AMNA NAWAZ: Good evening.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

Geoff Bennett is away.

On the "News Hour" tonight: President Trump projects confidence in his tariff plan, but the markets flash more warning signs over the enormous levies placed on Chinese imports.

Food banks and their customers feel the pain from cuts to government programs coupled with higher prices.

And we report from Senegal on the struggle to cope with climate change, despite promises from other nations to help.

ELIMANE KANE, Founder, LEGS-Africa (through translator): The Western world promised Senegal financing of $2.5 billion, but we haven't seen it yet.

(BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Welcome to the "News Hour."

Markets dropped again today as investors and businesses focused on the escalating trade war between the U.S. and China and what it could mean for the economy.

Markets continued their major slide since mid-February.

The Dow dropped more than 1,000 points, or 2.5 percent.

The Nasdaq fell by 4 percent, and the S&P 500 dropped by nearly 3.5 percent.

For his part, President Trump showed no immediate signs of easing Chinese tariffs.

John Yang begins with this report.

JOHN YANG: Today, stock markets gave back much of what they gained yesterday.

At a Cabinet meeting, President Trump said it's just part of the process.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: There will be a transition cost and transition problems, but in the end it's going to be a beautiful thing.

JOHN YANG: He underscored his willingness to negotiate with trading partners.

DONALD TRUMP: Everybody wants to come and make a deal, and we're working with a lot of different countries, and it's all going to work out very well.

JOHN YANG: One country not showing any interest in making a deal?

China.

Earlier, the White House clarified that the total new tariffs on China stand at 145 percent.

That's because the 125 percent duty announced yesterday is on top of the 20 percent rate levied earlier in response to the fentanyl crisis.

Chinese officials call it bullying.

LIN JIAN, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson (through translator): Tariff wars and trade wars have no winners.

China doesn't want to fight them, but does not fear them when they come our way.

If the U.S. insists on fighting a tariff war or a trade war, China will fight to the end.

JOHN YANG: After the initial levies were imposed, China responded with an 84 percent tariff on U.S. goods.

On CNBC, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said many of the platform's third-party sellers, either in China or selling Chinese products, may have to raise prices.

ANDY JASSY, CEO, Amazon: If you made me guess I'm guessing that sellers will pass that cost on.

I think they will try.

And I understand why.

I mean, depending on which country you're in, you don't have 50 percent extra margin.

JOHN YANG: While the 10 percent baseline tariff for most countries remains, the European Union announced it's pausing its retaliatory tariffs in hopes of reaching an agreement with Mr. Trump.

OLOF GILL, Spokesperson, European Commission: We're ready to make deals.

Let's talk.

We believe we can reach all sorts of beneficial outcomes from both sides that would avoid the types of tariffs that we believe are harmful and counterproductive.

JOHN YANG: British Prime Minister Keir Starmer welcomed Mr. Trump's reversal, as far as it goes.

KEIR STARMER, British Prime Minister: Look, I'm very pleased to see the changes in relation to the tariffs.

But the challenge hasn't gone away.

And I don't think this is a passing phase.

I think we're living in a changing world.

JOHN YANG: Meanwhile, some Democrats are raising questions about Mr. Trump's social media post saying "This is a great time to buy" just hours before he announced he was pausing the tariffs, sparking the stock market rally.

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): The chaotic nature of this tariff policy with Trump's position changing every single hour gives ample opportunity for any individual who has early access to information about the White House's change in position to make boatloads of money.

JOHN YANG: On CNN, former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said President Trump took a wrecking ball to the economy.

JANET YELLEN, Former U.S. Treasury Secretary: This is the worst self-inflicted wound that I have ever seen in an administration impose.

JOHN YANG: As investors, business executives and consumers try to absorb all of this, the government said inflation slowed in March to 2.4 percent, the lowest rates in September.

The Consumer Price Index data was collected before the president's toughest tariffs.

But economists warn that higher prices as a result of the tariffs could emerge in a matter of months.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm John Yang.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let's focus now on those concerns around China's trade relationship with the U.S. and what these responses could mean.

Derek Scissors watches all of this closely as a senior fellow for the American Enterprise Institute.

That's a conservative think tank.

And he joins me now.

Derek, welcome, and thanks for joining us.

Help us understand a little bit about the relationship between these two economies, the U.S. and China, the world's two largest economies.

How interdependent, how intertwined, rather, are they on each other?

DEREK SCISSORS, American Enterprise Institute: Well, on a matter of a daily basis, they're pretty intertwined.

The U.S. is the biggest consumer market in the world.

China is the biggest producer in the world.

They're the biggest exporter.

We're the biggest importer.

And so if you just look day-to-day, it looks like they're really intertwined.

Now, you can make a pretty good argument that Chinese goods can be substituted for, not quickly, not immediately, the way the president thinks.

But I think over time, the U.S. and China could be considerably less intertwined than they are today.

AMNA NAWAZ: And do you see that as one of the goals of this administration with these tariffs to try to decouple the two economies?

DEREK SCISSORS: I don't think so.

There are certainly people in the administration who have that goal.

For disclosure, I have that goal, at least partial decoupling.

That's never been the president's goal.

He presided -- he wanted to make a big trade deal in the first term and export more to China.

