tv PBS News Hour PBS April 18, 2012 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT
captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> brown: photos published by the "los angeles times" today show american soldiers in afghanistan posing with the bodies of dead insurgents. actions condemned by u.s. officials as repugnant. good evening, i'm jeffrey brown. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. on the "newshour" tonight, we get the latest on the images. another in a string of embarrassing episodes involving the behavior of u.s. troops. >> brown: then, we turn to the presidential contest as both the obama and romney campaigns push to win over hispanic voters. >> ifill: margaret warner examines the stand citigroup shareholders took voting down a $15 million dollar pay package for the company's c.e.o. >> brown: spencer michels reports on a breakthrough that could one day save the lives of millions of heart attack victims.
>> researchers have found a way to make scar tissue into beating heart muscle, but so far only in mice. >> ifill: and we talk with novelists ann patchett and lev grossman about the pulitzer board's decision not to award a prize for fiction this year. >> brown: that's all ahead. on tonight's "newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. 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. >> brown: once again today, u.s. officials found themselves apologizing for pictures of american troops in afghanistan. they emerged as the u.s. tries to wind down the afghan war and the taliban tries to step up the pressure. >> i've strongly condemned what we see in those photos. >> brown: defense secretary leon panetta spoke just hours after the "los angeles times" published two images. in one, u.s. soldiers and afghan police posed with the severed
legs of a suicide bomber-- seen here, partially blurred. the other appeared to show the hand of a dead insurgent, atop the shoulder of a smiling american. the incidents, from 2010, involved members of the u.s. army's 82nd airborne division. they were tasked with identifying dead afghan insurgents through iris scans and fingerprinting. panetta addressed the issue from brussels, where he and secretary of state hillary clinton attended a nato meeting on afghanistan. >> that behavior that was depicted in those photos absolutely violates both our regulations and, more importantly, our core values. this is not who we are and it's certainly not who we represent when it comes to the great majority of men and women in uniform who are serving there. >> brown: the secretary apologized on behalf of the united states government, and he
said an investigation has already begun. >> wherever those facts lead, we will take the appropriate action. if rules and regulations were found to have been violated, then those individuals will be held accountable. >> brown: a white house spokesman called the images reprehensible. the times said they were among 18 photos provided by an anonymous soldier. secretary panetta said the military had urged the "times" not to publish the images, fearing the taliban would use them to incite anti-american sentiment. >> i know that war is ugly and it's violent, and i know that young people sometimes caught up in the moment make some very foolish decisions. i'm not excusing that. i'm not excusing that behavior but neither do i want these images to bring further injury to our people or to our relationship with the afghan
people. >> brown: the photos were the latest in a series of incidents since the year began, that have made u.s.-afghan relations increasingly tense. in january, video emerged that showed u.s. marines urinating on afghan corpses. in february, violent protests and revenge killings broke out after u.s. troops accidentally burned korans. and last month, u.s. army staff sergeant robert bales allegedly killed 17 afghan civilians in two villages. most were women and children. all of this comes as the taliban steps up its attacks, including last weekend's 18-hour assault in kabul. at the same time, the u.s. and its coalition partners are trying to finalize plans to withdraw combat troops in 2014. for more, we go to craig whitlock, a pentagon correspondent for the washington post and retired army colonel bob killebrew. he served in vietnam and is now a senior fellow at the center for a new american security, a think tank.
craig whitlock, what more have you learned about this incident, what the soldiers were doing, what might have led to this. >> we know this unit, the photos were taken in 2010. so a couple years ago, the unit came back later this year but the unit has since redeployed to afghanistan. the army is trying to figure out where these soldiers were. the army says they know who most of them were but it's unclear whether some of them are back in the battlefield, back home or with other units. that's something we're trying to figure out. >> brown: how seriously is the military taking this after several episodes recently. >> i think they're taking it very seriously. as we've seen in this pattern of unfortunate incidents of misconduct since january. that the pen pentagon, the field commanders in afghanistan and the white house convictly apologized. they say they're going to investigate and they do. sometimes it takes some time. we haven't seen the results of the koran burning, the marine
video or if discipline has been handed out in those cases so sometimes the investigations can take quite a while. >> brown: colonel killebrew, what do you see in these photos and what steps should the military be taking now? >> well, i think first of all the secretary's statement was right on the mark. we don't do this in warfare. it's deplorable. i think the government, the military, will follow its internal procedures and track this down. i would add two other things, though. one is this happened two years ago in a unit that i know from my own experience has high standards of leadership and training so whatever happened it did not reflect on the unit. it was probably a small group of soldiers, the kind of soldiers that you tell off to do this kind of identification on bodies are typically intelligence soldiers and not direct combat soldiers and the second thing is
that it happened two years ago. this is an event that is well behind us now and i wish that it had not come up in that it's going to impede, i'm afraid, our efforts to train up the afghan army and leave a credible force behind us when we get out in 2014. >> brown: you are worried this might have a larger impact or lead people to say... to come to a larger conclusion about discipline or the situation overall there? >> i'm not concerned about that so much as i'm concerned about the impact on our own people here. i think the afghan population has shown itself to understand that these kinds of things happen in warfare. there was, as you know, mass unrest for the koran burning, but when things like this happen in battle or in the fringes of battle, the afghan population seems to take them a lot more calmly than some of us do.
