enforced? >> ifill: those are some of the stories we're covering on tonight's pbs newshour. >> 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... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: the announcement from beijing today captured the attention of scientists, diplomats and lawmakers alike. china and the united states agreed on a fast-track effort to pump less carbon into the atmosphere. >> this is an ambitious goal but it is an achievable goal. >> wooduff: it was an unprecedented announcement from the world's two biggest economies, and carbon polluters. president obama promised that by 2025 the u.s. will cut carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions by more than a quarter, below the levels of 2005. >> it puts us on a path to achieving the deep emissions reductions needed by advanced economies that the scientific community says is necessary to prevent the most catastrophic effects of climate change. >> wooduff: the u.s. was already on track to meet an earlier goal of lowering emissions 17% by 2020. china, in turn, agreed today to cap emissions by 2030. it was a first for beijing, although president xi jinping referred to it just once. >> ( translated ): we published a joint statement about dealing with climate change and together announced our individual action goals for after 2020. >> wooduff: it remained unclear exactly how each country will achieve the goals, but the announcement set the stage for negotiations on a new global climate pact, next year in paris. u.n. secretary general ban ki- moon lauded the agreement, during a visit to myanmar. >> i urge all countries, especially all major economies, to follow china and the united states' lead and announce ambitious post-2020 targets as soon as possible. >> wooduff: on the other hand, the head of the u.n.'s panel of climate scientists said the deal will not be enough to avert the worst of global warming. and in washington, soon-to-be- senate majority leader mitch mcconnell charged the president's plan will mean higher energy prices and fewer jobs. >> i was particularly distressed by the deal he's apparently reached with the chinese on his current trip, which, as i read the agreement requires the chinese to do nothing at all for 16 years while these carbon emission regulations are creating havoc in my state and other states around the country. >> wooduff: the u.s. and china also reached agreements on trade and military cooperation this week. but tensions remain over territorial disputes in the south china sea, as well as cyber-security, human rights protests in china, and human rights. some of the contention came through at today's rare, joint news conference. on pro-democracy protests in hong kong, president obama called for freedom of expression and fair elections. but xi condemned the demonstrations, and warned they're no one else's business. >> ( translated ): hong kong affairs are exclusively china's internal affairs, and foreign countries should not interfere in those affairs in any form or fashion. >> wooduff: at another point, "new york times" reporter mark landler pressed xi about restrictions on american news organizations in china. >> reporter: in the spirit of these reciprocal visa arrangements that you've agreed to this week with business people and students, isn't it time to extend that sort of right to foreign correspondents who seek to cover your country? >> wooduff: xi initially ignored the question, even removing the earpiece feeding him english translation. later, he blamed the restrictions on unfavorable coverage of china, and, he said, "the party which started the problem should be the one to resolve it." >> woodruff: from beijing, president obama flew to myanmar to meet with leaders from the association of southeast asian nations. we'll explore the in's and out's of the climate agreement and of broader u.s.-china relations after the news summary. >> ifill: the ebola death toll in west africa has now surpassed 5,100, out of more than 14,000 cases. the world health organization announced the new figures today. meanwhile, nurses in parts of the u.s. staged rallies and strikes, demanding better protection for medical workers. the national nurses union organized the effort. it came as the secretary of health and human services asked a senate panel for emergency funding. >> we've trained over 250,000 people. what we need to do now, and that's part of what this request is about, is to make sure that training continues and extends and we need to measure it. we are working with the manufacturers. they are producing 24/7 right now and we are working with them and working with the states to make sure that those who have the greatest need and will most likely treat, get that equipment. >> ifill: also today, relatives of thomas eric duncan, reached a settlement with a dallas hospital where the liberian man was initially sent home, and later died. the family's attorney said texas health presbyterian hospital will pay an undisclosed sum, and establish a charitable foundation. >> woodruff: a blast of early winter pushed farther south and east today, sending temperatures tumbling. readings fell more than 30 degrees overnight in illinois, dropping from 58 yesterday to 26 today. parts of michigan's upper peninsula were buried under three feet of snow, with more still to come. and, freeze warnings were issued as far south as texas, louisiana, mississippi and alabama. >> ifill: the federal agency that oversees the national weather service has been hacked. the national oceanic and atmospheric administration said today that four of its websites were hit in recent weeks. "the washington post" reported chinese hackers were behind the cyber-attack. it said n.o.a.a. had to seal off data on disaster planning, aviation and shipping. >> woodruff: nato charged today that russia has moved tanks, troops and equipment into ukraine in recent days. the alliance's supreme commander, u.s. general philip breedlove, confirmed reports by international observers. he said, "there is no question any more" that russia's military is operating inside ukraine." >> what worries me the most, i have said before, we have a situation now, where the former international