Now he's talking about, I want to talk to China.

I want to make a deal.

None of that sounds like decoupling.

Decoupling would be, hey, here's some tariffs, maybe not 145 percent, but 54 percent or whatever, and we're not negotiating.

So it sounds to me like he wants to make a deal just like he did in his first term.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, as you mentioned, China, of course, is the primary global producer of a lot of things Americans consume, toys, to cell phones, to computers.

Walk me through this now.

If tariffs do drive the prices up, imports, consumption of those goods here in the U.S. goes down, can that supply line, as you mentioned, can it shift to other nations where the tariffs are lower or could be negotiated lower, like Vietnam or Indonesia, for example?

DEREK SCISSORS: Absolutely.

The Chinese are very good at this, and they got a practice run in the first Trump term with much lower tariffs.

Their companies are nimble.

They're used to foreign investment.

There's large-scale Chinese foreign investment overseas.

They're going to try, for sure, to move production elsewhere.

Now, if the U.S. enforces its trade policies, that won't work.

The U.S. has never enforced trade policies at a scale we're talking about before.

This is another thing that President Trump has done that no president has done, except we haven't actually pulled it off yet.

So China is going to try to move production and shift trade through other countries.

We have a response, but it's going to be a challenging response.

If we do enforce our trade laws against China, that opens the door for countries like Indonesia to produce their own goods, and, of course, also for production in the U.S.

But this is going to take some months to shake out, assuming there's no U.S.-China deal.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, in the months that it takes to shake out, I understand the goods that are already in transit are exempted from many of these tariffs.

So when should American consumers expect to see any kind of increase in prices?

DEREK SCISSORS: Well, it's obviously going to depend on the goods.

There was a lot of stockpiling in anticipation of tariffs.

Now, I don't think anyone thought it was going to go to 145, for example.

But there was stockpiling by a lot of firms.

I don't think you're going to see prices rise due to trade in the next few weeks.

There may be firms raising prices on their own because they're expecting a big trade hit coming.

But trade costs are going to start rising in May.

And I would think that people would see it in June if it's actually about trade.

If it's about firms getting out in front of trade, of course, it could happen tomorrow.

AMNA NAWAZ: Derek, what about the impact of Chinese tariffs on the American economy?

There's an estimated 900,000-plus American jobs that are supported by U.S. exports to China, especially in agriculture and livestock.

Are those jobs in jeopardy?

DEREK SCISSORS: I think the big hit here is to agriculture.

We tend to export commodities to China, which is one of the problems for the Trump administration.

They don't want us to be a commodities exporter.

They want us to build things.

And so agriculture does face a threat.

In the past, there's been the sort of quiet dealmaking, where China makes an agriculture exception or it buys U.S. agricultural products that are sent to a third country.

This is the worst standoff we have had.

So I wouldn't guarantee that farmers are going to be OK, and they're the ones that the most threat from U.S. exports to China.

AMNA NAWAZ: In the minute or so we have left, I have to ask, where do you see this going next?

Does it continue to ramp up, or is there an off-ramp ahead for either the U.S. or China?

DEREK SCISSORS: Well, this is one of those weird things where it's pretty clear both countries want an off-ramp, but they want the other country to take the first step.

I think the Chinese are worried that Trump will say something somewhat embarrassing about how much they need to deal.

And the U.S. is legitimately, in my view, angry at Chinese trade practices.

So it's hard to imagine there won't be negotiations, but it might take a while.

Maybe both sides have to suffer enough that they're willing to take that first step.

And then the next issue is, those negotiations are going to be tough.

You can announce a deal.

We announced a deal, the phase one trade deal in Trump's first term.

It didn't work.

So we're taking a long time to get to the first step of the negotiations.

We may not quite get to an outcome where there's a deal that holds.

The market will rally on good news, but the final good news may not come.

AMNA NAWAZ: All right, that is Derek Scissors of the American Enterprise Institute joining us tonight.

Derek, thank you so much.

Good to speak with you.

DEREK SCISSORS: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: In a dramatic vote, House Republicans today passed a $5 trillion budget framework that kick-starts the process for President Trump's agenda on Capitol Hill, this less than a day after hard-line conservatives refused to support it.

Our congressional correspondent, Lisa Desjardins, joins me now to explain.

So, Lisa, this was a hard-won vote.

Let's talk about that in a second.

But first walk us through the framework of this bill.

What does it mean potentially?

LISA DESJARDINS: That's right.

This is not just a framework.

This is the framework for the Trump agenda in Congress.

It's part -- it how his key promises -- if they get passed, it will be because of this.

So let's take a reminder of what this bill outlines exactly.

First, this would be tax cuts of up to $5.3 trillion, including extending Trump's first-term tax cuts, spending cuts, significant ones.

But that is still to be determined how much.

This would increase the debt ceiling likely through the end of next year.

Now, it's interesting, Amna.

Today, the Congressional Budget Office came out and said the kinds of tax cuts that this allows, it could add an additional $6 trillion to the deficit, depending on what else is in this bill.

Now, Speaker Johnson and Republicans want to get this done now, because it is the first step.

They want to get to the second step, the detailed bill by summer.

There are political reasons for that, but there are more than that.

There are also some economic ones too.

