PBS News Hour - Full Show - September 15, 2026 - PBS News Hour full episode

Episode Date: September 16, 2026

Tuesday on the News Hour, President Trump slams the Supreme Court's decision blocking his effort to restrict mail-in voting with less than two months before Election Day. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner discusses efforts to regulate artificial intelligence. Plus, a Trump-aligned board votes to shut down the Kennedy Center after a judge says they can't put the president's name on the building. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

Good evening. I'm Amna Nawaz. Jeff Bennett is away. On the news hour tonight, President Trump slams the Supreme Court's decision blocking his effort to restrict mail-in voting with less than two months before election day. Virginia's U.S. Senator Mark Warner discusses efforts to regulate artificial intelligence. If we thought social media was a problem with our youth, think about having a chatbot that is forming an affinity relationship with your son or your daughter. If that doesn't scare the hell out of you, I don't know what will. And a Trump-aligned board votes to shut down the Kennedy Center for the performing arts, after a judge says they can't put the president's name on the building. Welcome to the news hour. Voters and elections officials have more clarity today around mail-in voting ahead of the November midterms.

That comes after the Supreme Court last night blocked the Trump administration from imposing new restrictions on mail ballots. In a brief unsigned order, the justices' law. left in place a lower court ruling that prevents the U.S. Postal Service from requiring specialized ballot envelopes and collecting sensitive voter information. The legal battle has upended state and local election plans, as some voters have already received their mail ballots with Election Day just seven weeks from today. Joining us now is Tammy Patrick. She's the Chief Executive Officer of Programs at the National Association of Election Administrators. She was also an elections official herself in Arizona for 11 years. Tammy, welcome back. Thanks for joining us. Thank you so much for having

me. So from the conversations you've had with state election officials today, what has been the reaction to this latest Supreme Court ruling? There's quite honestly a collective sigh of relief because it was almost an impossible ask to have election officials try and implement this rule in this late hour. As you mentioned, ballots have already gone out in the mail. And so I think everyone is a little bit relieved that we don't have to do this for the November election, and they can focus on the tasks at hand and getting prepared for what is to come. Even after the ruling, we should note one election official worried that this is far from over. We've seen the Department of Justice send threatening letters to dozens of states to get voter data. Attorney General Todd Blanche was in the

Rose Garden today, taking questions, and he said that ongoing investigations into illegal voting will continue. He went on to say this. Take a listen. should be nothing surprising about what we're trying to do when it comes to mail-in voting, which is we want to make sure that there is safe voting and that there is integrity, free and fair elections, and that there is one person placing one vote, and that that person's eligible to vote. Tammy, what other actions are elections officials preparing for or anticipating? Well, our election professionals that conduct our elections are steadfast in maintaining the rule of law

in their states and upholding their state statutes to make sure that only eligible voters are voting, but that all eligible voters have the ability to free and fairly and unencumbered participate in the process. So they're continuing to do all of the things they've done in the past to safeguard our elections and make sure that election officials all across the country are ready and prepared in this moment to serve their voters and to serve their electorate. It's important for voters to understand that although this rule has not gone in place, there are still safety measures and security measures in place to make sure that voting by mail,

voting early in person, or going to the polls on Tuesday on the 3rd of November, are all safe and viable options for election officials as well as for voters all across the country. Attorney General Blanche was also asked if the president's challenges and all the court rulings have left people confused about whether or not they can reliably use mail ballots.

said he was not concerned about any confusion. Are you? Voters are confused by what the options are. So it's important for them to know that the rules in place in their states remain. And so the rule has not gone into effect. Whatever rules were in place yesterday are in place today all across the country. The one thing I will say that is slightly different this time around is that some of the transportation routes for the postal service have changed. So some of the mail is taking a little bit longer. So make sure that anyone who does want to vote by mail, that you make that request early and get the ballot returned given whatever options you have available in your state. A drop box, or if you're going to mail it back via the postal service, get it back early.

Tammy, in the minute or so we have left, what's your takeaway for folks who are confused about all those who want to use mail ballots? What should they do to make sure that their vote is counted? The most important thing for voters to do in this moment is check with your state and local election officials, check with their websites. If you have questions, contact them, reach out to them. Don't necessarily believe everything you see on social media. And just make sure that the information you get that you read it thoroughly and be consistent in how you sign your name, make sure you fill out the ballot and the information correctly and fully, and then you will be fine. As long as you make a plan and stick to it, you should have no problem participating in the November

election. All right. That is Tammy Patrick from the National Association of Election Administrators. Tammy, thank you so much. Good to speak with you. Thank you so much for having me. In the brief ruling, a majority of justices blocked the mail ballot plan for moving forward, and only two. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas sided with the president. Joining me now to discuss the decision is Amy Howe. NewsHour's Supreme Court analyst and co-founder of SCOTUS vlog. Good to see you, Amy. Good to see you, too. So it's a brief unsigned order What do we know about how the justice is ruled here? Not much is the answer.