border, the current international border of ukraine and russia is completely porous, it is completely wide open. forces, money, support, supplies, weapons are pouring back and forth across this border completely at will. >> woodruff: the russian defense ministry denied the claim, but ukraine's government said it's re-deploying troops amid fears that russian-backed rebels will launch a new military offensive. >> ifill: in iraq, nearly two dozen people died in a wave of suicide attacks and car bombings in and around baghdad today. the targets were mainly security forces and police. iraqi officials blamed islamic state militants. >> woodruff: u.s. airstrikes in syria have killed more than 700 islamic state fighters, but they've also killed 50 civilians. the figures came today from a syrian human rights group based in britain. meanwhile, kurdish fighters in the town of kobani, near the turkish border, said they've cut a supply route to islamic state forces besieging the town. >> ifill: the united states, britain and switzerland fined five major banks more than $3 billion today over manipulating foreign exchange markets. the settlement includes citi- bank, j.p morgan/chase, royal bank of scotland, h.s.b.c. and u.b.s. regulators said they failed to prevent employees from gaming the system at the expense of clients. >> we expect firms to put conduct and their consumers at the heart of their business. firms need to take responsibility for fixing the cultural weaknesses that have led to the problems from the sales' floors to the trading desk. and we're playing our role in trying to improve standards across financial services. >> ifill: in a related probe, the u.s. comptroller of the currency fined j.p. morgan/chase bank of america and citi-group another $950 million. >> woodruff: a harrowing scene played out today at the brand new one world trade center in new york two window washers had to be rescued from 69 stories up. firefighters smashed a glass panel to bring them inside after they'd dangled for more than an hour. a building spokesman said one of the cables on the large scaffolding broke and left it hanging at a sharp angle one world trade center replaced the buildings that were destroyed in the 9/11 attacks. >> ifill: wall street mostly ran out of steam today after a series of record closings. the dow jones industrial average lost two points to close at 17,612; the nasdaq rose 14 points to close at 4,675; and the s&p 500 dropped a point, finishing at 2,038. >> woodruff: still to come on the newshour. how to make the climate change deal work. the complicated relationship between china and the u.s. a historic landing on the surface of a comet. what's next for the democratic party. answering your questions about the health care law. arguments over alabama's voting districts. and protecting the home of the last of the mountain gorillas in the congo. >> ifill: we look more closely now at president obama's china meetings in two parts. first, secret talks began months ago that led to that historic agreement between the two countries on cutting greenhouse gases. but today, there are still plenty of questions about how it will play out here, in china and globally and whether either side will be able to deliver on its pledges. michael oppenheimer is one of the many authors of the u.n. reports on climate change and a professor of geo-sciences and international affairs at the woodrow wilson school at princeton university. you welcome back to the newshour. >> thanks for having me. >> ou big a deal is this deal? >> this huge as far as i'm concerned. there are basically three reasons. one, the science. the science tells us that to have a chance of avoiding the climate danger zone, we've got to get the world's emissions turned around-- turned around rpd. that going down instead of up sometime in the 2030 time span. the chinese benchmark here of 2030 is consistent with that objective. the second reason is that if you get china and the u.s. in the room, you have about 45% of global greenhouse, global warming emissions. if you add in the eu which is already on the downward direction in terms of emissions, you have about 60% of the emissions. think about the leadership factor involved in that. other countries will have a harder time dealing with climate change with the three 800 pound gorillas together. and the third reason is if china in particular is going to do this, and also the u.s., they're going to have to go big into the renewable energy markets where they have already staked out a position. that is going to help expand the markets, bring down the price of renewable energy, make it easier for everybody else to do this. >> how did china come around on this, domestic pressure, international pressure? >> with china it is primarily domestic pressure. a realization, number one, they have a terrible air pollution problem which has become a political issue. they have to do something about that. at the same time, they've got exposure to the climate change problem. and they're worried about their energy security issues. so they've been looking to diversify their energy sources. and as part of that, that means getting off the fossil fuels which have been so dominant in the the chinese economy, for instance, coal. >> ifill: so these two presidents shaking hands t is kind of essential in that one cannot do it without the other. >> they really need each other if they are going to deal with climate change. and i think it's very interesting that they've decided that among the panoply of issues that they could reach agreement on, this is one where they have enough of a common interest, and enough of an intention that they are serious about movingford. >> ifill: well, there certainly are a lot of issues on the table. and this is one that something happened. but how hard ask it that either country, let's start with chipa. how hard is it for china to meet these peak emission targets? >> for china it's ambitious. there's no doubt about it. but china has shown an ability to move quickly on energy, over the last ten or 15 years. they've taken over the global production of photo voltaic cells solar energy and taken over virtually the global production of wind