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): We know that the debt limit cliff is approaching us pretty quickly here.

We know that markets have been a little unstable.

They want to know that Congress is on the job.

And I'm here to tell you that we are.

The Article I branch of this government, the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate are going to do our job.

LISA DESJARDINS: You mentioned this was difficult.

It barely passed 216 to 214.

They really couldn't spare very much on this, at stake here, nothing less than Trump agenda, but also every person in this country, their tax rates on the bank accounts for America in the future, and Republicans' political future going ahead.

AMNA NAWAZ: Let's talk more about the vote then, because yesterday there were some 20 House Republicans who opposed this bill.

The bill didn't change.

So what did to get it across the finish line?

LISA DESJARDINS: At least 20.

It could have been even more than that.

They have real issues with the idea that perhaps this added to the deficit.

And that's why they were holding back on it.

What has changed?

Senate Leader John Thune and Speaker Johnson have promised them in private talks that they will, personally, they are committed to these kinds of cutting of spending to about $1.5 trillion.

Now, it's a handshake deal, but that would be an unprecedented level of spending cuts.

REP. JODEY ARRINGTON (R-TX): And most importantly for me, a commitment from the leadership of the House that we will not put a bill on the floor of our chamber that adds to the national debt, which is a deferred tax on our children.

LISA DESJARDINS: Two Republicans did vote no because they said this will raise the deficit.

That's Thomas Massie and Victoria Spartz there.

Now, is everyone on the same page here, House and Senate?

No, I don't think they are.

They want to be on the same page, but the details are what matter here.

That's going to be difficult.

I'd say maybe they're in the same section of the library.

AMNA NAWAZ: OK, well, we should note the House passed another major Republican bill today.

This one has to do with voting.

What would it do and will it become law?

LISA DESJARDINS: Right.

This likely will not pass the Senate, but I want to talk about it because it is a big Republican priority.

This is called the SAVE Act.

Let's talk about what's in it.

This bill would require proof of citizenship in order to register to vote in federal elections.

Currently, voters have to swear, sometimes they sign, that they are citizens.

This bill, as I said, will likely die in the Senate.

But opponents say it is part of what they see as an assault on voting rights as voter suppression, because they note that millions of Americans don't have access to these kinds of documents in an easy way.

They also note that, from what we know, there is a microscopic level of noncitizens voting in this country, very small.

Republicans say, well, if it is so small, why not wipe out the chance altogether?

They know that voter I.D.s at the polls generally is a popular issue with voters.

This is something we have seen them run on and they will again.

Now, the next election, depending on the balance of power in the U.S. Senate, this bill could come up again and it is something we want to watch in the long term.

AMNA NAWAZ: All right, another busy day on Capitol Hill.

Lisa Desjardins covering it all, thank you.

LISA DESJARDINS: You're welcome.

AMNA NAWAZ: In today's other news: Russian American Ksenia Karelina is flying back to the United States tonight after 14 months in Russian captivity.

She was released as part of a prisoner swap, the second since President Trump returned to the White House.

Here's Nick Schifrin.

NICK SCHIFRIN: A smiling Ksenia Karelina today on her way back home, after being released from Russian custody in video filmed by Russia's spy agency.

She was arrested last February and sentenced to 12 years in a maximum security prison colony for committing treason.

The U.S. called that absolutely ludicrous.

Her crime?

A donation of $51.80 to a U.S.-based humanitarian group that helps Ukrainians affected by the war.

Karelina was a former ballerina and lived in Los Angeles for more than a decade.

Her boyfriend, Chris Van Heerden, told us last February how much she was missed.

CHRIS VAN HEERDEN, Boyfriend of Ksenia Karelina: She's kind, loving, funny, loved by all her friends.

Everyone who meets her wants more of Ksenia.

She is funny as hell.

She has so much life in her.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Karelina was part of a swap engineered by CIA Director John Ratcliffe for Arthur Petrov, who flew back to Russia today.

He was arrested for smuggling military-grade electronics to Russia in violation of U.S. sanctions.

Today, President Trump said he hoped the swap could turn into more diplomatic momentum.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: We spoke to President Putin about it and they made a deal.

They released the young ballerina and she is now out and that was good.

So we appreciate that.

We hope that we're going to be able to make a deal relatively soon with Russia and Ukraine to stop the fighting.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But, so far, Russia has refused President Trump's request for a full 30-day cease-fire, that despite a previous prisoner swap, U.S. teacher Marc Fogel exchanged for a Russian cyber-criminal.

As for Karelina, she will reunite with her boyfriend tonight and they will head straight to a rehabilitation facility for recently released detainees.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Nick Schifrin.

AMNA NAWAZ: Also today, a helicopter crashed into New York's Hudson River just off Manhattan.

All six people who were on board, including a family of Spanish tourists, were killed.

Three were children.

Eyewitnesses reported seeing the helicopter break apart in midair.

The crash prompted a massive rescue and response.

Boats circled the Bell 206 aircraft, which could be seen mostly submerged and upside down in the water.

What caused the crash is unclear at this early stage.

It is routine for the skies above New York City to see numerous plane and helicopter flights that are private and recreational or commercial.

In another aviation incident, two American Airlines passenger planes clipped wings on the tarmac of Reagan National Airport in Washington.