i'm concerned about the effect of this on the u.s. will and the u.s. determination to see this war through to the handoff to effective afghan forces in 2014. that's what we have to be working toward. and incidents like this dishearten the american population and cause fears that we're over there doing these things in a widespread way when we're obviously not. >> pelley: do we know whether there's been much reaction in afghanistan yet? >> there hasn't been much reaction in afghanistan yet. i'd like to follow up on what the colonel said. i would point out the "l.a. times" reported that they were given these photos by a soldier from that unit who was concerned about a breakdown in discipline and a lack of leadership. as i mentioned, this unit has gone back to afghanistan. so i don't have inside knowledge of what this brigade has been up to but according to the los angeles angels of anaheim, it wathe "los angeles times," theyd
resurface again. >> brown: do we know why they weren't released until now. had they been floating around for two years? and there were more than the two displayed today? >> that's right, the "los angeles times" said they were given 18, they only published two. most were more graphic. the army says they have been investigating this since early march. what happened in the interim is unclear but, again, the difference is that this unit has since gone back to afghanistan and i think perhaps that was the difference here. >> brown: colonel killebrew, we heard secretary panetta say that he wished the "l.a. times" had not gone ahead and published these. do you agree? >> i agree with the secretary. it's a spectacular news story, but it's two years old. this is a time when we need to be building confidence with the afghans. the vast, vast majority of our troops are over there doing selfless service and a thing like this doesn't help us, doesn't help the united states
and ultimately doesn't help the afghans. >> brown: craig, i should say first we did instrait "los angeles times" and they weren't able or willing to join us tonight. i'm not going to put you in their seat but what are they saying about why they went ahead with this? >> i think the editor of the "los angeles times" said in their newspaper is they have an obligation to tell readers the truth about what's going on in the war zone, warts and all. certainly "l.a. times," "washington post" and others publish stories about acts of heroism and the good things that the vast majority of members of armed services do over there but we have an obligation to public when misconduct happens and that's unfortunate but the public deserves to know the reality of war. and sometimes the secretary of defense said wars are ugly and violent and people need to understand that, too. >> brown: in the meantime, craig, the military is preparing for possible reprisals? they clearly voiced concerns about it. >> the pentagon said they are taking additional measures to
protect u.s. troops and they're worried this could lead to additional risk for soldiers in the front. >> brown: all right. craig whitlock and colonel bob killebrew, thank you both very much. >> ifill: still to come on the "newshour": the push for the hispanic vote; shareholders take a stand; a fix for damaged heart muscles and no winner for the fiction prize. but first, with the other news of the day, here's hari sreenivasan. >> sreenivasan: the syrian military escalated attacks on rebel areas today, despite the government's claim that it is adhering to a cease-fire. in the central city of homs, amateur video showed large plumes of smoke rising. mortar rounds and shells rained down on rebel-held sections. elsewhere, two vehicles carrying u.n. observers were surrounded by thousands of anti-government protesters near damascus. then, gunfire erupted as syrian security agents fired on the crowd, and the observers were forced to flee. in brussels, belgium, u.s. secretary of state hillary clinton condemned the violence. >> it is obviously quite
concerning that while we are deploying these monitors pursuant to a security council resolution that confirms our commitment to kofi annan's six point plan, the guns of the assad regime are once again firing in homs, idlib and elsewhere and syrians continue to die. >> sreenivasan: clinton said syria has reached a turning point, and she warned of new pressure on the government, unless it relents. at least 22 soldiers died today in growing border fighting in east africa, between sudan and south sudan. there have been almost daily battles since south sudan seized the oil town of heglig, last week. sudan today demanded an immediate withdrawal. south sudan claimed its independence last summer, but the border was never settled, and the two sides never agreed on sharing the region's oil wealth. in the u.s. presidential campaign, president obama and mitt romney traded criticisms over economic policy. the president traveled to the swing state of ohio, and he charged that republicans are
dead wrong on how to build a recovery. he spoke to a community college in elyria, near cleveland. >> in this country prosperity doesn't trickle down. prosperity grows from the bottom up and from the strong middle class out. ( applause ) that's how we grow this economy ( applause ) and that's why i'm always confused when we keep having the same argument with folks who don't seem to remember how america was built. >> sreenivasan: mitt romney offered the republican answer this afternoon, in charlotte, north carolina. he accused the president of pitting americans against each other to divert attention from his own failed policies. >> one of the things that is most disappointing to me in our president has been that over the last 3.5 years he has engaged in constant efforts to divide americans. and to find blame in one after another.