It's one of these weird quirks of the emergency docket that when you have a majority opinion or a majority order, the justices who join that order don't necessarily, don't sign their names, and they don't necessarily indicate if they don't agree with it. So you can have justices who publicly note the dissent, as justices Alito and Thomas did last night, but they don't have to.

So it could be seven to two, but there could have been one or more of the other justices who didn't agree but just didn't say so. We saw Justice Brett Kavanaugh write a concurring opinion here, essentially saying, yes, the Postal Service has the right to do this, but it's too close to the election, so no, they can't do it now. What does that mean? Does that leave the door open for the administration to try this again with more lead time before an election? It probably does leave it open at least a crack because you have Justice Kavanaugh saying there's a fair prospect

that the administration could win on appeal. And then you have Justices Alito and Thomas saying in Justice Alito's dissent that the Postal Service has broad authority to issue rules like these, and the challengers probably aren't going to win on appeal. And so that's three. You know, you need two more. And when there is this kind of uncertainty about how the justice is voted and given the president's strong feelings about this issue, you likely are going to see the administration keep pushing

forward. We saw those strong feelings on display. We've seen the president before has a history of lashing out when the Supreme Court rules against him. Today was no exception. He posted multiple times berating the justices, including this post in which he wrote, this Supreme Court is bullied and cajoled by the radical left into making decisions that have set America back at least a hundred years. These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court. They are merely a shell of their original selves. Amy, it's worth pointing out, the court has sided with the president on some issues like immigration and firing of agency officials ruled against him on other issues like birthright citizenship. What do you make of his reaction

to today's ruling on this issue? This is one of those issues like birthright citizenship, like tariffs, where he's lashed out, I think because these are issues that are very important to him. He has long believed, without any real evidence that he's offered, that there is rampant fraud in mail-in voting. He's long been a proponent of tariffs. He's felt very strongly about birthright citizenship. So he has been very successful before this Supreme Court on issues like immigration and on the emergency docket. He had a string in 2025 of, I think it was something like two dozen rulings in a row in favor of the Trump administration. But these are issues that I think he feels very personally, and he takes these losses very personally. And he's lashing

out. And the justices, justices Amy Barrett and Elena Kagan testified, for Congress about the threats to the judiciary and to the Supreme Court. They were asking for more money for security. And this kind of rhetoric isn't helpful. Amy Howe, let's go to Spock. What was good to see you? Thank you for joining us. Thanks for having me.

We start the day's other headlines on Capitol Hill, where Senate Democrats blocked a bill that would have introduced sweeping regulations for cryptocurrencies. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to. By a vote of 49 to 50, lawmakers rejected the measure known as the Clarity Act in what's seen as a major setback for the crypto industry. Democrats had pushed for stronger safeguards to prevent the president and other officials from profiting while in office. FBI director Cash Patel defended his handling of the agency during a nearly five-hour Senate hearing today.

Appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patel was questioned about his firing of experience. agents and the FBI's plans for the midterms. At one point, he refused to say whether Joe Biden won the 2020 election. And he defended the agency's loosening of certain hiring requirements related to prostitution and beastiality. Patel said the change was about protecting victims, not lowering standards. We did not want to punish victims of bestiality, victims who were trafficked. We did not want to make it an automatic disqualification for the FBI to consider you. if you are a victim of these awful, heinous acts.

And when you saw bestiality, I say this with respect, the person who recommended it, why didn't you just say what planet did you parachute in from? In a statement provided to the news hour, an FBI spokesperson said the agency is not relaxing hiring standards, calling the idea, quote, totally false. For the first time ever, the U.S. military has, confirmed it has weapons in space. Air Force Secretary Troy Mink made the announcement at a conference

yesterday saying the U.S. has, as he put it, on-orbit space control weapons capable of defending the joint force against hostile adversary action. He did not detail what those weapons are or how they work. But there's already been pushback with China's foreign ministry warning against an arms race that could turn space into a war zone. And a Kremlin spokesperson called for the, quote, complete demilitarization of space. In the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and the Iran-backed Houthi rebels of Yemen accused each other of more attacks today, as that conflict only grows worse. The Saudi military says Houthi strikes injured more than a dozen people across several cities,

including Jeddah, where Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman recently visited. In the meantime, the Houthis released this footage, claiming to show fighting with Saudi-backed forces in Yemen's north. The UN estimates some 125,000 people in Yemen have been displaced by the violence, with many living in makeshift camps and tents. We fled from the war and took nothing with us. We didn't even bring the children's clothes. We have no flour. The children are hungry.