One of the planes had several members of Congress on board.

No injuries were reported on either jet.

Air traffic control operations at Reagan have come under intense scrutiny since the fatal collision in January between an American Airlines flight and an Army helicopter that killed 67 people.

Well over 200 people are confirmed dead from a nightclub roof collapse in the Dominican capital of Santo Domingo.

Today, some rescue efforts gave way to recovery operations as hope fades for finding survivors.

Across town, mourners wept for Rubby Perez, the merengue icon who was performing on Tuesday night when the ceiling caved in.

For other restless families, no word yet on their missing relatives.

YAEFREISI MALENO, Relative of Nightclub Attendees (through translator): We learned that there are two relatives of ours.

Their vehicle was here.

There are videos of them dancing here, and that's how we found out.

So far, they have not given us any clues.

We have gone to the hospitals.

We have searched.

We have been attentive when they take the bodies out, and nothing.

AMNA NAWAZ: Officials said 189 people have been rescued alive from the rubble.

The government says it'll launch an investigation into what caused the collapse when recovery operations finish.

The Trump administration announced a lofty goal today.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that his agencies will identify the cause of autism by September of this year.

Kennedy gave that pledge today during a Cabinet meeting with the president.

He cited a sharp rise in cases in recent decades.

ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR., U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary: We have launched a massive testing and research effort that's going to involve hundreds of scientists from around the world.

By September, we will know what has caused the autism epidemic, and we will be able to eliminate those exposures.

AMNA NAWAZ: Kennedy's efforts will build upon decades of research into whether genetic or environmental factors might contribute to autism.

He's frequently linked autism with vaccines, which has been debunked by the scientific community.

While inflation generally cooled here in the U.S. last month, there was one notable exception, eggs.

The average retail price hit a record high in March at $6.23 per dozen.

That came as a bit of a surprise to some industry experts because wholesale costs had decreased significantly and egg farms suffered no new bird flu outbreaks.

Experts say shelf prices may drop when demand falls after Easter.

And two of the world's biggest names in fashion are set to unite.

Prada has struck a nearly $1.4 billion deal to buy Versace from us luxury group Capri Holdings, bringing the brand back to Italian ownership.

The high fashion icons are known for contrasting styles.

Prada won't be involved in the creative side of Versace, and the executive said there aren't plans for changes at CEO.

Versace had taken financial losses over the last few quarters, while Prada has defied a luxury market downturn with sustained growth.

The deal is expected to close later this year.

Still to come on the "News Hour": why President Trump is directing the Justice Department to investigate two members of his last administration; the debate over daylight saving time reaches Capitol Hill; and musician Nile Rodgers reflects on the origins of his career and artistry.

AMNA NAWAZ: Despite data today showing an ease in inflation, President Trump's tariffs mean Americans can expect to see even higher food prices in the near future on items ranging from coffee to fruits to cheese.

That comes at a time when food banks nationwide are reporting record levels of need and after the U.S. Department of Agriculture last month halted more than $500 million in deliveries to those food banks.

Deema Zein reports.

DEEMA ZEIN: Empty shelves, an unusual scene in a normally stocked warehouse.

RADHA MUTHIAH, President and CEO, Capital Area Food Bank: What we were expecting to be about 55 tractor trailers' worth of food, and we just heard a couple of weeks ago that half of those will no longer be on their way to us.

DEEMA ZEIN: These vacant racks stand out in Washington, D.C.'s Capital Area Food Bank, a 123,000-square foot building where staff store inventory and pull orders for delivery to more than 400 regional partners.

Radha Muthiah is the food bank's president and CEO.

She says the recent USDA cuts made a deep impact here.

RADHA MUTHIAH: Six hundred and seventy thousand meals' worth of food that we now have to scramble to look for other sources of food to be able to try and at least partially bridge that gap.

I understand evaluating these programs.

Every administration does that.

We are happy to share data, client testimonials on the impact of these programs on working adults, on children who are able to focus more on school, on seniors who can combine this with food, with medication that they need.

DEEMA ZEIN: In February, food banks nationwide began noticing canceled USDA deliveries in their sums in their systems.

The funding freeze comes after the Trump administration cut two other programs that provide aid to food banks and schools.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins defended the cuts on FOX News.

BROOKE ROLLINS, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture: But right now, from what we are viewing, that program was nonessential.

It was an effort by the left to continue spending taxpayer dollars that were not necessary.

DEEMA ZEIN: Republican lawmakers are also considering cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, previously known as food stamps.

Last year, about 42 million people used the program.

In a statement to the "News Hour," a USDA spokesperson said: "The USDA has not and will not lose focus on its core mission of strengthening food security, supporting agricultural markets, and ensuring access to nutritious foods."

The agency also noted a recent approval of $261 million in purchases of fruits, vegetables, and tree nuts to food banks.

VINCE HALL, Chief Government Relations Officer, Feeding America: This is an extraordinarily serious moment for food banks all across the United States.

DEEMA ZEIN: Vince Hall is the chief government relations officer for Feeding America, a nationwide network of more than 60,000 food pantries and distributors.

He says an end to pandemic era aid, rising inflation and stagnant wages has led to record high demand at food banks.