and each day if there's a problem with some group of americans who much be responsible for it. never saying he's responsible for the mistakes he's made and policies that made it hard for businesses to start and for people coming out of school to find a good job. >> sreenivasan: romney also said today he would clean house at the secret service. he called for firing 11 agents who allegedly used prostitutes in colombia, ahead of a presidential visit last week. this evening, the secret service announced three of the agents are leaving its employ. it says the investigation will continue. wall street gave back some of its gains of the last few days. the dow jones industrial average lost more than 82 points to close at 13,032. the nasdaq fell 11 points to close at 3,031. a retired couple in southern illinois has claimed the final share of last month's record mega millions lottery jackpot. merle and patricia butler came forward today, and took home a lump sum of $111 million, after taxes. butler said even when he matched
the winning numbers to his $3 ticket, it took a few moments for the realization to sink in. >> after i looked at it for a couple minutes, i turn to my wife who was right there with me and i says, "we won," and she kind of looked at me funny and i says "no, we've won." then she started giggling and she giggled for about four hours, i think. >> sreenivasan: the overall jackpot totaled $656 million. the other winners in kansas and maryland have chosen to remain anonymous. the winningest coach in women's basketball is stepping down. pat summitt announced today she will not be back as head coach at the university of tennessee next season. instead, she'll become head coach emeritus. summitt is 59. she announced last august that she has early onset alzheimer's. during 38 seasons at tennessee, her teams won 1,098 games and eight national championships. long-time television host and producer dick clark died today, after a heart attack,
at a hospital in santa monica, california. he was dubbed "the world's oldest teen-ager", and became a tv fixture across several generations. >> live from philadelphia, it's time for america's favorite dance party. "american bandstand." >> sreenivasan: dick clark hosted that famous dance party >> this one's called "rock around the clock." >> ♪ one, two, three o'clock, four o'clock rock. >> sreenivasan: clark's clean shaven, suited image helped introduce rock and roll into the livingrooms of millions of >> this is sam cook singing, "you send me, darling, you send >> sreenivasan: clark used his fame to create an empire-- producing awards shows and hosting game shows, including the "the $25,000 pyramid." >> happy new year 2001! >> sreenivasan: and since 1972, he helped the country count down the new year. he continued to host "the new year's rockin' eve," even after he suffered a stroke in 2004
that affected his ability to speak and walk. >> my speech is not perfect, but i'm getting there. >> sreenivasan: dick clark never liked to say goodbye. instead, he ended every broadcast with his signature salute: >> i'm dick clark. so long. >> sreenivasan: dick clark was 82 years old. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to gwen. >> ifill: along the campaign trail, democrats and republicans take note of the census numbers and plot a new path to victory. >> soy barack obama, y apruebo este mensaje. >> ifill: it's not a coincidence that president obama has begun speaking spanish. as the general election campaign takes shape, democrats and republicans are competing for the support of the nation's fastest growing demographic group, latino voters. the "newshour's" vote 2012 map center found in 2008 hispanic voters represented large percentages of voters across the southwest and florida.
but the map is much bigger than that. both campaigns are competing heatedly in at least three critical swing states: nevada, colorado and florida. latinos made up 9% of voters overall in 2008, and they chose mr. obama over john mccain by more than two-to-one. seeking to nail down that edge, the obama campaign launched a series of new spanish language ads today. but the g.o.p. is also in the hunt. the republican national committee appointed hispanic outreach directors in those states this week as well as in virginia, new mexico and north carolina. >> los estados unidos representa libertad, oportunidad, donde todo es posible. >> ifill: romney launched his appeal in florida during january's republican primary. this ad was voiced by romney's son craig. >> soy mitt romney y apruebo este mensaje. muchas gracias.
