The World and Everything in It: March 13, 2023

PREROLL: The World and Everything in It is made possible by people like us: Hannah, Lindsey, Sierra, Lynn, Tavis, Jeremy, Steven, Jeffrey, Candy, Travis, Nathan. We are the 2023 World Journalism Institute mid-career course, AND WE HOPE YOU ENJOY TODAY’S PROGRAM.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Congratulations, W-J-I midcareer students! And good morning!

Federal law tacks on extra prison time for aggravated identity theft. But one man argues the law is too broad.

NICK EICHER, HOST: That’s ahead on Legal Docket.

Also today the Monday Moneybeat: the biggest bank failure since the financial crisis. Economist David Bahnsen will explain.

And, as you heard, we enjoyed working with World Journalism Institute mid-career students. We also want to tell you about the upcoming collegiate course and how you can get involved.

Plus the WORLD History Book…50 years ago, more than 100 prisoners of war return home.

REICHARD: It’s Monday, March 13th. This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

EICHER: And I’m Nick Eicher. Good morning!

REICHARD: Now the news with Kent Covington.

Wall Street bracing for Monday morning after bank collapse » Wall Street is opening to uncertainty today … as investors brace themselves for the fallout … from the second-biggest bank collapse in US history.

Democratic Senator Mark Warner:

WARNER - This bank did fund startup companies all over the country. I know it's called Silicon Valley Bank, but the startups literally are all across the country, and they've got to pay their bills this week.

Last week, the bank said it needed to raise $2.25 billion to balance its books. That sparked a bank run, leading the government to seize the bank’s assets on Friday.

Republican Senator Kevin Cramer says the bank failure could shake investors’ confidence.

CRAMER - My sense is it is a fairly localized issue. The problem is that we live in a very emotional time where markets are emotional. The reference to to social media has been an accelerator if you will, of some of that emotion. I think it can be problematic.

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen says the government will not bail out the bank… which could leave some account holders in the lurch. The F-D-I-C insures up most customer deposits of up to $250,000.

China and TikTok » The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee says he remains extremely concerned about China’s access to American data … through the Chinese-owned social media app TikTok. Congressman Mike Turner told ABC’s This Week:

TURNER: We worked really hard to get them out of our telecommunications systems by getting rid of Huawei systems in our telecommunications. Then we’re handing over our phone systems by people downloading the TikTok app.

The FBI and US intelligence agencies continue to warn that the popular video sharing app could be used in Chinese spying and influence operations within the United States. House leaders plan further hearings to examine how the government should respond to the threat.

SD boat accident » At least eight people are dead and more are missing after two smuggling boats wrecked off a San Diego beach.

Authorities received a 9-1-1 call Saturday night from a woman who was on one of the boats.

San Diego Lifeguard Chief James Gartland told KGTV.

GARTLAND - When lifeguards arrived on scene, we arrived in rescue mode. We did the best we could to recover people from the water, try and find survivors.

Rescue teams pulled the eight bodies from the water, but heavy fog hindered the search for the rest of those missing.

Coast Guard Commander for San Diego Capt. James Spitler He told KGTV …

SPITLER - This is not necessarily people trying to find a better life. This is part of a transnational criminal organization effort to smuggle people into the United States. These people are often labor trafficked, and sex trafficked when they arrive.

He says human trafficking in the area has increased by more than 700 percent since 2017.

CA flooding » Another atmospheric river is scheduled to hit California today, bringing more flooding and power outages to the waterlogged state.

Tulare County Sheriff's spokeswoman Ashley Ritchie

RITCHIE - An evacuation for the Cutler area. Now due to a levee break…

Near Monterey Bay, crews were trying to repair a broken levee on the Pajaro River before more rain arrives. Monterey County Spokesman Nicholas Pasculli:

PASCULLI - Quite simply the magnitude of the flows. The levee did experience boils and overtopping locations as we experienced in January both on this Santa Cruz side and the Monterey side.

Thousands were forced to evacuate the area.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has declared a state of emergency in 34 counties.

Ukraine » The Russian advance in the city of Bakhmut in eastern Ukraine … seems to have stalled as of this weekend. WORLD’s Josh Schumacher.

JOSH SCHUMACHER, REPORTER: The head of the Russian mercenary Wagner Group publicly declared last week that his troops had seized control of much of Eastern Bakhmut.