VINCE HALL: Any reduction in the supply of food to food banks is going to have very significant impacts for people facing hunger.

Food banks were already maxing out their supply chains.

They were already going to every conceivable donor, looking for every conceivable pound of food and asking every community to support.

And so the reality is, we're going to be short, we're going to be short on foods.

DEEMA ZEIN: Just outside Washington, leadership at Catholic Charities' Alexandria food pantry say they expect to see a drop in the variety and quantity of their USDA orders.

It's food that U.S. Army Reserve veteran Philip Tinsley relies on.

PHILIP TINSLEY, Food Panty Client: Well, it's important for your own health, but more important for, I guess, some of your mental health, that you don't think, well since I'm poor, I have to be treated like trash.

Or since I am poor, I have to eat bad food.

Or since I'm poor, I have to eat secondary food that other people don't want.

This is really what anyone would go and get off the shelves.

DEEMA ZEIN: And in this region, some food banks are starting to see more former federal workers enter their doors.

Tens of thousands of federal employees have been fired since the Trump administration took office, leaving some searching for ways to make ends meet.

WOMAN: This is my first time going to a food pantry as a client.

I have been a volunteer in the past.

DEEMA ZEIN: This former federal contractor was let go in mid-February and recently lost her health insurance.

She spoke to the "News Hour" anonymously for fear of retribution.

WOMAN: Coming here and admitting that I need some extra assistance took a bit of courage to having never been in this situation before.

I think it's important that people take a step back and take the politics out of it for a second and realize that these are real people's lives.

DEEMA ZEIN: And the need spans far and wide with some of the highest insecurity food insecurity rates in rural areas, like here in Rappahannock County, Virginia.

PENNY KARDIS, President, Rappahannock Food Pantry: We do not have any grocery stores nearby.

So for a family to be able to go and get fresh produce from a grocery store, they have about a 30-minute drive anywhere within the county.

DEEMA ZEIN: Rappahannock Food Pantry President Penny Kardis says they will look to their community to fill the gaps.

PENNY KARDIS: It would be a challenge for us.

We would have to -- besides looking at our current donors, we would possibly have to look at corporate donors.

That's a little bit difficult for us.

We have no businesses in the area, so that would -- we'd have to look really far outside for that.

DEEMA ZEIN: Sue Raiford has lived here for 30 years.

She says after a bad work accident about a decade ago, she could barely walk and weighed only 75 pounds.

SUE RAIFORD, Food Pantry Client: And when I went into the pantry, these people just surrounded me.

And they said, oh, we have got to fatten you up.

Here, here, here.

And it's been that type of welcoming companionship that is always here for everyone that walks through these stores.

DEEMA ZEIN: It's that community Raiford fears will be hurt as cuts are made to the programs many here rely on.

SUE RAIFORD: Like myself, many, many seniors, we don't have means to go out to the grocery stores.

We just can't do it.

I think without that support from the government, many lives will be shattered.

And that's the heartbreak.

DEEMA ZEIN: For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Deema Zein in Rappahannock County, Virginia.

AMNA NAWAZ: Late yesterday, President Trump signed executive orders targeting two former officials who criticized him.

Escalating his retribution campaign, the president directed the Justice Department to investigate Miles Taylor, a former Homeland Security official, and Christopher Krebs, a top cybersecurity official overseeing elections, both political appointees during Trump's first term.

The president accused Taylor, without evidence, of treason.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: I think it's a very important case.

And I think he's guilty of treason, if you want to know the truth.

But we will find out.

This guy Krebs was saying, oh, the election was great.

It was great.

That was a very corrupt election.

They use COVID to cheat.

And we're going to find out about this guy too.

AMNA NAWAZ: Our White House correspondent, Laura Barron-Lopez, has been following the latest and joins me now.

So, Laura, let's just start with these executive orders.

Break down for us what exactly they do.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: So the executive order orders targeting Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor strip security clearances from both of those former officials.

They also revoke the clearances for their work associates.

For Taylor, that means people that work at University of Pennsylvania, and for Krebs anyone at the company that he works at, SentinelOne.

And then finally they -- Trump ordered the Justice Department and Homeland Security to launch investigations into Krebs and Taylor's tenure during his first administration.

Now, that last one, Amna, that's escalation.

Lawyers that I talked to said that there is no prior target of President Trump that has been subject to an investigation by the Justice Department that potentially threatens criminal penalties.

AMNA NAWAZ: So Miles Taylor and Chris Krebs, why is the president targeting these two men specifically?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: As you noted, Amna, both of these men have been critical of President Trump's conduct, be it during the first term and since then.

And Trump's executive order specifically targets Chris Krebs for telling the truth about the 2020 election.

When it comes to Miles Taylor, the president says that he disclosed sensitive information and claims that Taylor potentially published classified information.

Now, many of our viewers may remember that Miles Taylor authored an anonymous 2018 op-ed about resisting President Trump from inside of the first administration.

AMNA NAWAZ: And have we had any kind of response from Mr. Taylor or Mr. Krebs?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Chris Krebs reaffirmed his statement from 2020, essentially saying that the election was secure.

Now, SentinelOne, the cybersecurity firm that Chris Krebs works for, said that they will cooperate with any review of security clearances of their workers.