turbines. and in that way they've helped other countries, particularly germany drive down their own emissions because they have been able to sell these products cheaply. so they can make a decision, and then they can implement it. so i have no doubt that if this remains a political priority, chaina will be able to meet this goal. >> talking about political prioritiesing let's come back here to the united states where already we have heard republican senator mitch mcconnell saying today this is to the going to work. china is getting the deal. we're going to get-- we're going to get caught on the short end of that stick. can the political will fall short here? >> i think that that's getting it backwards. namely for china, this is going to be tougher than for the u.s. for the u.s. what it means is staying the course on the regulations and the laws that are already in place. and then stretching those laws a little further to implement some new regulations. so we're already on the downward glide path. this means staying focused. and we can do it with technologies and measures that are already known and available. >> but what if the political winds shft the other way, which it looks like many people want them to, away from staying the course. >> it could happen. one could envision the election of a president that isn't as friendly to do ing something about this issue as obama is. >> or congress as just happened. >> or congress, but you have to realize that once we set a national priority to move emissions done, the public is in favor of it. every survey indicates that the public is in favor of strong action. they're waiting for leadership. and on top of that now we have china and the u.s. having mutually agreed to do this. it won't be easy no matter who the president is to back off a deal that they made with china when there is a whole constellation of issues that we are reaching agreement with china. >> and a whole constellation of countries watching this,a. which ones would you be watching most closely? >> i would watch india. they are the next big developing country that hasn't really taken much of an interest in this issue. they're critical because their emissions are expected to grow quite a bit in the future. if this agreement is actually implemented, it will go a long way to dragging india in, or maybe pulling them in with a little help, into doing something about climate change. and beyond that we look at countries like brazil, indonesia, et cetera. >> michael oppenheimer of princeton, thank you very much. >> thank you for having me here. >> woodruff: today's deal, of course, also has broader implications for the often tense relationship between the u.s. and china. for more on that angle, i'm joined by susan shirk. she was a deputy assistant secretary of state in the clinton administration and now chairs the 21st century china program at the university of california san diego. and gordon chang an author and attorney who practiced law in hong kong for 20 years. he's also a contributor to forbes.com. welcome back to the newshour to both of you. first off, apart from substance, gordon chang, how significant is it when you put together today's deal on climate change, yesterday's deal on trade, given the state of relations between the u.s. and china? >> well, certainly, i think yesterday's deal on information products is very, very important. this is going to affect american business in a very direct way. and if it indeed is implemented in the wtos information technology agreement next year, this is a major win. i'm not so sure about climate change deal, though. because china's commitment was pretty vague in the white house fact sheet. and also the zin what news agency in their release didn't talk by a chime at cap in 2030. so i got to make sure, we've got to make sure that there really is a deal here. and indeed, doing nothing for 16 years as mitch mcconnell says, and i very rarely quote mcmcconnell, but doing nothing for 16 areas is politically unsustainable. not only in the united states, but in other countries as well. >> woodruff: susan shirk, asking you the same thing. put this in the context of the overall state of u.s.-china relations, how significant are these two agreements? >> well, i think it's very significant. this was a good day for u.s.-china diplomacy. both governments have demonstrated that they have the will to cooperate despite the growing rivalry between them. and you know, this climate commitment is very significant. and china has already begun to take major efforts to move toward renewable energy and to reduce emissions and clean up their local environment. the information technology trade deal, china had been the one holdout. now that china was motivated to make the compromise necessary to move this agreement forward, i'm quite sure that it will move forward and the benefits for the u.s. economy will be substantial. and third, there is also a very important military to military agreement because for years china had resisted our efforts to develop a code of conduct about the maritime and air encounters around their periphery. but now they've agreed that we're going to develop that kind of code of conduct. so i think because xi jinping was hosting this big show and the spotlight was on china, he was very motivated to compromise at this point. >> woodruff: well, both of you talked to us earlier today about the role that internal political pressures may have played on president xi. gordon chang, how do you see that affecting what happens coming out of this meeting, this summit, and the possibility of future connections, relations between the u.s. and china? >> it's going to be very important to see how china implements the agreement that it reached. i think that the political system now is in distress. everyone says that xi jinping has quickly consolidated control in beijing. but there are too many symptoms of problems, including the failure to dispose of the issue of the former security czar, and also this continuing series of loyalty oaths on the part of flag officers which seem to be a symptom of disagreements in the people's liberation army. so it xi jinping i don't think has the concensus to be able to deal with