But the Institute for the Study of War reports that while Russian forces have remained engaged in heavy fighting … the Kremlin has not announced any further advances.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last week shot down rumors of a strategic retreat … and said his forces would not give up on Bakhmut.

For WORLD, I’m Josh Schumacher.

And I'm Kent Covington. Straight ahead: On Legal Docket, New Jersey wants to break up with New York on protecting their shared waterfront.

Plus: The Monday Moneybeat. 

This is The World and Everything In It.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: It’s Monday, March 13th. Glad to have you along for today’s edition of The World and Everything in It. Good morning. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. It’s time for Legal Docket.

Today we have two recent oral arguments heard by the US Supreme Court. So let’s jump right in.

The first dispute has to do with additional prison time tacked on to a conviction and sentence for a related crime. Specifically here, additional time added for identity theft.

Stolen identities became more common with computer hacking and stolen credit cards. So Congress wrote a bill that President George W. Bush signed into law: the Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act.

Here’s President Bush on that day in July, 2004, edited for time:

BUSH: The crime of identity theft undermines the basic trust upon which our economy depends...The law signed today will dramatically strengthen the fight against identity theft and fraud...And someone convicted of that crime can expect to go to jail for stealing a person’s good name. These punishments will come on top of any punishment for crimes that proceed from identity theft. For example, when someone is convicted of mail fraud in a case involving stolen personal information, judges will now impose two sentences: one for mail fraud and one for aggravated identity theft. Those convicted of aggravated identity theft must serve an additional mandatory two year prison term...What I’m telling you is this is a good law. And I appreciate you working hard to see to it that it made it to my desk.

REICHARD: The best of intentions, certainly, but whether it’s “a good law” depends upon how well it’s carried out those intentions in the years since. And with two years’ additional prison time attached, the stakes are high.

Here are the facts of the case.

A man in Texas named David Dubin was a managing partner in his father’s psychology practice. Dubin filed a $540 claim with Medicaid for services provided to a patient. The patient’s name and Medicaid ID was on the form, along with a false date so that the bill would qualify for payment.

EICHER: A jury found Dubin guilty of healthcare fraud in overbilling Medicaid … and that part he doesn’t dispute. What he does dispute is the additional conviction and prison time added for aggravated identity theft—the 2004 law we just talked about.

Dubin says the overbilling has nothing to do with the patient’s identity and that the patient suffered no harm from it. So the facts don’t fit the law.

Or so says Dubin’s lawyer, Jeffrey Fisher:

JEFFERY FISCHER: The Fifth Circuit's decision here stretches the aggravated identity theft statute beyond its breaking point. Overbilling Medicaid by $101 may provide fodder for a simple healthcare fraud prosecution, but, as even the concurring judges below recognized, it does not meet any ordinary understanding of the term "identity theft."

REICHARD: Fisher went on to argue there has to be some meaningful connection between the Medicaid fraud and the use of someone’s name. Otherwise, commonplace errors could ensnare people. Fisher gave an example:

FISCHER: A lawyer who bills 4.9 hours when he worked 4.8 bills for a second year associate when it was really a first year, etc. Understanding what Congress meant by words, we would not assume Congress would sweep in vast arrays of conduct without doing so clearly.

REICHARD: Arguing the other side on behalf of the federal government: assistant to the Solicitor General Vivek Suri. He started with reference to a hypothetical … that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson had made earlier:

VIVEK SURI: I'd like to start with a hypothetical that Justice Jackson was discussing with Mr. Fisher about the waiter who uses a customer's credit card to bill for something that the customer didn't order. Let's say the customer ordered steak, and the waiter uses the credit card to ring up a bottle of wine as well. And I think the discussion earlier today established that the waiter was acting without lawful authority. He had the authority to use the credit card number to bill only for the food that was ordered. He didn't have the authority to use it for other things, whether it be wine or Amazon.com products or paying down his mortgage.

EICHER: Likewise, Suri argued, Dubin had no authority to make a false claim with a patient’s personal information. Suri pointed to the language of the statute: if someone “uses” a patient’s name “in relation to” health care fraud, then he “plainly” acts “without lawful authority” in carrying out that fraud.