>> ifill: but the presumptive republican nominee has a significant gap to close. a pew research center poll released this week showed the president leading romney 67% to 27% among hispanics. until now, much of the debate has centered on immigration issues, but both sides are focusing on the economy and on education. with the obama campaign highlighting support for pell grants that helped nearly two million hispanic students attend college. and romney expressing mild support for senator marco rubio's version of the "dream act" which would allow children of undocumented immigrants to remain in the u.s. legally. during the primary campaign, he pledged to veto another version of the bill that granted citizenship. for more on the intense competition for hispanic voters from coast to coast, we are joined by representatives from both major parties. senator bob menendez of new jersey, former chairman of the democratic senatorial campaign committee. and bettina inclan, director of hispanic outreach for the republican national committee.
senator, start by telling us how critical the latino vote is this year. >> well, i think as it was four years ago, the latino vote is critical in some of the key states that will be battleground states that you previewed, some of them. but also in states that people may not think of as battleground states in terms of latinos but virginia, north carolina. this is an all-out effort by the obama campaign to reconnect with latino voters, to remind them what's important in this election, what's at stake for them, to talk about an administration that has worked hard from making health care affordable for nine million latinos who didn't have health care to looking at changing the economic realities of latinos in the country over $800 million in the president's small business jobs act, that went to hispanic-owned businesses. to changing the realities of where we were in the disaster...
economic disaster we were left in 2008 and having a hispanic unemployment drop drama khr-t i. still more work to do but moving in the right direction. so it's going to be a critical vote in this election and one the president enjoys an advantage but is not taking for granted by any steph of the imagine nation. >> ifill: miss inclan, the republicans aren't taking it for granted either. what issues do you hope will drive latino voters to switch allegiances. >> the latino vote, the hispanic vote, is very important. senator menendez talk about how they make key constituencies in major swing states. we've hired six state directors, in florida, north korea next, virginia, colorado, new mexico and nevada and we'll be having a national outreach program to connect with even more voters across the country. the number one issue going to be the economy and he mentioned a little bit the unemployment for
the hispanic community is unacceptable. it's two points higher than the national average. there's more hispanic children living in poverty than ever before and these economic issues are really personal and emotional for hispanic families across the country who just want to achieve the american dream but under this administration it's become a lot harder. >> ifill: personal and emotional enough that voters could switch allegiance this is year? >> it's the number-one issue. poll after poll, the economy and jobs, like every other american, it's the number one issue. how more personal can it be if you can't figure out how to feed your family. >> ifill: senator menendez, on a conference call you said the republicans were guilty of selling snake oil to hispanic americans. what did you mean by that? >> well, gwen, look, look at the republican presidential debates and all you have to do is listen to the words of governor romney. governor romney, who opposes the dream act, an opportunity for young people who were brought to this country through no choice of their own to realize their dream of america, the only
country they know, the only country they pledge allegiance to each and everyday of their lives. a governor who talks about self-deportation. governor romney's history in taking companies, breaking them apart, large numbers of people unemployed as a result, bringing them into bankruptcy, that's not going to get latinos employed. the reality is that latinos know who stands on their side. that's why the univision/abc poll done earlier, a couple months ago, with a well-respected hispanic polling firm showed that, in fact, latinos know who created this crisis-- george bush-- and republicans, they understand very clearly what health care means to them. 60% believe the government should ultimately guarantee health care. 57% of them do not want to see the president's affordable care act repealed. well, when governor romney talks about repealing obamacare, it goes right in the face of this
community. >> ifill: let me allow miss inclan's response to that. there was a lot there. >> there was a lot. the reality is, when we look at this election it's really early on. a lot can happen. but when you talk about the differences between this president and the republicans, it's stark and we're... what we've seen is also so many hispanics are disappointed with this administration, not only because of the economy but for this president did not keep his promises. he promised he would pass immigration reform within his first year, he did not make that a priority even though he had filibuster-proof in the senate and in congress, had complete control of congress, never even proposed reform. and people are disappointed. a lot of hispanics have left their countries to aspire to the american dream here, hoping that we'd have... with so much hope, then you have a candidate who keeps on making promises in the hispanic community and doesn't accomplish them. >> ifill: mitt romney was overheard saying at a fund raise they are week that if
republicans can not win the hispanic vote this time around it spells doom for us, he said. do you agree with that and what do you think that was about? >> i think that mitt romney and all the republicans and we at the republican national committee comprehend and internalize that the hispanic vote is very important because hispanics are an integral part of this society in america and with their support and they're growing each and everyday, i myself am hispanic and we know how important it is to get them engaged in the electoral process. there's a lot of hispanics, republicans, democrat, independent, who are not engaged. what we're trying to do at the republican party is get more of them to talk about the issues, get them more involved and increase hispanic voter turnout and increase it for the republican party. >> ifill: senator, we do run the danger of talking about hispanics as a monolithic voting block. are there different issues that drive different segment of the population? >> well, of course the community is not monolithic, but there are certain overarching issues that