We have no food. Separately, a new assessment finds that the war in Iran costs the U.S. more than $38 billion through August 1st. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office also says the conflict will continue costing up to $3 billion a month or more and will also drive up inflation. In California, prosecutors say they will not seek the death penalty against Nick Reiner in the killings of his parents, Director Rob Reiner and his wife, Michelle Singer-Riner. The L.A. District Attorney said today that his office has done a thorough review before reaching

its decision, which included speaking to the victim's family. Nick Reiner will instead face a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. He was charged with first-degree murder last December just days after the fatal stabbing of his parents. Nick Reiner has twice pleaded not guilty. On Wall Street today, stocks slipped ahead of tomorrow's Federal Reserve decision on interest rates. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell more than 300 points. The NASDAQ gave back around 200 points. The S&P 500 also ended firmly in the red. And it was a night of records at the 78th Emmy Awards,

with one show leading the charge. The Emmy Go, that's two. Widows Bay. The Apple TV hit about a cursed New England town, part humor, part horror, took home 14 wins, the most ever by a comedy series in a single year. The show's star, Matthew Reese,

became the first man to win, two lead actor awards in the same year. He also won for the limited series The Beast and Me. The Pitt and its star Noah Wiley both won for their second straight year. And with her fifth straight Emmy for HACS, actress Jean Smart is now the first woman to win for every single season of a TV series. Still to come, on the news hour. NATO jets shoot down a drone in Lithuania as Russia continues to provoke Europe. Our communities on the East Coast are trying to protect against erosion. And we catch up with the hardest working man in jazz, Christian McBride. This is the PBS News Hour from the David M. Rubenstein studio at WETA in Washington,

headquarters of PBS News. Well, the warnings about artificial intelligence are growing more urgent, and increasingly they're coming from inside the industry. AI researchers have resigned over safety concerns, while some of the field's most prominent leaders are calling for stronger government oversight. But Congress has yet to agree on meaningful safeguards. Jeff Bennett spoke earlier today with Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, about Washington's willingness to act. Senator Warner, welcome back to the News Hour. Thanks so much for having me. Jacob Coxon, the anthropic researcher who resigned and the resignation ignited this latest push for

regulation, he says the next year or two could be crunch time for a humanitarian. Do you take that literally? Do you think AI poses an imminent existential threat? I don't believe imminent existential threat, but potentially catastrophic threat, yes. And the irony is, there have been numbers of AI researchers who've been saying this for some time. Matter of fact, Dario Modi, who is the CEO of Anthropic, who I spoke to over the weekend, saw last week, Sam Malton, he's been saying that for the last year as well. It feels what's happened. is that there's been building concern about this. A lot of that is exhibited pushback against data centers,

which do need some guardrails on them in terms of energy and water and setbacks from communities. But I think the data center pushback reflects a greater concern about, boy, this technology people don't understand, could it take away your job, and then you add the incidents that have taken place recently. Think about this, the Open AI Hugging Face model, where the Open AI tool had 3,000 AI agents that collaborated together in a way where they hid information from the humans.

And literally some of these agents would, in a sense, sacrifice themselves or commit suicide to try to accomplish their task. That was with 3,000 agents. More recently, they've had a tool that had 10,000 agents working as a swarm. And so I do think we've had these indications. you've got the four biggest AI companies in the world, literally saying we've got to do something, and shame on us if he don't act. Meantime President Trump says the government already has the tools it needs to police AI, and he says these recent warnings amount to a hoax.

You've got David Sacks, the White House AI advisor, who says if these companies want to slow AI advancements, they should do it voluntarily. They don't need permission from Washington to do it. What's your assessment of those two arguments? Well, first of all, Mr. Trump also said, You know, the only thing we need is a really brilliant president with a high IQ like himself. So I'll let your viewers make your judgment on that. And then, you know, Mr. Sachs, he's got a point that as we go through this process of an AI safety review,

we've got to make sure there is the voice of small tech or early tech so that this is not an effort to simply solidify the incumbency position these big four entities have. And I do think the idea of what the Trump administration has done is they put together a bit of a voluntary form. You can't do voluntary when there's at least a reasonable chance of a catastrophic risk that might currently disrupt the financial markets or disrupt water systems or electric systems. So we've got to take this seriously. And those of us who, in a bipartisan fashion, who've been calling for this kind of safety guidelines for a while, this is our moment to move. It's made more difficult because, frankly, you know, President Trump's administration has gotten rid of a lot of the talent at the cybersecurity agency, which is part of the problem. He's gotten rid of some of the safety institutions that were being set up. Frankly, the British have now got a stronger safety regime than we do, and not one that's over the top in terms of, you know, over-regulated.