Suri sought to reassure the court that despite what the hypotheticals seemed to show, everyone and his brother would not get swept up in that language:

SURI: The statute at issue here only comes into play only if a predicate federal offense has already been committed.

EICHER: But Justice Jackson wasn’t convinced:

JACKSON: Mr. Fisher says look at the list of predicate offenses. It's like every fraud in the world. And you’ve just admitted in response to Justice Thomas that it could be a teeny, teeny fraud. So it's not more serious just because of the predicate offense. It would seem to me it would have to be more serious because of the way in which you're using the name.

REICHARD: I think the court will narrow the scope of this law so as not to catch unawares nearly everyone (and his brother) in the language of this law.

This last dispute at the court is one of so-called original jurisdiction. That means it’s one of those rare times in which the Supreme Court is not only judge of the law and the constitution, but finders of fact, as well. Another way of saying it: Original jurisdiction is litigation that begins at the high court, not the usual years of winding through the lower courts first.

EICHER: It’s also a dispute with a set of facts reminiscent of the 1954 movie starring Marlon Brando: On the Waterfront. A movie about an ex-prize fighter who worked as a New Jersey longshoreman trying to stand up against his corrupt bosses in the union.

You might recognize the most famous lines from the film:

BRANDO: You don’t understand! I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody. Instead of a bum. Which is what I am. Let’s face it.

EICHER: Contenders in this lawsuit are the states of New York and New Jersey. Back in the 1950s, mob violence and corruption were rampant along the waterfront in a 25 mile radius around the Statue of Liberty. Cargo theft. Loan sharks preying on the longshoremen. Foremen taking kickbacks. And much worse.

So the two states agreed to something called the Waterfront Commission Compact. Congress gave its consent, which led to the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor.

REICHARD: Seventy years later, New Jersey wants out of the compact. It’s wanted to do that for a while now, given that things have changed: technology has replaced most dockside jobs, for example. Others cite a climate of abuse that still prevails even at the Commission.

Lawyer for New Jersey, state solicitor general Jeremy Feigenbaum:

JEREMY FEIGENBAUM: The question this case presents is whether the Waterfront Commission Compact prevents New Jersey from reclaiming its police powers. As New York admits, there is nothing in the plain text of the compact that expressly limits New Jersey's withdrawal.

EICHER: Maybe nothing that expressly limits New Jersey’s withdrawal, but New York argues if New Jersey exits the compact, the stability of the area will collapse. And more than that, there’s no way for New Jersey to pull out of the agreement unilaterally.

New York Solicitor General Judith Vale:

JUDITH VALE: And it's not just 70 years. I don't think that's just what we're judging it from. The two states have come together and amended this compact over the decades. As recently as 2006, they amended this compact to add powers to the Commission. And so they were re-upping their understanding over time that they are still in this together and that they still believe that the joint endeavor is needed.

REICHARD: Again, this is an original jurisdiction case—so it sounds much more like a trial court. And as I heard it, it sure sounds like a victory for New Jersey, the state that wants out of the deal. For example, this exchange between Justice Clarence Thomas and lawyer Vale for New York. It’s a discussion on what the compact specifically does and does not say:

CLARENCE THOMAS: They said nothing about ending it. They had other modifications and other terms that had to be jointly decided but nothing about terminating it. So what I'm hearing you say is that if they say nothing about terminating it, they basically sacrifice their sovereignty permanently, unless the other party agrees.

VALE: Well, two -- two responses to that. I don't think it's a sacrifice of sovereignty….

THOMAS: And there are indications in both this compact and the history of compacts generally that that is what the states would understand, that they would understand that when you do a compact and you don't say anything express about termination, that you are sticking together until you jointly decide to end it.

REICHARD: Advocates and justices lobbed legal theories back and forth like a tennis match. Principles of contract law; the sovereignty of states; how treaties are made and broken; unintended consequences on other interstate compacts in the country; and which state is bringing the biggest book of business to the port. It used to be New York.

JOHN ROBERTS: What was the allocation of business between the New York side and the New Jersey side in 1953?

VALE: It was predominantly on the New York side. It was about 70 percent on the New York side.

ROBERTS: And today?

VALE: It's predominantly on the New Jersey side.

ROBERTS: Eighty/twenty is the numbers that -- okay.