the international community on an acceptable basis. and we saw this in that really deplorable handshake with japanese prime minister shinzo abe where xi jinping breached one diplomatic protocol after another. i think that shows there is problems in the chin ease political system that they can't deal with a neighbor in an acceptable fashion. >> that raises another interesting point. i do want to get your sense of the internal pressures and how they're playing out on xi and how you think this relationship moves forward between the u.s. and china. >> well, i do think that xi jinping has been very much focused on domestic threats to his power. and maintaining the communist party and power despite the dramatic changes in society and economy over the last 30 years. so you see this contrast between what looks like a very confident xi jinping and confident china on the world stage with a very nervous xi jinping in china about the potential for domestic unrest. but i think xi did well for himself by handling this meeting so well, looking like, you know, enhancing china's status as a responsible big power. and that's going to resonate domestically as well. just quickly-- the fact that president obama referred to what is going on in hong kong, president xi was asked about that,about domestic unrest, in hong kong, gordon chang and then susan shirk, how much pressure, how much influence does the u.s. really have if any in this. >> well, you can have a lot of influence if it decided to use it we have enormous trade leverage over china which has become increasingly dependent on exports to the u.s. now that investment and consumption in the u.s. are stagnating. basically if the united states wanted to exercise leadership, it could. >> woodruff: susan shirk? >> well, i think that the united states really has the international community more broadly has limited impact on china's human rights policies and its policies toward hong kong. and you know, it has some impact, certainly, china doesn't want the reputation of being a police state, even north korea is concerned about its reputation on the human rights front we've seen recently. so it can have some marginal impact. but by and large, my own experience having served in government in the clinton administration is that we have limited impact, and the demand has to come from within china. >> woodruff: susan shirk, gordon chang, we thank you. >> thank you. >> ifill: it was a historic first for space exploration. the european space agency landed a small spacecraft, one the size of a washing machine, on a moving comet speeding through the solar system. this photo of the comet as it was descending toward it. precision was everything for the smaller lander you see here. an error of one inch could have thrown the lander more than 850 feet off course. tom clarke of independent television news has a report on the day's events. >> some of these scientists waited 20 years for this moment. then they had to wait some more. traveling at the speed of light, a message from the philae lander took nearly half an hour to cover the 300 million miles from the comet to earth. (applause) but come it did. and with it, space history. >> the first thing he told us it has been found, and the landing gear has been moved in time so we are sitting on the surface. >> putting the lander's mother ship rosetta into orbit around a core met was audacious enough. 67p as the comet-- comet is known is tumblinging end over end at 40,000 miles an hour. but to land a 100 kilogram spacecraft on its forbidding surface, a near few had dared to dream of. >> science fiction has become science fact today. or a better way maybe is hollywood is good, but rosetta is better. >> how audacious. how exciting! how unbelievable to be able to dare to land on a comet. >> the rosetta spacecraft which carried the lander was built here but by airbus defense and space. their main business is making satellites and carefully avoiding mishaps. rosetta and its lander were almost unthinkably risky. >> when we look at this image we can see some areas that look kind of benign, kind of smooth. but we can also see big boulders and cliffs. this is not going to be an easy area to land on. >> despite a successful touchdown, the lander team uncertain how securely philae is anchored to the comet's surface. in the last hour it sent these images of its final descent. the closest we have ever had of a comet but whether the probe is working as it should is as yet unclear. >> pbs will present a special documentary called to catch a comet that takes you behind the scenes of the rosetta mission it will air on many stations next wednesday. but you can watch it now online at pbs.org. >> ifill: congress re-opened for business today, a week after mid-term elections saw republicans re-take control of the senate and beef up their margin in the house. they began sizing up their new territory, even as the lame-duck session got under way. senate republican freshmen were all smiles as they surrounded future majority leader mitch mcconnell this morning. >> everybody knows... >> ifill: and in alaska, dan sullivan gave them a 53rd seat, when he officially defeated democratic incumbent mark begich. this afternoon, senate leaders on both sides promised cooperation. >> regardless of how you interpret last week's election results, it is clear that the american people want us to join together to get things done for the middle class and all americans. >> hopefully, slowly, but surely we can begin to rebuild not only trust and confidence within ourselves in this institution but regain the lost trust of the american people. >> ifill: those pledges will likely be put to the test almost immediately, on the long-delayed keystone x.l. pipeline project. democratic senator mary landrieu called today for a vote thursday. she faces republican bill cassidy in a runoff next month. other items on the lame-duck congress' agenda include: a short-term spending bill to fund the government, possible passage of international trade agreements, and advancing presidential nominations for judgeships and other offices. and, overshadowing everything else: immigration reform. president obama has promised executive action