Miles Taylor himself posted to social media platform X, saying: "Dissent isn't unlawful.

It certainly isn't treasonous and America is headed down a dark path."

AMNA NAWAZ: Now, Laura, we have seen the president target before people, institutions he believes are his political enemies.

What's the larger pattern and context we need to understand here?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: The lawyers and legal scholars that I spoke to said that these actions are unprecedented, that they have never seen a present use power in the way that President Trump is using to go after his perceived enemies.

He's essentially stripping traditional power -- traditional separation between the Justice Department and his office of the presidency.

Now, this is part of a larger pattern of punishing any person or entity that the president considers an enemy.

Now, we -- this is not an exhaustive list that we're about to show, but these are some of the people who President Trump has either revoked security clearances for or security protections for.

That includes former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley, Trump's former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and many others.

Now, the president has also targeted law firms that either legally challenged his policies or represented political opponents or cooperated with some of the prosecutions that were carried out against the president.

Now, this week, the president added to his target list the firm Susman Godfrey and targeting their security clearances.

They represented Dominion Voting Systems in their lawsuit against FOX News.

And people will remember that FOX News had to settle $787 million to Dominion Voting Systems.

AMNA NAWAZ: Laura, going after these law firms in this way, investigating two former officials from his administration, what are the ramifications here?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: I spoke to Kevin Carroll, who served as counsel under the Homeland Security Department during Trump's first term, and he called these actions specifically against Taylor and Krebs blatantly unconstitutional and said that it was just the beginning.

KEVIN CARROLL, Former Senior Homeland Security Official: They're going to continue to go after individuals and law firms.

And I think it's very important for people to fight back and for the courts to support them when they fight back.

What they're trying to do is going forward prevent people from being whistle-blowers, prevent people from speaking out about misconduct, prevent people from telling the truth about election results.

And it's just really important for the legal profession especially to show some backbone.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Now, Carroll and other lawyers that I talked to you said there were three big ramifications here, the chilling effect on political speech broadly, the intimidation and scare tactics being used against lawyers and government officials, who could ultimately hold President Trump or his administration accountable, and also the impact on the right to representation, meaning that Kevin Carroll was worried that lawyers may turn down clients who find themselves on the opposite end of the administration.

AMNA NAWAZ: All right, that's our White House correspondent, Laura Barron-Lopez.

Laura, thank you.

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: Last month, almost the entire country performed the biannual ritual of changing our clocks, in this case, springing forward to start daylight saving time.

But, on Capitol Hill today, lawmakers debated getting rid of this practice once and for all.

William Brangham explains.

SEN. LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER (D-DE): I know I speak for many Americans when I say it's time, it's time to figure this out.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): Congress has the authority to end this outdated and harmful practice.

SEN. EDWARD MARKEY (D-MA): We just have to make daylight saving time permanent, in my opinion, one way or the other, or at least get more -- we need more sunshine.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Today's hearing, named after Cher's hit song "If I Could Turn Back Time" examined a bipartisan bill called the Sunshine Protection Act, which would change our current system where, in March, most states spring forward to daylight saving time and then in November fall back to standard time.

This law would establish permanent daylight saving time nationwide, no more switching.

SEN. RICK SCOTT (R-FL): The American people are sick and tired of changing their clocks twice a year.

It's confusing, unnecessary and completely outdated.

SCOTT YATES, Founder, Lock The Clock: My name is Scott Yates.

I have been reading, writing and testifying about this for nearly a decade and I have this recommendation.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Scott Yates, founder of the Lock the Clock campaign, has been on a yearslong mission to ditch the switch.

He cites evidence that in the days immediately following the time change, human health suffers.

SCOTT YATES: Peer-reviewed studies consistently show that heart attacks go up, strokes, car crashes.

Even miscarriages spike in those days following the spring switch.

Study from the University of Vienna found deaths overall just increased by 3 percent in those couple of days after the change.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: You have been like a modern-day Sisyphus trying to push this rock up a hill.

Now you're here in Washington.

Do you think this is finally going to be the day that you win the argument?

SCOTT YATES: Well, I hope so.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: According to polls, it's an idea that's gaining popularity.

President Trump has voiced support.

But the right solution, permanent daylight saving time or permanent standard time, has been debated for years.

And today's raft of testimony reflected the competing issues.

Jay Karen represents the golf industry, which favors permanent daylight saving time, which would extend daylight for all those late afternoons on the links.

JAY KAREN, National Golf Course Owners Association: Golf thrives on what we call recreational daylight, the overlap of sunlight and people's availability to be outdoors.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: But then Dr. Karin Johnson, representing the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, testified that the darker mornings you get with daylight saving is terrible for sleep.

The academy recommends permanent standard time.

DR. KARIN JOHNSON, American Academy of Sleep Medicine: Morning light and healthy sleep are known treatments for depression.

On the other hand poor sleep increases the risk of drug use, alcohol use and other risk-taking behaviors.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: And Dr. David Harkey of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety says that, in terms of accidents and public safety, darkness is dangerous.

DR. DAVID HARKEY, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety: The clearest takeaway from this research is that there is a strong relationship between increased darkness and fatal crashes, particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So how did we get here?