VALE: Yes.

ROBERTS: That's a fairly substantial change in the mix, and that may have something to do with an effort to reallocate or withdraw from a compact that was entered into in 1953.

REICHARD: The justices as a whole were skeptical that New York can hold New Jersey to this compact. We’ll know for sure by end of June.

And that’s this week’s Legal Docket.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Next up on The World and Everything in It: the Monday Moneybeat.

NICK EICHER, HOST: All right, it’s time now to talk business markets and the economy with financial analyst and advisor David Bahnsen. David is head of the wealth management firm The Bahnsen group, and he joins us now. David, good morning to you.

DAVID BANHSEN, GUEST: Well, good morning, Nick, good to be with you.

EICHER: Well, David, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jay Powell, appeared before committees in both houses of Congress last week. This was his first appearance before Congress in nine months time. His basic report was that inflationary pressures are running higher than they were the last time the Fed's Open Market Committee met, which would have been in February. Now you're going to hear Jay Powell refer to that panel by the initialism FOMC. We're going to play a bit of what Jay Powell said before the Senate. So let's have a listen.

JAY POWELL: From a broader perspective, inflation has moderated somewhat since the middle of last year, but remains well above the FOMC's longer run objective of 2%. Although inflation has been moderating in recent months, the process of getting inflation back down to 2% has a long way to go and is likely to be bumpy.

EICHER: So David, I'm going to ask you to demystify this for us. The Fed's target interest rate range is four and a half to four and three quarters percent if I have that right. And of course, market interest rates, the rates that you and I pay, are a lot higher than that. But because of these multi-day hearings, there were a lot of Fed stories on the Business Wire and into the headline news. So a lot of people were hearing about Jay Powell. What do we need to know, in order to understand what Powell is saying to the Senate and the House?

BAHNSEN: Well, I don't think that he's saying anything other than we have a plan to raise rates by a quarter point, and if we think inflation is getting worse, we'll raise by more than a quarter point. They're not going to raise by more than a quarter point at the next meeting. And I believe that his standard talking points of telling the market what they're going to do, and then adding qualifiers, like of course, if the data changes, then we'll change is very expected and very normal. I totally disagree with them, that there are upward inflationary pressures right now. But you notice he equivocated when he talks about growth, when you talk about jobs, when talking about wages, as these things are supposedly inflationary. I think it's a huge fallacy. And so we will see what the CPI number comes in here this coming week, and we will see what the Fed does next week. But I will go out on a limb and say that they will raise by a quarter point. And it's entirely possible they're going to raise by another quarter point at the meeting after that, that's certainly what the futures market is expecting. And I will be very surprised if they raise beyond that at all. I think that they're on the verge of breaking something, but have not yet broken something, and therefore they have a good chance to get out before doing real damage.

EICHER: David, I want to hone in on the idea that strong economic numbers are basically bad news. Job growth, for example, is overheating the economy, and the Fed needs to cool that off by raising rates. Recently, you quoted Elizabeth Warren favorably. And I think maybe it's time for a little more Elizabeth Warren here. As I said, Chairman Powell appeared before the Senate, which meant he appeared before Senator Elizabeth Warren. Warren took Powell to task repeatedly pressing him to address an estimated 2 million workers who might lose their jobs as the Fed tries to slow the economy. Powell responded by saying inflation is, quote, extremely high. It's hurting the working people of this country badly all of them. Warren then asked, does that mean unemployed workers will just have to bear it. Powell then responded with a question of his own, will working people be better off if we just walk away from our jobs, and inflation remains 5% 6%? David, why is that the choice? Why is that the trade off? Is employment really the cause of inflation?