by year's end, even as republicans warn it could "poison the well." incoming house members started member-elect registration today outside a d.c. hotel, luggage in tow. republican cresent hardy will represent nevada's fourth congressional district. >> got here last night and woke up this morning and got cameras in my face. >> welcome to washington. >> ifill: the representative- elect from michigan's 14th district, democrat brenda lawrence, said the key is to stay focused. >> not get lost in the debate, but to really engage to get the job done. >> ifill: the new congress convenes in january. as republicans prepare to become the majority party in the senate, the democratic party reflects on what went wrong during this year's election and what comes next. joining me is florida congresswoman debi wasserman-schultz, chairman of the democratic national committee. thank you for joining us. >> thanks,. >> nancy pelosi said this is not a gop wave but an ebb tide for the democrats which is worse? >> well, what we are doing is looking beyond justice, one election. what we felt last tuesday was a tough night for democrats. but you know, if you look at 2010 and 2014 mid-term elections, clearly we know the voters support our agenda. they consistently last tuesday voted to increase the minimum wage, voted in a gun safety statewide initiative. they defeated personhood amendments. but what we seem to be having a problem with is a disconnect between voters who support our agenda and presidential candidates, and then aren't going to the polls and voting in mid-term elections. we have two electorates that it appears are shaking themselves out. and we need to take a deep dive look and that is why i'm going to appoint a committee in the next few days to really take a deep dive assessment of the multifaceted issues that have resulted in our not being able to have success in midterm elections recently. >> ifill: the chairman of the republican national committee came on our program after the election last we can and said he believes he has a mandate. >> well, ask john cornyn the number two whether he agrees with his own party chairman. because he clarely said right before the election, that republicans should not feel like a victory was an embraced by the american people of their agenda. all across the country, the republicans lost based on their position on the issues. five states voted to increase the minimum wage. the republicans opposed that. two states defeated personhood amendments, south dakota being one of them. republicans support that. gun safety is a very important issue for democrats. republicans oppose it. >> ifill: but you said now and before that you are right on the issues but it's not translating. what is not translating? what are democrats doing wrong? >> well, that's exactly why we need to take a good, hard look at what are the structural deficits that we have, where we have an electorate that goes in a presidential election and votes for our presidential can darkts embraces our party's agenda and message, and then two years later, doesn't feel motivated to go to the polls and support candidates that are going to help imcomplement-- implement that agenda. they are supporting us on the issues, there is a disconnect on getting out and voting for our candidates in midterms. we have to take a deep dive on what the problem is. >> ifill: how do you do that with a leadership that seems a little hollowed out right now. the leaders of your party, many of them are under-- you have the president about to leave office, some of your most promising young stars or younger stars, michelle nunn and wendy davis went down to defeat, without do you have that will step up and you have lost control of governor's houses, state legislatures. what is the future for the democratic party leadership? >> we have a bright future for our democratic party leadership. and let's remember, while we didn't have the success that we wanted last tuesday or in 2010 for that matter, we did improve our standing on the targeted groups of voters that really, the ones that make a difference in elections. women, where there was no gender gap at all in 2010, we got 52% of the vote among women. 62% among hispanics. you, young people turned out, that actually voted, voted for our can the-- candidates. and the list goes on. but what the democratic party is going to do now is when a point this committee, we're going to have a top to bottom review with key party stakeholders, experts, op rattives and we're reaching out all across the country to our supporters and asking them for their feedback. because we want to make sure that this is a comprehensive review so we can really have it be instructive on what we need to change in order to make sure that we request get our folks out to the polls, who support our presidential candidates in mid-term elections. and we have to have an honest assessment. i want to make sure we are right about this and not going to leave anything off the table. the committee is going to have a broad mandate. >> if you have an honest assessment will you have the assessment completed and executed in time for the 2016 race, or have you left your potential candidates for the presidency at a disadvantage? >> oh, not at all. this committee is going to be charged to meet and do the assessment intensely and comprehensively. and they'll report back to us at our winter meeting at the beginning of february. so this is going to rapid. >> ifill: debi wasserman-schultz chairwoman of the democratic national committee, thank you very much. >> thank you, gwen. >> woodruff: now, what people need to know about the next round of enrolling for insurance later this week under the federal healthcare law. individuals can begin applying on the state and federal exchanges starting this saturday. the government estimates that roughly nine million will do so, but that's below earlier estimates. last night, we started to answer some of the essential questions. but there were a few more we wanted to tackle. i recorded this conversation with mary agnes carey of kaiser health news, and susan dentzer, a health analyst for the newshour. susan and mary agnes, thank you for being with back with us