i think are cross-cutting throughout the entire hispanic community. and certainly the community understands who got them into the economic predicament that we are getting them out of. from a high watermark of 13% unemployment down to 10%. we've got to do better but they don't want to go back to the policies that created the economic crisis that put them in that rate of unemployment. they don't want to go back to policies... i know that my colleague here on this program said that the president didn't follow promises. the reality is that if we didn't have a near depression immigration reform would have been accomplished in the first two years and if republicans didn't insist on a filibuster proof vote, 60 votes in the united states senate, we would have the dream act passed which passed with a majority of votes, all democratic votes. and we would have comprehensive reform because we'd only need to get 51 votes. so all they have to do is not on
insist on a filibuster amount and we could make progress on those issues. it's republicans each and every time that have been the bar to both immigration reform and who created the economic crisis for which latinos disproportion natalie suffered. >> ifill: senator, both you and bettina inclan say the economy is the number one issue for latinos as well as for every other group in this country yet we keep returning to this argument about immigration reform. is it possible to have this... make this pitch for these voters, for this voting block and ever get past that arguement. >> of course, immigration is an important issue bewe see the economy and jobs is incredibly important. this president has to be held accountable for what he has done. he's been in office for three years promising he would change the economy, do lots of great things but even knowing what he was inheriting, as he likes to say, he was going to turn things around. we've given him a try, he's failed. he's failed on his promises and we are going, again, economy and jobs are the number one issue and that's what's going to get people out to vote and that's
what's people... we've talked about it. when you can't figure out how to pay your bills, that's an emotional issue. >> ifill: senator robert menendez and bettina inclan from the republican national committee, thank you both very much. >> thank you. >> brown: now, a rare move by shareholders to rebuff company executives over compensation. margaret warner has our story. >> warner: shareholders delivered a loud message at citigroup's annual meeting in dallas yesterday. they voted to reject a nearly $15 miillion pay package for c.e.o. vikram pandit. the bank's board of directors already voted to award pandit the money for 2011, but as part of the dodd-frank law on financial regulation, public companies must offer a "say on pay" vote to their shareholders at least every three years. like many banks, citi has struggled in recent years. it got a $45 billion bailout loan from the treasury during the financial crisis.
but has paid it all back, and now is profitable. we look at what was behind the vote and what happens now with anne simpson, director of corporate governance for calpers, the california state pension fund. holding ten million citi shares, it voted against the pay package. and russell miller, founder and managing director of clearbridge compensation group, which advises companies on executive pay. we invited citi to appear, but the company declined our invitation. citi is a "newshour" underwriter. and welcome to you both, anne seufrp simpson. explain the vote at calpers. why did you vote against this pay package? >> it was a simple vote. we rejected the proposal because city have not demonstrated that they're making awards of performance pay for long-term performance and that's what we as the owners really need to
see. >> warner: so are you saying the amount of money was too big or you don't like that way the compensation package is structured? >> it's... we're share owners, we're not management. it's not our job to nickel and dime individual amounts. but what we want to see is full transparency, that's the first thing, we need to understand what's going on and we also need to see that performance targets are anchored to the long term. and that information was simply missing. and, remember, mr. pandit joined as chief executive at city, thee share price was something on the average of $340 per share. when i looked yesterday afternoon it's hovering just over $35. so because we're long-term owners we're still looking not at just what's happened since the financial crisis, we're really looking ahead. that's our focus. >> warner: russell miller, turning to you. the bank had offered a rationale
for this pay. what was the rationale and did it relate to some of the issues that miss simpson just raised? >> yes, thank you. it does relate. the first thing i think it's important to recognize is citigroup like many, and most companies now in the current environment with the shareholder vote, are certainly aiming to design their pay programs so that the payouts for c.e.o.s and other members of management correspond with the underlying performance of the company. and that was exactly citigroup's rationale in this case as well. their point of view as described in their proxy was that they believe that citigroup had strong performance for 2011 and even more importantly they believe they've established a strong foundation for continued growth of the company. >> warner: they also pointed out that at least in terms of salary mr. pandit took just a dollar a year in 2009 and 2010. didn't they make a point of that? >> they recognized that his
basalry was a dollar a year in the prior years. although there was no indication, no suggestion, that this was intended to be any type of makeup. this was really viewed as we want to recognize the company's turnaround, the company's performance, and the c.e.o. mr. pandit who's led us there. they also recognize that they were one of the companies that received government funds and that they fully paid back the government and that there was what appears to be at least among the board, certainly within the company, a view that the performance was strong and it supported the payouts that they determined for mr. pandit. >> warner: anne simpson, back to you. shareholders, even since this dodd-frank law has gone into effect, they rarely vote against pay packages. why do you think it's happened now? and how much did this new legislation, this new law, have to do with it? >> well, the new law has everything to do with it because if share owners are not asked their views it's impossible to
gauge. we've not had the ability to vote on the policy on compensation in the united states. that rule's been around for a long time in other places like australia, the u.k., norway. we've not had it in the united states. so that came in for the first time last year and admittedly this was quite new, investors were working out how to use it, is this a nuke year attack, just a feather duster? what signal are we sending? and i think what we're seeing now is the investors, the majority of investors have got well thought through frame works for looking at long-term targets and also i think in the banking sector particularly being concerned that there is a robust risk strategy that wraps around the returns. because we know chasing short-term returns was one part of the reason the financial