BAHNSEN: No, it is not. It's a ridiculous theory. It's been so disproven over the last 50 years in economic life, that it's just absolutely depressing that we have to have the conversation and worse that we have to have a far left wing, economic progressive, like Elizabeth Warren being the one to actually make this case. Now let's not give her too much praise. She's rooting her argument in the notion that inflation is caused by profiteering and by entrepreneurs trying too hard to make money. which is an equally preposterous theory. But that in this moment, no one on the right is stepping up to say that economic growth is not inflationary, that employment is not inflationary, that wages are not inflationary is utterly depressing. And I hope that you and WORLD listeners know that I've been making this case for two years. And the trade-off is called the Phillips Curve. That's the economic term. And it was an academic theory that had gained a lot of weight in a kind of Keynesian environment, post-Depression, post-World War Two. And I had thought it was left for dead in the 1970s, when it was very clear that high unemployment was not putting downward pressure on inflation. The inverse of that, of course, is that low unemployment does not have to be putting upward pressure on inflation. And so we saw last week, the wage growth number was only 0.2% for the month, that's the lowest in over a year. And in fact, the annualized wage growth has now gone from near 7%, to only 4.6%. There's big downward pressure in the inflation of wages. And yet these Phillips Kurvers, and the academic ideology that Jay Powell is promoting on the Senate floor would suggest the opposite, that you should see what they call a wage price spiral, that the high level of inflation will be pushing wages higher, it's doing no such thing. I think that the wage inflation we saw in 2021 and '22 was a byproduct of very low immigration at the time, in the COVID moment. And, of course, big labor shortage domestically, as there were significant unemployment benefits and stimulus checks and incentives, and then culturally, a lot of people leaving the labor participation force. And that was a temporary and very unfortunate moment. But that right now there being strong demand for labor, is the furthest thing from inflationary. It is what is needed, Nick, to put downward pressure on inflation. Because with more workers, you get the production of more goods and services, you aid the supply side of the economy, and it helps normalize an equilibrium between supply and demand, which is anti-inflationary.

EICHER: Okay, David, on Friday, we received news of the biggest bank collapse since the financial crisis of 2008. According to The Wall Street Journal, Silicon Valley Bank collapsed on Friday, in the second biggest bank failure in US history after a run on deposits. So how big a deal is that? That seemed to have come out of the blue, but you've been talking about overvalued tech for a long time. And this was a big tech bank.

BAHNSEN: It was almost exclusively a tech bank. They put it in the name of the bank. So the whole reason that we-- Alexander Hamilton use to promote the idea of a national bank was the need for geographical diversification and sector and industry diversification. If all you bank is farmers, and farmers have a drought, then you have a real problem with your bank. And if you bank machinists, and educators, and healthcare and technology, and one of those sectors has a problem, then you likely don't have a problem with your bank. And in Silicon Valley Bank's case, they primarily bank venture capital firms and a lot of startups that were funded by venture capital. So you had a perfect storm, and I'll try to go quickly, but it's something I spent all weekend studying. I am firmly in the camp that this is a highly idiosyncratic event that will not prove to be systemic, or contagious. I expect that there could be a couple of other banks caught up in it. But in fact, you saw on Friday, JP Morgan, the largest bank in the country, it's stock was up as the market was tanking and as most banks were going down, the small and regional banks were getting hit as investors were concerned about smaller banks and the big banks that are more over-capitalized were doing well.

So in a nutshell, what happened with Silicon Valley is that the interest rates go higher, and that has really deeply hurt the venture capital space. They can't get the easy funding they could get, a lot of their projects haven't taken off. We had a bubble in this tech stuff. I've been talking about it for over two years. So then a lot of the venture capital firms that, of course, their companies don't have any profits or any cash flows, they're startups, that's what venture capital is. They're used to raising money from equity and debt investors. That's dried up in a high rate environment. So they have deposits with this bank and they have to start depleting their deposit base. So that brings the deposit base of this bank down. But then to keep their capital cushion where it needs to be, they have their own portfolio of capital, which is largely in short term government bonds. And those have lost value for the same reason venture capital is hurting: higher interest rates. So they sold off a huge portion of their bond portfolio to raise cash and took a $1.8 billion loss in doing so. So their deposit cushion drops, their own capital cushion drops, then the worst thing that can ever happen to a bank happens, is the CEO is publicly having to defend the bank. And once you have to go tell the public that your bank is okay, you're not okay. And that's what happened. It was a classic run on the bank.

I don't I'm not conspiratorial, but I just will try to help WORLD listeners get in front of this, we will end up finding out--it may not be soon, that there were some hedge funds and others who kind of helped, you know, facilitate, let's say, making money on both ends of this. And that's their prerogative within a leveraged financial system. I just simply believe that this was a really poor case of management at Silicon Valley Bank. And yet I do not believe that it reflects something systemic about the banking system.