So I think we have to think about putting safety into the mix. before these models are released. We need to put safety around what's called the sandboxes where they test out these models. And then we've got to really decide for how long and who's at the table, because getting the details right under this are going to be critically important.

On that point, how do you slow American companies without handing China an advantage and creating a different type of national security threat? How do you slow the AI race without losing the AI race? Well, first of all, I would, want America to win the race. And secondly, I've been involved in monitoring China. I've been chair or vice chair of the Intelligence Committee for the last 10 years. I'm very well aware of the competition. But here's what some of the accelerationsists say, you've got to do pedal

to the medal or China will win. Well, China has already, for example, put in place requirements for their AI models to not create AI bots or chat bots that would form personal relationships. relationships with children and young people. Don't our kids deserve the same? China has already put regulations on not having these AI tools, create what's called deep fakes, false images of people. Shouldn't Americans have that same protection? And I think you can go ahead and put a bit of safety into this process

and not lose the race. And frankly, the downside of a mistake or a catastrophic risk being created, Boy, boy, that's not something you, you know, I fear, frankly, that if we had that kind of activity, you might see politicians from both the left and the right come together and say, we've got to shut it all down, and that would not be good either for our America or, frankly, innovation. So, Leader Thune has suggested that Congress has a role here. I know there are bipartisan talks underway. What do you think realistically could pass this year in terms of legislation?

Well, that's the million-dollar question. I do think, you know, some of these companies believe that we are so close to being on the cusp of potentially these models going beyond humans' ability to control them that I think we have to act with a sense of urgency. Now, I'd love to see, you know, guardrails on data centers. I'd love to see kid protection. This whole notion of AI agents, there needs to be liability. There's national security concerns. There's job disruption concerns. Obviously, the way Congress works, we're not going to get the whole process done.

The companies do need some ability to talk to each other. That would require some level of antitrust exemption. For them to get that exemption, they have to show how we put this safety effort together. But I think they also need to show, and this is what I've been frustrated with them, they need to do a better job of convincing normal Americans, normal humans, how AI is going to actually improve their life and not just get kind of overwhelmed with the billions and trillions of dollars

that seem to be passing back and forth between these companies. So I do think we've got to grant them the ability to collaborate in a certain way because frankly the best talent is not inside the government. It is in these front-chair models. There are other companies,

large corporate enterprises that have used these tools. They need to have a seat at the table. Small tech has to have a seat at the table. So there's not simply an effort to solidify these leaders' incumbency power. So I think we could act, and there is this sense of urgency right now, that I'm hoping, in a bipartisan way we can get done. I'm talking with some of my Republican colleagues right after this viewing. What would you say to those skeptics who would point out that social media has been around for more than two decades now, and Congress hasn't been able to regulate it in a meaningful way,

even after its harms became clear, they might ask, why would AI be any different? Jeff, you just made my case. I don't think there is a individual anywhere in the political sphere that doesn't think, gosh, if we could go back 10 years, shouldn't we have put some guardrails on social media? Shouldn't we have said 10 years ago, maybe our kids shouldn't have their phones available all day through the school day?

If we thought social media was a problem with our youth, think about having a chat bot that is forming an affinity relationship with your son or your daughter. If that doesn't scare the hell out of you, I don't know what will. And also the very notion on top about that of these agents collaborating together, these AI agents collaborating together in a way that humans don't control. That's even beyond social media. So I think the failure to act on social media is frankly something that's moving a lot of us to say, We can't repeat that mistake. Senator Mark Warner, Democrat from Virginia. Always a pleasure to speak with you.

Thanks for joining us. Thank you, Jeff. The board of the Kennedy Center here in Washington, D.C., voted this afternoon to temporarily close the iconic Performing Arts Center, citing financial issues and a need for structural repairs. That came shortly after a federal judge blocked the board from adding President Trump's name to the center's building or grounds. To break it all down, I'm joined by our White House correspondent Liz Landers. A couple of things here. Let's start with the decision from the federal judge about renaming the center.

What exactly did the judge say in the decision? So Judge Cooper is a federal judge here in Washington, D.C., and he has been going back and forth about this for months now. You may remember that this started back in May, and today's decision, he says, quote, simply put, defendants cannot install memorials for President Trump or anyone or anything else at the Kennedy Center without Congress's blessing. So this first came to him in May, and he said at the time, you cannot rename this center unless Congress approves it. The center had tried to do this. They put President Trump's name up on the front of the building by John F. Kennedy, the slain president, up there at the front. And people sued over this and were upset about it.