crisis took us to the edge. >> warner: back to you, mr. miller. one, do you agree that dodd-frank... that that law, that provision is having a major impact and that it is, as miss simpson suggests, going to be broader than just citigroup? >> no question that the dodd-frank act and the specific provision that allows for shareholders to have a say on pay and taken a active vote and express their views has been a significant step in this direction. it's given the shareholder it is opportunity to directly say whether they support or don't support what the boards are doing as it relates to executive compensation programs. also, what we're seeing as a result of these votes, while they're nonbinding, boards are taking these votes very seriously and we are seeing changes as a result. >> warner: so back to you, miss simpson, what do you actually expect to happen here? because i hadn't realized this when i first heard the news yesterday but this is a pay package that was not only voted
on last year but a lot of it was paid last year. are you... what are you looking for the board of directors of citigroup to actually do with this vote? >> we don't have the ability to rewrite history. what the board has done; the board has done. we have to be looking forwards. we're long-term owners, we're going to be around for a very long time. advice to the board is it's time to roll up your sleeves, go back to the drawing board and come back to shareholders with long-term performance targets risk adjusted that really make sense. >> warner: so, mr. miller, to you, so the idea of... well, first of all, explain how this... if you can, the pay was... briefly, was structured. how much of it has been paid and do you see a prospect of any kind of clawback? >> so it's interesting because the pay was structured... the $15 million he was quote/unquote
paid for 2011, of that only about $7 million of the $15 million was paid in... in 2011 or early 2012. the balance of it, about $8 million, is actually deferred over the next four years and will be subject to clawbacks or reductions depending on performance over the next four years. but ostensibly, the intent is to deliver that $15 million to him over that time frame. >> warner: so one final thought from each of you very briefly. how much of this do you believe-- and missimpson i'll begin with you-- was affected by the general national debate that's been going on for now a year about both income inequality and executive pay? >> the united states celebrates success. that's a great feature of american culture. and therefore if there's any complaint about pay it's because performance has not matched up.
pay for performance is understood. pay for underperformance, no. >> warner: brief final thought for from you, mr. miller? >> i have to agree that what we're hearing from shareholders when we look back at 2011 where less than 2% of companies got a failed vote like we saw with citigroup this year, we're trending on the same level for 2012, clearly what shareholders are saying is we're okay with executives being paid well if the performance is there. where we have concerns are those in many cases it's really the outliers. we're talking about less than 2% of the companies where the pay doesn't appear to be aligning with the performance and shareholder interest. >> warner: russell miller and anne simpson, thank you both. >> ifill: next, a development that could be good news for millions of heart attack victims. scientists announced they've managed to convert damaged tissue into functioning heart muscle. the research appeared today
in the science journal, "nature." "newshour" correspondent spencer michels has our story produced in collaboration with kqed san francisco's quest program. and a note: some of the pictures of the medical procedures are graphic. >> reporter: more than five million americans live with damaged hearts. because the heart muscle cells are deprived of oxygen during the attack, scar tissue forms in the heart, tissue that does not beat like other heart cells do. now however, scientists at the gladstone institutes in san francisco have figured out a way to transform scar-forming cardiac cells into beating heart muscle in mice, and hope they can replicate the feat in humans. deepak srivastava directs
cardiovascular and stem cell research at gladstone, an independent biomedical research institution. he led the team that published results in nature, and explained the challenge and what he called the breakthrough. >> from the moment an embryo is three weeks old, until the day an organism dies, the heart never takes a break. the heart cell is unique in that it incorporates some features of brain cells, and some features of muscle cells all together. it's actually an amazing thing to see; cells in a dish that just without any stimulus just start contracting. it's that property that allows the cells in unison to generate force and pump blood through the body. >> reporter: though doctors can save most patients' lives, they can't always preserve all of their heart function. >> an individual may have trouble walking up a flight of stairs and have to stop several times trying to walk across the street to get to work. there are a variety of
approaches we use right now to help people who are left with damaged hearts. but none of them actually get to the root of the problem, which is replacing that damaged heart muscle. and that's where our focus has been at gladstone. and you have enough for how many mice today? >> so i have enough for like three mice. >> reporter: researchers here have discovered a way to coax mouse hearts into rebuilding themselves. in their experiments, they first give lab mice a mild heart attack. >> we do a more limited type of heart attack that doesn't result in too many symptoms in the mice, and doesn't cause death. we first anesthetize the mice so they don't feel any of the pain. >> it's almost out >> there are billions of muscle cells in the heart that are important for the squeeze of the heart. but there's an equal number of cells that are really there to support the muscle cells, and sort of form the architecture of the organ. the support cells are the ones that actually make the scar after a heart attack, and the
breakthrough we've made is that we've found a way to genetically engineer these cells, to make new muscle instead of scar. >> reporter: first, the researcher mimics a heart attack by cutting off blood to part of the heart. then, she injects three genes that will transform the scar cells into beating heart muscle cells. >> three months after the injury, what we find is quite remarkable. using ultrasounds on these animals, what we see is that the heart's function is greatly restored. the ultrasound provides us an image of the walls of the heart, and the valves in the heart, and shows how it squeezes and relaxes with each heartbeat. it's very close to normal in the amount of blood it's able to pump out to the rest of the body. there's still some scar, we can see that, but embedded within the scar tissue is new muscle.