Where did this idea come from that I remember being told as a kid that this was to help the farmers of America?

DAVID PRERAU, Daylight Saving Historian: That is one of the myths that I don't understand about, because it's 100 percent wrong.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: David Prerau has written two books on the strange history of why we change our clocks.

It started after the Germans changed their clocks during World War I to save energy.

The U.S. later copied that and kept it up for several decades.

In the 1960s, President Johnson signed a law setting official dates for the switching back and forth.

But during an energy crisis in the '70s, President Nixon reversed that, establishing a year-round daylight saving time.

But pretty soon the country saw the darker side of daylight saving, which adds more sunshine to our evening, but steals it from the morning.

DAVID PRERAU: What happened was, it seemed OK until the middle of winter in 1974, when it became very unpopular very quickly.

People really dislike the winter daylight saving time.

They dislike having to get up in the pitch dark, having to commute to work in the dark and having to send their kids to school in the dark.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: President Ford then reversed course, and we went back to changing clocks twice a year, which brings us back to today's debate.

Should we stop switching?

And, if so, which time do we choose?

SEN. TED CRUZ: It's a question of what do you care about more, sunshine and joy and fun and money, or health, mental health, physical health?

And the honest answer for most people is, gosh, I care about all that stuff.

So that's not an easy trade-off.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: This isn't the first time this legislation has been introduced, and the chances of the bill clearing the Senate and being taken up by the House remain slim.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm William Brangham.

AMNA NAWAZ: In 2009, a group of wealthy nations made a commitment collectively to help less developed countries cope with the effects of climate change.

But where the $100 billion in annual grant pledges actually go has been tough to verify.

And critics say that the effort has done little to help the people who need it most.

With support from the Pulitzer Center, Fred de Sam Lazaro traveled to Senegal to report on efforts to combat climate change and alleviate poverty.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Fisherman Ibrahim Diagne remembers playing soccer on the beach here, beach that is now the Atlantic Ocean.

He points to a stretch of boulders on the shoreline, a last line of defense to save properties from being swallowed by a warming, rising sea.

So that one closed, right?

It's not safe out there.

Many buildings that were once homes, hotels, and eateries are now abandoned, and, beyond the boulders, a more vivid glimpse of the erosion.

There is one short stretch where the raging Atlantic has been tamed.

THIOBANE GUISSE, General Manager, Beach Resort and Spa (through translator): Today, things are going very well.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Thiobane Guisse is general manager of the Palm Beach Resort and Spa in an area that attracts many mostly French tourists in this former French colony.

THIOBANE GUISSE (through translator): We have 250 rooms and 17 suites.

We're full and not complaining.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: In the winter months, guests bask on pristine beaches, protected by a series of stone seawalls and breakwater, a $75 million project completed in 2022 and financed by the World Bank.

THIOBANE GUISSE (through translator): Without exaggerating, the World Bank saved our business.

It not only saved the beaches, but it allowed us to restore all our activities.

Protecting economic activity also protects the population at large, because we do business in the community and also pay taxes.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: But efforts so far by the World Bank and donor nations have done little to help those hardest hit.

Around Saint-Louis, which has long been pummeled by devastating floods, a two-mile seawall was built and fishing families relocated farther inland.

They're safer, they say, but hardly secure.

IBRAHIM DIAGNE, Fisherman (through translator): We need to be safe from disasters, but we also need to earn money.

We need them both.

And, today, because they cannot earn money here in Senegal, we see a large number of young people leaving Senegal by boat to go to Spain.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Their struggle is starkly visible in fishing communities up and down the coast.

A backbreaking morning's worth of work, and all that this boat brought back today was one crate about a quarter filled with anything that is marketable out there.

Climate change has diminished the quality of fisheries.

And complicating matters, they complain large foreign trawlers whoop up a lot of what's left.

These small-scale fishermen must venture farther offshore to find anything in crafts perilously ill-equipped for the high seas.

Nonetheless, thousands venture even farther out each year.

ALASSANE SARR, Fisherman (through translator): In every house here, there are four or five people who took the boat to go to Spain.

AHMET SARR, Fisherman (through translator): We cannot give you an exact figure.

Many are dead, and others are just lost.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: In the first eight months of last year, about 22,000 Senegalese immigrants landed on Spain's Canary Islands.

Aid groups say thousands have lost their lives on the perilous 1,000-mile journey.

Maguette Sarr's 22-year-old son did make it to Spain.

She misses him and hopes he can return soon, she says, though it would be just for a visit.

MAGUETTE SARR, Fishmonger (through translator): If he gets his papers, I hope he can come back to Senegal.

And after that, he can go back to Spain.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Because there is no job here?

Visible in the distance offshore from here is a 24/7 beacon of economic hope.

At least that's what the government says, one part of a multibillion-dollar offshore gas and oil development.

Fishermen here say it's only hurt them since they cannot fish near the platforms.

But to others, the very development of oil and gas shows a stark double standard.

ELIMANE KANE, Founder, LEGS-Africa (through translator): It's true.

There is hypocrisy from the Western world, who tries to entice countries from Africa to use alternative energy.

And then when this country discovered oil and gas, they were the first to rush in.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Environmentalist Elimane Kane knows that, even as they have preached renewables, rich countries themselves have continued to explore new fossil fuel development, this even prior to the new administration in Washington.