So when he said that it had to come down, they put up this tarp. And the tarp is still there, but the president's name has come down. So then the board suggested, perhaps to get around some of the rulings from Cooper already, they suggested inscribing the front with the phrase, quote, renovated and restored by President Donald J. Trump, or they suggested renaming the plaza there, which is a big part of the Kennedy Center campus, after President Trump, the judge quashing those things today. He was not having it.

Separately, there was a Kennedy Center board meeting today. That is where they voted to shut the center down. What is the issue here with the building and finances that they're citing? So the board released this draft resolution that came out yesterday that laid out the issues that they see with the Kennedy Center, with both the physical infrastructure of the Kennedy Center and then the finances. They posted a video of the ceiling collapsing within the main part of the Kennedy Center recently. You're seeing that right there. Crashing to the ground, they said that this happened at the beginning of September,

and that therefore it is a hazard to have people in the building. This resolution, though, indicated that the entire building would be closed and would not reopen until 2028. So it would take more than a year to do this. Now, the pushback on this has been that the Kennedy Center has gone through renovations before, and the idea is to just close a part of it and still be able to have performances and have the center open to the American public while parts of it are being renovated. Today's meeting featured, we're told, a contentious back and forth between President Donald Trump, who's the chair of the board, and one of the Democratic members of the board, Joyce Beatty. She's a congresswoman.

Her counsel released in a statement saying that Trump verbally berated her, and we heard from the president on truth social today, warning that if the Kennedy Center isn't warning that if it is not renamed with his name, it will not be renovated. He wrote, quote, if the ruling is a negative one going forward, it should not be and is not overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court, the reconstruction and the renovation of the Kennedy Center will not take place. So, Liz, where does all this go next? What are we seeing in the way of indications from Judge Cooper?

I want to be clear. The Kennedy Center is not closing down immediately. Cooper has to approve the renovations and the closing of the Kennedy Center before this happens. A source familiar with this litigation told us that they do not believe that Judge Cooper is going to allow the center to close until a discovery process moves forward. In other words, the Kennedy Center will have to reveal some of their internal deliberations and plans. This stuff happens behind closed doors. Some of it leaks out into the press, which is why we're reporting on this. But he's not going to allow that to happen until this discovery takes place. Amna, you have done interviews about this with the former head of the Kennedy Center, but their ticket sales have plummeted in the last year.

They've been having financial issues. The board has warned that the center is on the brink of bankruptcy. We asked the Kennedy Center for comment about all this. We did not hear back in time for the broadcast. It's our White House correspondent, Liz Landers. Liz, thank you very much. A drone was shot down today in Lithuania by a NATO jet. It's unknown from where the drone was launched,

but it's the latest in a series of drone incursions and sabotage attacks across the northern nations of NATO. Lithuania borders Russian-allied Belarus and the Russian enclave, Kalinagrad. And as Moscow relentlessly presses its destructive campaign in Ukraine, it's also now overtly and covertly confronting NATO. Here's Stephanie Sy. Overnight, for the first time in Lithuanian airspace, fighter jets shoot down a potentially armed drone as seen in this video. The alliance tracked the drone for roughly 30 minutes not far from residential areas before the Italian Air Force destroyed it over this field.

Lithuania says there is still much to investigate. It is not yet clear whether this was a drone that had been diverted and lost its way, as has often happened in our recent history, or whether it was a deliberate provocation. No version has been ruled out yet. But authorities added the drone likely carried explosives and entered from Russian ally Belarus. Lithuania neighbors a critical choke point directly between Belarus and Russia,

Kalingrad region, positioning it on NATO's front line with Moscow. The drone was intercepted near the village of Ptkanai, 60 miles west of the capital Vilnius. Lithuania's defense minister did not confirm whether the drone was Russian, but said, If we do not force Russia to negotiate for peace, then unfortunately such incidents in the Baltic region may become more frequent. Drone incursions have become an increasingly familiar sight and source of concern across NATO's eastern flank. NATO fighter jets have previously intercepted drones over the other two Baltic states, Estonia and Latvia. Some of those were suspected to be Ukrainian drones that strayed off course. But in recent weeks, officials from several NATO countries accused Russia of sabotage surveillance and plans to attack a

German airport with a drone carrying explosives. There were also other signs of tension across the region this week. In Denmark, officials say a Russian warship fired flares near a Danish military helicopter in the Baltic Sea. A move, the country's prime minister said, was meant to intimidate and divide. The Russian ambassador to Denmark said the Danish helicopter was at fault, adding it was not the first time Danish aircraft carried out, quote, dangerous maneuver. near Russian warships.