>> reporter: yerem yeghiazarian's is director of the translation cardiac stem cell program. he was enthusiastic about the new developments at gladstone. one of those is that we have to make sure that its scalable to the size of a human heart, where it's the first time that anybody has described this as a novel way of treating damaged hearts because up to this point there are no medications and no devices that replace a scar in the heart with beating functional heart muscle cells. >> reporter: he admit there is' a long road ahead before the procedure can save human lives. >> we have to make sure that it's scalable to the size of a
human heart where, instead of thousands of cells that we might need to regenerate in the mouse we may need millions in the human heart. the second thing that we have to do is to make sure that this will be a safe approach. and for that, we will likely use a larger animal model that's closer to human, such as a pig. and then the final thing that we really have to work out is what is the best way to deliver the reprogramming genes into the cells of the heart? >> reporter: srivastava estimates it will be six or seven years before treatments might be available for humans. >> ifill: on our website, we have more reporting on the science behind the genetic technique researchers are using to repair hearts. that's in a blog post from our colleagues at kqed quest on the "newshour" homepage. >> brown: when the pulitzer prizes were announced earlier this week, there was one rather glaring omission in the
arts categories: no award was given for fiction-- the first time that's happened since 1977. today, the administrator of the pulitzer prize told the "newshour" that: the no-decision stirred up the world of books, including two best-selling authors who join us now: ann patchett's novels include "bel-canto" and her latest, "state of wonder." she also owns and runs "parnassus books," an independent book store in nashville. lev grossman's novels include "the magicians" and "the magician king." he serves as the book critic for "time" magazine. and welcome to both of you, anne patchett, i'll start with you. you feel disappointment as a writer, indignation as a reader, rage as a book seller. that's how you put it in a "new york times" piece today. explain why this bothers you so
much. >> well, the most important point is really as a book seller because independent bookstores-- as we all know-- are struggling. i have to say pars in a us is is doing pretty well but there is a real pull constantly to figure out how to get readers into the store, how to get them excited about books and especially important literary books and the pew hreutser is a big draw. it's right up there with christmas for bringing people into the store every year. so it's a big loss as a book seller, just not having that prize that people are talking about and getting them into the store to get this particular book. >> brown: lev grossman you wrote in time "for an organization like the pulitzer board to automatically hand a prize to a novel every single year feels a bit like bad faith to me." what do you mean by that? what's the argument for not doing it every year? >> well, i want to start by saying that i, too, as a reader, was disappointed that they
didn't give out the award but it guess it comes down to how often you really feel as though great novels are published. is a great novel published every year? the fact that the pulitzer board can say "we didn't find a book we could give it to this year" gives me some faith in the integrity of the process because i actually don't believe there are great novels every year and for the pulitzer people to come out and say "we couldn't find it, we tried, but we couldn't" makes me feel as though they are in good faith with us as readers. >> brown: so we're talking about sales, we're talking about the integrity of the process. ann patchett, do you want to come back on the integrity question? what do you think? >> let me come back on this. we don't know that it was integrity. it could have been a hung jury. because there's... there there's some thinking that it was three people, there was no clear winner, but that doesn't mean that they decided they looked at these three books and said none of them were good enough. one of the things that bothers
me tremendously about this whole conversation is that these are three good books and it almost feels like these three people are being singled out and you're saying "we almost gave you the pulitzer but you're not quite good enough so we're not going to give it to you." it could have been that they just didn't decide amongst themselves. >> brown: lev grossman, what about the sales argument? how much impact do you think that these kinds of awards actually have? and to the extent that they do have some impact on sales and attention for books, is it not a loss to have an award? >> it's certainly a loss. it's regrettable. the pulitzer is a powerful sales tool. and it's a powerful force for good. a few years ago diaz got the award, that was tremendous for him. edward p. jones was another great, great pulitzer winner that put him before the public in a way he deserves to be so my