And all of Senegal's newly discovered gas, developed by the oil company BP and Texas-based Kosmos Energy, goes directly to Europe, which has looked to replace Russian gas imports since the Ukraine invasion.

Senegal should develop renewable energy, Kane says, but the international financing for it has been scarce.

ELIMANE KANE (through translator): The Western world promised Senegal financing of $2.5 billion, but we haven't seen it yet.

There is a transparency issue.

I can't tell you how much they have received.

The process is not clear.

JOSEPH KRAUS, Senior Policy Director, The ONE Campaign: Climate finance is effectively the Wild West.

There are no rules.

There's not very good accountability.

And a lot of times it's being driven by donor interest, rather than recipient need.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Joseph Kraus is policy director with The ONE Campaign, a group trying to track the pledged $100 billion in climate finance assistance.

They found two-thirds of it has either not been delivered or has little to do with climate.

JOSEPH KRAUS: Some of the spending that gets considered climate finance by rich countries is absurd.

So to give you a couple of examples, Japan counts coal-fired power plants as climate finance.

The U.S. considers gas-fired power plants as climate finance.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: These are real-life examples.

JOSEPH KRAUS: These are real-life examples.

Italy financed a chocolate shop and labeled it climate finance.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Adding salt to the wound for many Senegalese, the World Bank, which had earlier helped Senegal negotiate with the energy companies, ended its support for most new fossil fuel projects in 2019, under pressure from wealthy countries to demonstrate a climate commitment.

That stalled further development that would bring gas to the domestic market here.

Senegal has committed to phasing in renewables and already gets about a third of its energy from them.

But the government sees gas as a critical bridge for development and to connect the one-third of its citizens who still lack electricity.

BABACAR MBENGUE, Operations Director, SAPCO-SENEGAL (through translator): Senegal Underdeveloped countries need fossil fuel energy, oil and gas.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Babacar Mbengue heads a government agency that's working to develop more coastal tourism here.

BABACAR MBENGUE (through translator): It was a shock when we heard that the World Bank will no longer finance these kinds of projects.

So I think we can find other partners to finance this project.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: But that will likely mean higher market interest, rather than the concessional rate charged by the World Bank, adding to crippling debt to international lenders already on Senegal's books.

JOSEPH KRAUS: Forty percent of the world's population lives in countries that pay more to service their debt than their governments spend on health or education.

This includes Senegal.

This is the impossible choice that is being forced upon countries that did very little to cause the climate crisis, but are on the front lines of its impact.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Also facing an impossible choice, thousands of farmers and fishermen displaced by erratic climate and other factors, meaning many Senegalese, like their oil, will likely continue to journey north to Europe.

For the "PBS News Hour," I'm Fred de Sam Lazaro in Saint-Louis, Senegal.

AMNA NAWAZ: And Fred's reporting is a partnership with the Under-Told Stories Project at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota.

All right, we end tonight with something, well, a little different that we're going to be bringing you from time to time.

Legendary photographer Platon has been taking portraits of some of the world's most prominent people for decades, from heads of state to movie stars and everything in between.

He recently started filming his photo shoots in which he gets his subject talking in a most disarming way.

Call it Platon's Dialogues.

And, tonight, his dialogue is with Nile Rodgers, singer, songwriter, and producer whose many hits are like a playlist of some of the most memorable pop music we have.

It's all part of our ongoing arts and culture series, Canvas.

NILE RODGERS, Musician: So I was a child when I found out what an artist is.

I was taking private lessons with a jazz tutor.

And I was proficient enough on the guitar to do cover songs.

One day, my teacher noticed that I was not my normal happy-go-lucky self.

He said: "Nile, what's wrong?"

And I said: "Well, tonight I have to play these bull (EXPLETIVE DELETED) songs."

And he said: "What are you talking about?"

I said: "Well, look at my set list.

I got to start with this song called 'Sugar Sugar' by The Archies."

(SINGING) NILE RODGERS: He said: "You know that 'Sugar Sugar' has been number one for about three or four weeks now.

In order for it to be number one, millions and millions of people have to love that song.

So are you trying to say that those millions of people are wrong, but you, Nile Rodgers, you're right?"

He grabbed me by the back of my head, looked me directly in my eyes, and said: "'Sugar Sugar' is a great composition because it speaks to the souls of a million strangers."

I almost want to cry.

I almost want to cry.

I thought to myself, he just showed me what an artist was, that I was not an artist before that.

I was a composer.

I was trying to be the smartest guy in the room.

What I wasn't trying to do was to speak to the souls of a million strangers.

(SINGING) NILE RODGERS: My name is Nile Rodgers.

I am an individual who speaks to the souls of a million strangers.

AMNA NAWAZ: In a late news update before we go: In a blow to the Trump administration, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to block a judge's order to return a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported.

Immigration officials have acknowledged their error in sending Kilmar Abrego Garcia to a maximum security prison in El Salvador.

A 2019 court order protected him from being deported there because he faced possible persecution by local gangs.

And that is the "News Hour" for tonight.

I'm Amna Nawaz.

On behalf of the entire "News Hour" team, thank you for joining us.