The EU's top diplomat, Kaya Kallis, said the recent incidents were not accidents, but calculated. We have seen Russia's dangerous, reckless at full display past 48 hours. And one thing is very clear. Putin will not stop unless he's stopped. So as Russia is willing to take greater risks, Europe must impose a greater cost. As Russia refuses to back down, NATO's Baltic allies are policing the skies on edge. For an inside look now at this growing confrontation with Russia across NATO territory, we turn again to Ambassador Doug Lute. He served as the U.S. envoy to NATO from 2013 to 2017 and spent years as a senior army commander in postings across Europe before that.

Ambassador, welcome back to the news hour. recent drone incursion into Lithuania follows a drone hitting a Ukrainian passenger train less than a mile from the border with Poland two days ago. Is this an escalation or is this more of the same types of violations we've seen from Russia in recent years? Well, I think these two drone incidents that you mentioned are part of a larger pattern and a pattern that's been going on playing out over several years with attacks that involve drones, as you You've mentioned along the eastern flank of NATO, but it goes beyond that. It goes to cyber attacks.

It goes to misinformation and disinformation campaigns, election interference, cutting of undersea cables in the Baltic Sea, and so forth. And all of these together are part of a campaign by Russia to both test NATO and to distract NATO, and in particular, distract NATO from its support to Ukraine. What are the real world risks of these incursions, Ambassador, not just for the safety of the people in these states that border Ukraine and Russia, but for the possibility of open war with NATO. How much is that a fear in your mind? Of course, conflict with NATO is largely defined by Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, which essentially

says an attack on one ally shall be considered by the others as an attack on them. So all of these activities, which move right up to the boundary, right up to the border of the definition of armed attack, are really playing with fire. Because there's always the chance of misperception or the chance of an accident or an unintended consequence. Imagine, for example, if the drone that hit the passenger train just to cross NATO's boundary with Ukraine, just across the Polish-Ukraine, just across the Polish-Ukraine, Ukrainian border just this weekend, had intended to be only a signal, but had been slightly misguided and hit a load of passengers to include senior, former, European, and U.S. officials. That's the kind of misperception or miscalculation that can lead to rapid and unbounded escalation. EU officials say these incidents were deliberate acts.

Why does Putin seem to have, as NATO put it last month, an increase. increasing tolerance for risk. And does the U.S. as more hands-off stance have anything to do with that? I think Putin sees an opportunity here to accomplish by way of these hybrid attacks or these lower than Article 5 attacks, a chance to divide the alliance. And this has, of course, been a political objective of Russia and before Russia of the Soviet Union. And that is essentially to break the link, the transatlantic link between the United States. and our European allies. And Putin sees an opportunity here because he sees the perception among European allies that the White House has moved away from what has been a standing

leadership and commitment of the alliance that stood for nearly seven decades. But now you see some questions, some doubt imposed by this administration and causing our European allies to question U.S. commitment. So Putin sees an opportunity. and he's taking advantage of it. Well, is NATO prepared for this kind of low-intensity hybrid war? It seems that some states take it very seriously, Poland, the Baltics, Germany, but are others less concerned and has Poon successfully divided the alliance? He hasn't been successful yet, but your observation that those closest to the border

to the east are most concerned. So it turns out even here in the well into the 21st, 21st century, geography still counts. So the Baltic states, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey, and so forth, those bounding Finland, those bounding the eastern flank of the alliance, are paying the most attention. Putin has not been successful yet, but he is being persistent, and he is very, very patient in this approach to divide the alliance. That is Ambassador Doug Lute. Thank you, sir, as always, for bringing your perspective. Rising seas, stronger storms, and relentless erosion are reshaping America's coastlines and forcing communities to make difficult choices.

Along much of the Atlantic coast, homeowners face a tough question, how to protect a place when the shoreline you built your life around starts to disappear. Special correspondent Ben Tracy of Climate Central has the story of two communities grappling with this, part of our ongoing series, tipping point. There were three houses over here, one out here, one right over here. Ladd Williams neighborhood in Buxton, North Carolina, and then our house was right here. Has changed a lot in just a year. The house that was on the beach front was the first one to go. No. Twenty-one houses on the outer banks have collapsed into the Atlantic in the past year.