again. >> thank you. >> so more questions from people across the country a lot of questions about the health care law as we are days away from the start of the second enrollment period. we said, as we said starting on saturday. so here we're going to hear now from a woman in texas who is asking about the penalty this year. >> i'm jessica, and i'm from houston, texas. i have a brother who is currently uninsured. and so my question is, what is the penalty, the financial penalty going to be this year? and how is that going to be enforced? >> mary agnes. >> unless you have an exemption, and there are several to the penalty, if you didn't have health insurance in 2014, the penalty is 95 dollars or 1% of income, whichever is greater. in 2015 it rises to 325, or 2% of income whichever is greater. and they take it out of your income tax refund involvement if your income is too low to file taxes, you wouldn't get hit by the penal. you might qualify for a subsidy but that is the plan to take it out of your income tax return. >> woodruff: we spoke with a woman, her name is winona. from camarillo, california. and her question is about dropped coverage. >> i am concerned about my friends who i know have been dropped from their health care. and their doctors that they have been seeing for years and years don't accept the plan. and so now they're having to go to other doctors. susan? >> it's hard to know exactly what is going on there. could be one of a couple of things. one is a number of plans were extended last year. you may recall the president had said if you like your plan, you can keep it. there was some back and forth over whether that was true. a number of states did decide to go ahead and extend plans, others did not. it could be that was the reason why her friend was dropped it is also possible that she is talking about the network there plans, in order to be more affordable have tended on the exchanges to restrict their network. so not all physicians, not all hospitals are included in every network. so it could be that the coverage was intact, it is just that it wasn't being honored by a particular provider or hospital who is no longer in that plan. >> woodruff: would you add anything to that about dropped coverage. >> that is-- some states have different powers to extend plans, for example, in their state. a insurance commissioner-- some insurance commissioners have the power to say if those plans don't meet the essential health benefits of the affordable care ago they won't let them be offered. as susan said, some insurers decide not to set plan a second year. it could be a variety of circumstances that lead to her friend's situation. >> woodruff: we have one other question. this one we don't have a video but what we can share with you is's spoke with a small restaurant owner from name els florida, her name is valerie weinberg, she said that she was overwhelmed with the application process that small businesses needed to go through last year in order to insurance their workers. her question was will anything be changing on that front this year? >> susan? >> well, last year the enrollment through the so-called shop exchanges to the degree it was available, was on paper. this year it's on-line, both on healthcare.gov, the federally facilitated marketplace and in all the state marketplaces that are offering the shop marketplaces as well. >> woodruff: so there are more ways to sign up. >> and it won't be-- it will be able to be done on-line is the bottom line. >> woodruff: if you look at it overall, would both of you say there are more questions this year, fewer, are you getting the sense that people feel a little more familiar with the process. or is it just as con fussing as it was before, mary agnes? >> i think people know there is federal health care law. they may know there is a web site. they certainly heard about the debacle last year when health care.gov opened. but the question for me will be what does the administration do to promote the plans this year, to promote healthcare.dov last year. but this time before enroll am we son tons and tons of advertising. haven't seen as much this remember. >>. how does that engage the public's attention, what do they do with that information, what are they looking for. the key test is healthcare.gov, if it works when you bet on the site. >> woodruff: how is the administration getting the word out. obviously in the news media we are talking about it this week. but if they are not doing a big campaign, how do people know? >> well, it's also true that the people who didn't sign up last year are going to be the hardest-- hardest to reach people. it's very clear that people who really wanted to get health insurance, many of them were able to get on-line and enroll last year. this year, there will going to be many more people who face language barriers. one in five americans who are uninsured say that they don't have health literacy, fundamental literacy or so-called numberacy. they can't figure out premiums, copays and all of that. so a lot of this will be done with one-on-one assistance at the state level in particular through the use of navigator and other forms of consumer assistance. sitting down with consumers and working with them one-on-one to get them signed up. >> so mass media announcements running it on network television, on some popular churches. >> churches. >> faith based organizations doing outreach. hospitals. >> yeah. >> et cetera. okay. well, we appreciate the two of you, as one of you said to us a few minutes ago, i think it was mary agnes, we will always keep on talking about the affordable care ago. there will always be questions. mary agnes carey, susan dentzer, we thank you. >> thank you, judy. >> thank you. >> ifill: we turn now to supreme court arguments today on the intersection of race and politics. alabama democrats are arguing that the state legislature has packed minorities and democrats into too few districts in violation of voting rights laws. but that's open to interpretation and it fell to the high court to tackle that today. as always, marcia coyle was in the chamber, for the national law journal, and for us. so tell me about this introspection and how it