EICHER: Well, a very big news week, this past week, so we will return to listener questions. And you may have a question for David. So if you do, please don't be shy about sending it over. The email address is feedback@worldandeverything.com. And thank you to David Bahnsen. He's Founder, Managing Partner and Chief Investment Officer at the Bahnson group. You can check out his personal website bahnsen.com. David, thanks for bringing us up to date on all of this news from last week and we'll work, we'll catch you next week. Have a good one.

BAHNSEN: Thanks so much, Nick.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Today is Monday, March 13th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher.

Well, this week, we held the 2023 World Journalism Institute mid-career course, one week of journalism training in Asheville, North Carolina, with professionals in other fields or in other media.

Lee Pitts is director of WJI. Thanks for taking a moment here. Good morning.

LEE PITTS, GUEST: Good morning, Nick. Thanks for having me.

EICHER: What a great week. exhausting, but exhilarating is what I always say.

PITTS: Yeah, yeah, they grow a lot. And they learn a lot and they laugh a lot. We have a lot of fun, but their writing muscles and their storytelling muscles, really, we really stretch them and they come out stronger storytellers.

EICHER: But this group is done and what we're doing now is we're getting ready for a group of collegiate WJI students up in your neck of the woods, Dordt University in Sioux Center, Iowa. But really importantly, we're coming up on a deadline, and that's a big deal in journalism. So talk a little bit about that.

PITTS: Yeah, the end of this month in March, March 31st. We have a deadline for the WJI Collegiate, where we each year invite 28 students from around the country. Last year, they represented 17 states and even from around the world. We had a student last year from the Ukraine. They come together and they they learn writing from practicing professional journalists, they get good mentoring and good feedback.

But we don't lock them in the classroom and make them endure lecture after lecture. We make the community our classroom and we send them out to explore the world and, you know, that's worth a thousand lectures to actually do their own stories, really from the first full day they're there.

But one of the things that we do that might be different from many journalism programs, is we recognize the humanity in the subjects we cover. We teach our students that you don't just reach down the throats of the person you’re interviewing and yank out some quote. You know, we understand that a person is created in God's image and they're not just a mere subject for story assignments.

You know, and we do emphasize that journalists are storytellers and in the world God created, stories matter. And we focus, in a world so, so full of bureaucracy and institutions, we focus on the story is not about healthcare, but the patient; not about education, but the teacher and the students.

So we have that very person-focused, centered on our stories.

EICHER: wji.world is the website. The deadline for application is the last Friday of this month, an important date to keep in mind. So we're getting down to the end. WJI.world. Lee Pitts is the director of WJI. Any final words?

PITTS: Yeah, I would just say to students out there, they're thinking about applying that I firmly believe we firmly believe WJI is a great way to spend your life-stories, telling the stories of others. So I invite you to join us, where we'll ask you for two weeks, you know, what stories do you want to tell? And we'll take you out there and allow you to go tell those stories.

EICHER: Lee, thanks a lot. We'll see you up in Iowa.

PITTS: Thanks, Nick. Look forward to seeing you there too.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Next up on The World and Everything in It: the WORLD History Book.

Today’s picks: Vietnam prisoners of war return home and President Harry Truman has strong words for the USSR. Plus, 100 years ago, the New York Times publishes what would become the three most famous words in mountaineering. Here’s Paul Butler.

PAUL BUTLER, REPORTER: In the early spring of 1923 British mountain climber George Mallory is touring the United States. He is raising money for his third expedition to Mount Everest—the highest elevation above sea level in the world. Mallory had visited the mountain twice before…in 1921 and 1922.

As Mallory travels across the country, the adventurer is often interviewed by the press. On March 18th, 1923, The New York Times runs a story with the headline: CLIMBING MOUNT EVEREST IS WORK FOR SUPERMEN.

The reporter asks the great adventurer why he is so interested in Mount Everest—a common question during Mallory’s tour. Mallory explains that as no one had yet reached its summit, its very existence is a challenge. He goes on to say that mankind has an innate desire to conquer the universe.

But the most famous line from the story is the three word answer to the question: “Why climb Everest?” “Because it’s there.” The phrase is attributed to Mallory, though it’s difficult to know if he actually said it—or if it was just the reporter’s characterization of Mallory’s attitude. Either way, the expression entered the mountain climbers canon, and generations of adventurers have repeated the witticism as they push back the boundaries of the universe.