sense is that... unlike not all awards, the pulitzer is actually very powerful. but i feel like that power depends on it being used responsibly. if they were to give it to a book that they didn't feel was a great book, maybe it wouldn't be as powerful in future years. >> brown: ann patchett, you raised the analogy in your "times" piece to the academy awards. >> yes, yes, which is not an institution that is desperate to find the absolute best film every year. it's a show about getting people to go to the movies. and to some extent that's part of the pew i pulitzer's responsibility, that we need to get people reading. it's not as if there isn't a book that's good enough. there were loads of books that were good enough this year and, frankly, all three of the finalists were more than good enough and i think that the main
thing that we need, especially this environment of are people still reading fiction, are people still going to their book stores, we need the prize to do their job and to pick a winner that we can all feel excited about. althoughly say this is very nice, too. because the fact that there is no prize, weirdly, also serves the same purpose of getting people discussing books. i mean, would you have had the pulitzer winner on the snow maybe; maybe not. but to be able to discuss the books and say "okay, these three books are really good" and everybody's putting out their choices of books saying "if you didn't like these three, i've got three more that are really good." that's exciting because people are recommending books. >> brown: to be fair, many years we have had the winner on. not every year but... >> (laughs) good for you. >> brown: but i'm glad to have this discussion. lev grossman, what about that? is it possible that some good comes out of this? i mean, i've seen now that book stores are having sort of
special events, we're having this discussion, people are able to talk about books and recommend books that readers might go and look at from last year. >> i think it's great. i get to be on t.v. which definitely doesn't happen every year. i think the way that it has stirred up a debate about literary value and the function of prizes and what literary greatness is i think is wonderful. i think it's terrific. i... the greatest book that i read last year, i think, was by george r. martin. martin is... because he's such a commercial writer, a popular writer, it's felt he can not be a great writer as well. personally i kneel he is and it's a wonderful thing to be able to argue about. >> brown: ann patchett, just in our last... >> well... >> brown: i was going to ask you. we've raised the three nominees. i realize we haven't said what they are. so tell us what they are and so readers will know what they can
look at. >> sure. "train dreams" by dennis johnson, which is a wonderful novella about the logging industry in oregon. covers a long period of time, starts at the turn of the century. david foster wallace's posthumous novel "the pale king" about the toiling tax collector. a sprawling, brilliant ambitious piece of work and i will say for "train dreams" such a beautiful book. every single sentence in that book was perfect as far as i'm concerned. and then karen russell "swamplandia which is a thrilling imaginative book set in an alligator park in florida. >> brown: books that readers can go to prize or no. ann patchett and lev grossman, thanks so much. >> thank you for having us. >> ifill: again, the major developments of the day:
photos published by the los angeles times showed american soldiers in afghanistan posing with the bodies of dead insurgents. u.s. officials condemned them as repugnant. the syrian military escalated attacks on rebel areas, despite the government's claim that it's adhering to a cease-fire. and dick clark-- the long-time "american bandstand" and "new year's eve" t.v. host and producer-- died of a heart attack in santa monica, california. he was 82 years old. online, we have another story in our "divided by d.c." series, examining how the politics in the maryland and virginia statehouses mirror the national debate. hari sreenivasan explains. hari? >> sreenivasan: our next installment is a report on how virginia resolved its budget standoff today. that's on our politics page. also there, make sure to sign up for the morning line emails from our politics team. on his making sense page, paul solman answers a reader's question about how the fed creates money. on art beat, we talked to ziggy marley about a new film on his father, reggae legend bob marley. plus, we highlight a documentary from our pbs colleagues in
washington state on the deconstruction of dams on the elwha river. it explores what that means for communities along the river and the fish that once ran through it. here is an excerpt narrated by debbe hirata. >> across the united states, a quarter of a million dams block rivers and streams. by 2020 nearly all of them will reach their 50-year life peck tonightsy. as dams age, they begin to break down, spillway gates rust, reservoirs get clogged with sediment and concrete walls begin to fall apart. when an aging dam fails, the result can be catastrophic. today more than 700 u.s. dams are slated for removal, but no one has ever taken out a dam this big.
>> sreenivasan: "undamming the elwha" airs tonight on kcts seattle and you can also watch it online. follow a link on our web site. all that and more is at newshour.pbs.org. jeff? >> brown: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. on thursday, we'll look at: the public grilling of federal officials about a lavish conference in las vegas with an $800,000 price tag. i'm jeffrey brown. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. we'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. thank you and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> citi. supporting progress for 200 years. and the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and...