There goes. After storms and waves eroded the sand beneath them. At one point, five homes went down. homes went down in just 45 minutes. It was devastating to stand there and watch our neighbor's house bump into the corner of our deck. Latt and his wife Debbie woke up to find their house was now in the water and barely standing. They knew it was time to move. When you say you moved, it wasn't just you, your wife and your stuff. It was the whole house. Last November with patio furniture still on the deck, their three-bedroom house was put on wheels and rolled two blocks

inland to a new lot they bought 600 feet from the water. What do you estimate this cost you? North of a quarter million. It took a bite out of the retirement fund. Did you ever think of just kind of leaving the house and starting over somewhere else? No, no, never. Many homeowners can't afford that kind of move. And most flood insurance policies don't pay until the house falls into the water. And when that occurs, yes, in fact, there typically is a bit of a mess.

Dave Halleck is the superintendent of the Cape Hatteras National Seashore, which stretches for 80 miles along the outer banks. This 400-foot-long pile of debris was the mess left after those houses collapsed last year. As you can see, there are no front steps that go up to it. We met Halleck in Rodanthi at another abandoned beachfront home. What's likely to happen here? If this house follows the path of the others, it will most likely collapse at some point. The ocean is just simply catching up to this development.

Many of these homes were built in the 1960s and 70s when they were hundreds of feet from the ocean. It's now an unwelcome neighbor. The ocean is literally at the front door. Reed Corbett, a coastal scientist at East Carolina University, says while erosion is natural, The erosion is natural on barrier islands. Here, it's uniquely bad. You can find areas that have erosion rates of 10 to 15 feet per year. You're losing hundreds and hundreds of feet of potential beachfront during the time of a single mortgage.

And as the planet warms and ice continues to melt, sea levels are rising, allowing ever stronger storms to push water further inland. level is risen by a foot and it continues to erode. So anything on top of that, high tide, a wave, a storm. You start a foot higher than you were when many of these homes were built. I do think that we need to be upfront about the risk. Corbett says communities like the Outer Banks need to have an honest conversation about what it means to live on the water's edge.

There have been homes that have fallen in the ocean in last year. where those homes were purchased within the previous 12 months. And the homeowner didn't have an understanding of the vulnerability of that. And the outer banks won't be an outlier. Climate Central research shows by 2050 about 2.5 million Americans and 1.4 million homes could be at risk from severe coastal flooding. This is an example of what every community at some point in the not too distant future is going to be managing.

Up the coast in Connecticut, it's moving day for Tim Rath. I've got to get the hell out of here. How far are you moving today? It's about nine and a half feet. With his 60-ton home resting on 10 steel beams, a hydraulic system jacked it up one foot at a time. In less than a day, the house was nine feet higher. The lift alone costs 50 feet.

$50,000. Why are you lifting your house? I've been here for 42 years. I've been through, I don't know, four or five major floods, and it gets old after a while. His neighborhood was devastated in 2012. Sandy was the worst. When Superstorm Sandy tore up the East Coast, causing nearly $70 billion in damage. The waves would come in here and fill this up like an aquarium right to the roof.

Since Sandy, new seawalls have gone up and nearly, Half of the homes here are now raised. What do you think of all this stuff? For Wrath, it's about protecting his legacy. Did you ever think about just moving somewhere else? No. This is going to be for my grandson, a little three-year-old you saw in the front yard. Back on the outer banks, they're rebuilding the beach in Buxton to protect something else.

The economy. The reason you're here or I'm here or anybody's here is because we have a beach. DARE County manager Bobby Outen says the beach also protects Highway 12, the only major road here from being washed out. Rebuilding this beach costs about $50 million. They've done it three times in 10 years. Critics say it's like shoveling money into the ocean. Beach nourishment is a great tool as long as you've got enough sand and enough money because it works. Can you fight this off forever? We can mitigate it like this for a while. How long I can't answer that question.

They're also repairing this broken jetty, hoping it will help slow the erosion. Does it feel weird to be this far from the ocean? Yeah, a little bit. Ladd Williams knows the future here will look different. We don't deny that there's climate change and that it's affecting things, but you need to adapt to that. You can't just say, well, abandon everything. He's grateful to still have his home, even if the view,

has changed. I noticed your sign on the front of the house. We both agreed that answered prayers was an appropriate name. It still feels like home. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Ben Tracy with Climate Central. As a bass player, extraordinaire, band leader, composer, and educator, Christian McBride has been called one of the hardest working men in jazz. And he's as comfortable performing with jazz icons as he is with pop artists like Sting and Bill.

Irish. Senior arts correspondent Jeffrey Brown recently met McBride at his home and at his hometown jazz festival for our arts and culture series Canvas. Headlining the Montclair Jazz Festival in northern New Jersey, Christian McBride leads his 17th strong big band. It's not the 30s or the 40s where big bands were standard, you know. So if you play in a big band now, you're part of a very lucky group of musicians. As composer, bassist, and band leader for the ensemble, McBride is keeping a more than century-old art form alive.