Perhaps the most famous reference to Mallory’s expression occurred on September 12th, 1962 on the campus of Rice University:

KENNEDY: Many years ago, the great British Explorer, George Mallory, who was to die on Mount Everest, was asked, “why did he want to climb it?” He said, “because it is there.” Well, space is there and we're going to climb it…as we set sail, we ask God's blessing on the most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked. Thank you.

Next, March 17th, 1948—President Harry S. Truman addresses a joint session of congress:

TRUMAN: Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Congress: I am here today to report to you on the critical nature of the situation in Europe, and to recommend action for your consideration.

In an attempt to limit Soviet influence in Europe, President Truman argues for quick and significant US economic aid to the region—what becomes known as the Marshall Plan.

TRUMAN: It is of vital importance that we act now, in order to preserve the conditions under which we can achieve lasting peace based on freedom and justice.

Truman lays out a series of measures to “strengthen the powerful forces for freedom, justice, and peace”—not just in aid, but also a national commitment to maintaining a strong military force.

But the speech is best remembered for its strong criticism of the Soviet Union.

TRUMAN: The situation in the world today is not primarily the result of natural difficulties which follow a great war. It is chiefly due to the fact that one nation has not only refused to cooperate in the establishment of a just and honorable peace, but—even worse—has actively sought to prevent it.

The Cold War is already well underway between the Western allies and the USSR. But President Truman offers an olive branch—speaking of an open door for any nation that seeks to preserve the peace.

TRUMAN: We shall remain ready and anxious to join with all nations—I repeat, with all nations-in every possible effort to reach international understanding and agreement.

In the years after the war, the nation was deeply divided over how involved to become in rebuilding Europe—and how best to respond to the growing threat of the Soviet Union. Truman ended his speech with a plea to set aside political bickering and work together.

TRUMAN: The American people have the right to assume that political considerations will not affect our working together. They have the right to assume that we will join hands, wholeheartedly and without reservation, in our efforts to preserve the peace in the world. With God's help we shall succeed.

And finally, 50 years ago this week…

BRUCE DUNNING: One by one, 40 men descended from the plane, the first of three to arrive from Hanoi…

CBS newsman Bruce Dunning is at Clark Air Base in the Philippines as more than 100 POWs arrive from Vietnam.

BRUCE DUNNING:  All but one of these men who flew to freedom in this latest release were shot down during some of the fiercest fighting of the war. 17 months from July, 1967 to November, 1968…

On January 27th, 1973, the US agreed to a ceasefire with Vietnam. Terms included the release of nearly 600 Americans held as prisoners of war within 60 days. The two-month long Operation Homecoming began on February 12th.

On March 14th, 1973, the third group of POWS arrive in the Philippines for medical evaluation before being relocated to US military hospitals or home.

One of those service men is Air Force Colonel John Flynn. He addresses the crowd of well-wishers and reporters from the airstrip:

FLYNN: I would like to particularly acknowledge the courage and the integrity of our President…He had our support and our prayers always…

Another of the released POWs is John McCain III, a U.S. Navy lieutenant commander shot down over North Vietnam more than five years earlier.

DUNNING: He was also the most seriously marked by his five and a half years of imprisonment. But his smile was broad as he saluted and shook hands with Admiral Geyer, who replaced McCain's own father, Admiral John S McCain Jr. As Pacific Forces Commander.

The disembarking seemed increasingly familiar to people who had watched the first two releases, but the enthusiasm of the crowd was just as strong for these former prisoners As for those who preceded them…Bruce Dunning, CBS News, Clark Airbase, the Philippines.

That’s this week’s WORLD History Book. I’m Paul Butler.

EICHER: Tomorrow: giving ex-felons the right to vote after they complete their sentence.

And, we review a handful of books for children.

That and more tomorrow.

I’m Nick Eicher.

REICHARD: And I'm Mary Reichard. 

The World and Everything in It comes to you from WORLD Radio.

WORLD’s mission is biblically objective journalism that informs, educates, and inspires.

Jesus said to the Jews who’d believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, ‘You will become free’?” Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin. John chapter 8:verses 31-34

Go now in grace and peace.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.