played out today. >> after 20910 census, the republican-led alabama legislature engaged in a redrawing state legislative districts, just like other states were doing following the census. the plan they came up with was challenged by the alabama legislative black caucus and the alabama democratic conference, who claimed that the plan was what we called a racial jerry mannedder because it-- gerrymander because it packed into existing majority black districts more majority voters in order to make the surrounding districts more white and more likely to vote republican. >> ifill: now when we talk gerrymander that is generally an he an rate way of doing districts for certain purposes. does it platter more constitutionally or according to the law whether these lines were drawn for racial reasons or for other reasons? >> it does, it matters a lot. there are two really background principleses here to keep in mind. first the supreme court in its voting rights decision has said that race cannot be the predominant factor in redistricting. >> ifill: it can be a factor but not the main one. >> not the main one. and if it is the main one, it violates the constitution. the voting rights act on the other hand also prohibits states from drawing plans that diluteor impede minority voters ability to elect canadians of their choice. it does that because it is protecting or it's trying to correct decades of discrimination against minority voters. now i think the chief justice today during or all arguments sort of summed up the burden that's on state legislatures here because of those two principleses. he said state legislators have to find a sweet spot between two extremes. they can use some race in order to comply with the voting rights act, but not too much race or they violate the constitution. >> ifill: that does sound a little complicated. so today as it gets argued in front of the court how are the arguments made and how received. >> the challengers to the alabama plan said basically all that was considered here by the legislature was race. they relied on racial statistics. they had racial targets. take a look at these majority black districts, they kept the same percentage and-- tried to get the same number of minority voters that existed ten years before. >> ifill: they actually would say there are a hundred voters here, we will move them over across the street. >> not only hundreds but thousands. in senate district 26, for example, they moved 14,506 voters into that senate district, a rich, about 35 were white so they moved huge numbers of people into these districts. some of the justices were skeptical of this argument because they're struggling with, was this done because of race or was this done to achieve a partisan advantage? the supreme court has said that it's not unconstitutional to draw lines for partisan advantage. >> but how how do justices determine intent in this case. what kinds of questions do they ask to get to the bottom of this. >> they have to examine the numbers. they have to examine the evidence that was put forward in the lower court when this case was tried in order to get at intent. but trying to find this line between race and partisan gerrymandering has always been hard. the state of alabama said this is a status quo plan. the republicans finally gain control of the legislature after 130 years. we drafted this plan in order to comply with the voting rights act, and also we wanted to have very few population deviations among the districts. well, justice kagan pushed back on that. because she said that's not really the only interruption of the voting rights act. you don't have to have as you have here, a district with 76% majority black voters when circumstances have changed. but there's no need for that because those voters could still, if it's less than 72%, still vote for the candidate of their choice. >> ifill: last time this court took up the voting rights act, a lot of advocates considered they rolled back certain protection and certainly the outside has said the same thing. will this affect the voting rights ago or is it its own thing? >> pretty much its own thing right now. there is oom sentiment among the justices to send it back to the lower court to see if it would look at each district individually to see what the motive was instead of the overall plan. but it's true that when alabama drafted this plan, it was still under the voting rights section 5 which is now pretty much inoperable. so if alabama had to redo its plan, it might very well dot exact same thing it did without worrying about the voting rights act. >> that was an oversight. >> so anybody who is watching to sea if the court says more or does more to the voting rights act. >> marcia coyle, national law journal, thank you very much. >> my pleasure, gwen. >> woodruff: finally tonight, a new documentary about a mission to preserve a renowned national park in africa. it was released on friday on netflix and in theaters in new york and los angeles. jeffrey brown has our conversation. virunga national park in the eastern congo is one the most diverse places on earth. home to endemic birds, buffalo and 800 mountain gorillas, the only ones on the planet it is a spectacular place, africa's oldest national park and the unesco world heritage site. a new documentary titled "virunga" tells the story of the p and the life-and-death of park rangers filing tlelts, armed mill-- militia, poachers and the efforts including corruption and bribery accord together filmmakers of a british company soco international to explore for oil. in a response soco oil says the film misrepresents their intentions and does not portray their company's track record of responsible operating. phil the filmmaker joined me in our stud who recently. >> you focus on the efforts of a number of rangers in the park to save the park. and specifically the animals. how did you come to find them? >> well, i mean, i went out to try and document a story about the rebirth of eastern congo because the park, i was inspired by this park that not only had rangers who were risking their their lives, but also pushing forward these really ambitious development projects, tourism, hydro power, agriculture