But it's just one of his many hats. He fronts smaller groups like his quintet and has been a regular side man performing with countless others, including such legends as pianist McCoy Tyner and trumpet player Freddie Hubbard. He's played on more than 400 recordings and beyond jazz as well, including with one of his heroes, James Brown. I also want to ask you about Art Tatum. He also hosts NPR's long-running Jazz Night in America.

And earlier this year, he won his 10th and 11th Grammys. How does he describe himself? I'm a professional musician. Yeah. You know, you get called for a gig, you play the gig. You know, I like to think of myself. like a HVAC guy. You know, what do you need me to do?

All right, let's do this. Let's fix this. Practical, yes, but also educational, even evangelical. When you guys are just kind of putting it together, think in terms of phrases. As artistic director for Jazz House Kids, a nonprofit in New Jersey that provides classes in programming for young musicians, McBride spreads the gospel. of his music through the most direct hands-on guidance. Right? You don't have to play no crazy lines. Just make sure whatever you play,

you play with conviction. One point you said, if you're going to play, you got to play with conviction. That's right. What does that mean? You know, if you're going to make a mistake, make it loudly. You know, nothing sounds... You mean it? Yeah, nothing sounds worse than making a mistake and admitting

you made a mistake. And is that easy to convey? Well, it's easy to convey. It's not always easy to practice. You know what I mean? But playing with conviction is really at the base level of what all great musicians have. Pride came from a musical family.

Both his father and great uncle were bass players. He attended a magnet school for the arts in Philadelphia graduating in the same classes members of the roots. And he's been playing professionally since he was 17. When you're starting out, are you trying to create your own voice, your own style? No. No. I was not trying to create anything other than opportunity.

You're in New York City now. You're 17 years old. You need a job. You need a gig. And then once you get the gig, now you can start slowly turning it into yours. Ever and... McBride's partner in jazz education and in life is his wife Melissa Walker, a vocalist and the founder of Jazz House Kids.

You know, you really just let that story evolve over the lines. Which is now grown from a small in-school program in Newark 25 years ago to a program that today serves about 2,500 annually, with classes taught by professional musicians. We're going to give an authentic experience through this music. Number one. And number two, you put the very best practitioners, you know, that are not only playing and making a living out of this music, but they're great educators. They know how to reach young people where they are.

But what do you think it is about jazz that is so vibrant about meeting young people where they live? It really is a folk music. It is something that is passed down from one to another. You know, it's not something that only happens in the hollowed halls of the music. of great universities and big stages. That's not what it is. The music of the people.

Jazz House Kids programming includes a two-week summer program, classes and performing ensembles for 150 young students, starting quite young. I feel that being, particularly the jazz musician, the basic skills that you need to, Be just good, not great, but just good, are the same attributes that lead you to being successful in any endeavor. Listening, teamwork, having empathy, being able to harmonize. Almost 20 years ago, one of the first summer programs ended with a small concert in a local park.

I didn't even know that you needed a permit to do something in the park. And we had our first little performance. for a handful of people. Correct, because there were about 40 students and their parents and, you know, a couple of people dropped by. And Christian and I looked at one another and we said, we know it, something great when we have it. And that became the Montclair Jazz Festival.

Today it's grown to one of the largest free jazz festivals in the country. This summer, attracting a record 32,000 music lovers to hear big name music. musicians and the young ones from Jazz House Kids. This year the festival also partnered with the Smithsonian hosting an oral history project for the country's 250th celebration. For the hardworking professional Christian McBride, it's all part of playing what you love

and letting others in. If you're in a position to go out and advocate for it, that's what you're supposed to do. That's what Wenton Marcellus has done all of these years. Before him, that's what Louis Armstrong did. That's what Dizzy Gillespie did. And I'm glad to be in the position where I can spread the message, so to speak, in all different kinds of ways. What I loved most about jazz, even as a young child, was you can actually hear and feel a person's

personality through their playing. Human beings doing excellent things is never going to go out of style. Kristen McBride releases a new album with his quintet Ursa Major this fall. For the PBS News Hour, I'm Jeffrey Brown in Montclair, New Jersey. And remember, there's always a lot more online, including a look at the Chesapeake Bay's rebounding blue crab population and why scientists are cautiously

optimistic about its future. That is at pbs.org slash news hour. And that is the newshour for tonight. I'm Amna Nawaz. On behalf of the entire NewsHour team, thank you for joining us.