and efficiency. and really trying to bring stability and peace for economic development in the region which has experienced 20 years of war. i started living with the rangers. i lived with them in the park for 11 months and followed their work. and they are some of the most inspiring people of integrity i have ever met. they would die for the park. >> brown: and they get very close to the animals. we have a very short clip, one of the rangers, andre balma with one of the gorillas. let's look at that. >> they must not see that they are abandoned. they must feel they are in the family. >> the gorillas themselves, what is the situation for the gorillas? >> so there is only about 800 mountain gorillas left in the entire world. there is probably more people in this building than there is mountain gorillas. they're incredibly endangered. the park is home to the last of them. it's doing its best to improve, improve the situation for the gorillas. and it's doing a good job of that. >> things have been relatively peaceful in the park and in this area of congo. when you started, i ger, right? >> absolutely. >> then what? >> so i had only been there a month. i was trying to tell this story. and after about only four weeks on the ground, this new civil war started. and i also learned about the park, concerns about illegal oil exploration. so the and it became very different he entirely. >> brown: you spent a couple of years you were telling me following. what kinds of things are the rangers doing? what surprised you in watching what they were doing? >> i mean, i think, you know, one of the things that i have taken away that really humbled me is that these people would risk their lives, every day they wake up knowing it could be their last. 140 of them have died in the last 20 yearses protecting virunga. and they do that because they know the potential this place has to transform the region for the better. that's humbling that people will die for a bigger purpose. >> one of the main characters, he was himself a child soldier. i mean it's a very moving story. where he had come from, to devoting himself to the park. >> so i mean, his story is incredibly inspiring. and because of his upbringing, so challenging, he doesn't want that same thing to happen to his own son who is nine years old. so he is devoting his life to improve the country, doing that by working with the virunga national park. and in the process hoping that his son won't have to go through the same thing that he did. >> brown: and of course in protecting the park there is the larger-- large quer here of the country itself, right, a very troubled country for many years. >> absolutely. i mean there's been war in congo for the last 20 years. it was after the rwanda genocide that this instability push mood congo and it has been there for a long time. the reason the park is so special, so important to protect this place is because it really does hold the keys to driving forward stability and economics development in eastern congo. >> brown: so what do you want viewers to take away from the film? >> we want viewers to understand about what is going on in this park. because it's something which really everybody around the world, your viewers should be really concerned about. protect virunga national park isn't just about protecting the last of the world's mountain gorillas or a part of eastern congo that really can strife for stability and peace. you see there is a precedent here. virunga is a world heritage site, parts of our planet that humanity decide ready so special there shouldn't be oil exploration or gas exploration in them. so if the virunga national park, africa's oldest national park, almost as iconic as that falls in the place of business interests, what is left with our planet that is safe from human greed. and that's why everyone should be so concerned about what is happening here. >> brown: all right, new fill is virunga. orlando von einsiedel, thank you very much. >> woodruff: in the run up to the film's release, s.o.c.o. international halted all operations in virunga national park. the move comes after the world wildlife fund and the oil company agreed that exploring for oil would only be possible if unesco and the d.r.c. government agree it would not conflict with virunga's heritage status. >> ifill: again, the major developments of the day. president obama moved on to myanmar after announcing an unprecedented agreement with china to curb carbon emissions. but top republicans warned the plan would cripple economic growth. the ebola death toll in west africa passed 5,100 out of more than 14,000 cases. and a european space probe successfully landed on a comet the first time that's ever been done. >> woodruff: on the newshour online right now in the summer of 1927, a little-known producer recorded 77 songs in a tennessee hat warehouse converted into a recording studio. dubbed the bristol sessions, it came to be known as the single most important event in the history of country music. who was the man behind the recordings? read a profile of ralph peer and listen to the music he helped bring to the masses, on our art beat page. all that and more is on our web site, pbs.org/newshour. >> ifill: and that's the newshour for tonight. on thursday, we examine the changes on capitol hill. as the new congress starts moving in, i'm gwen ifill. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. join us 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: >> lincoln financial-- committed to helping you take charge of your life and become you're own chief life officer. >> 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... >> 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". brought to you i the street.com. featuring stephanie link who shares her investment strategies, stock picks and market insights with action alerts plus. the multimillion dollar portfolio she manages with jim cramer. you can learn more at the stre deals done. first tariffs are cut. now a surprise u.s./china accord on reducing carbon emissions. a new era at hand in u.s./china relations and what will the the magic of macy's. the retailer cut its full year seemed to care.t, but investors cold snap, what