Return to Transcripts main page
Campbell Brown
Pelosi Under Fire; California Facing Money Doomsday?
Aired May 18, 2009 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ROLAND MARTIN, CNN ANCHOR: Folks, tonight, we're about to break down an interesting story, that, of course, a story dealing with Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, and the trouble that she is confronting in terms of Republicans going after her over the issue of torture and water-boarding.
And, of course, we have got our great panel here, as always, Erica Hill, CNN anchor and correspondent, Ali Velshi, chief business correspondent, Jessica Yellin, national political correspondent, and of course Lisa Bloom, "In Session" anchor and CNN legal analyst.
And, folks, it has been a rough few days for Nancy Pelosi. The speaker of the House set off a firestorm when she said the CIA lied to her about water-boarding back in 2002.
Now top Republicans want her to put up or shut up, while Democrats say, please, move on.
Our senior congressional correspondent, Dana Bash, is in Washington with the latest.
Now, Dana, Pelosi, of course, she wants to move beyond the controversy, but, so far, that's not happening.
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's not happening thanks to Republicans, at least for now. They're working very hard, Roland, as you can imagine to keep this controversy going.
The latest is that they're saying, look, if the speaker saying that the CIA lied to her about the kind of tactics that they used, that she needs to show evidence.
But two things here. First of all, Republicans know that really the only way she really can prove that is by showing notes from a briefing that she had. And you know what? Right now that's highly classified, so she can't do that.
The other interesting thing to note is that these very Republicans, Roland, who are saying that Nancy Pelosi needs to come clean, they simply say that they do not want information or at least any kind of investigation into Bush officials and what they knew and what they did with regard to this interrogation policy. And obviously they were the ones who put the policy in place.
Now, they know that that would be a political nightmare for them to look into the Bush years, so you do have a bit of a contradiction there when it comes to Republicans.
MARTIN: Now, how are Democrats reacting? Has this hurt them in any way? What are they saying?
BASH: Well, I spoke today to one of Nancy Pelosi's most loyal deputies, Congressman John Larson. And he actually surprised me. He said that he didn't think she had the best performance last week in her press conference. And he said that on the record.
But in the same breath he also said, look, Democrats are rallying behind her and he said he can't find any members who don't think that she should still be their leader. And I can tell you that, with regard to other Democratic congressmen that we talked to today, that does seem to be the case, whether you're talking about liberals or moderates. They are standing behind Pelosi.
But one thing that I do hear time and time again from Democratic sources is, they're kind of baffled at the strategy and the tactic that she used last week to kind of escalate this story by going after the CIA, when really what she was trying to do and what most Democrats thought she should do is try to end it.
MARTIN: All right, Dana.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Jessica, go ahead.
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Oh, I was going to ask, Dana, you have said that the Republicans clearly don't want an investigation. But the truth is what she and the Republicans share is a desire for an investigation.
(CROSSTALK)
YELLIN: What are the chances they get one?
BASH: You're exactly right, Jessica.
And this is one of those interesting dynamics here in Washington, because Nancy Pelosi wants a so-called truth commission. Republicans, though, don't want a truth commission. And you know who shares that perspective? It is the president. It is the Democratic president, Barack Obama. He doesn't want a truth commission.
He is disinterested in looking back at the Bush years, almost as much as Republicans are. And that is what is putting Nancy Pelosi and the people who agree with her on the Democratic side in a pickle. So, she can call for a truth commission all she wants, but her very own president down the street simply doesn't want one.
MARTIN: All right, Dana, thanks a bunch. We certainly appreciate it.
Right now, want to bring in Democratic strategist and CNN contributor James Carville and Republican strategist Ms. Sanchez, Leslie Sanchez, as we call her, the great one.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: All right, folks, interesting story here, James.
Washington, D.C., is all abuzz. Folks are saying that Pelosi is, you know, she is not speaking truthfully. Even the former speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, he said that, frankly, that she has, frankly, discounted herself from holding the office.
Are you surprised that Newt would feel that way?
JAMES CARVILLE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right.
Let's be fair. Rush Limbaugh has also joined Newt Gingrich. I don't want to leave my friend the speaker out there by himself.
(LAUGHTER)
CARVILLE: Look., I agree with our Congressman Larson. Probably it wasn't the best press conference she ever had. We're making this into like it's the end of the days. It was a less-than-stellar press conference. She didn't lie to start a war or something, you know?
And I don't think that the Democratic Party really wants to go to war with the CIA. And, look, she has an entirely different recollection of a meeting that happened seven years ago. And maybe the CIA has a different recollection.
Senator Graham backs her up, as does Senator Rockefeller, Senator Feinstein. But maybe we will never know what happened in 2002 at that meeting, and I don't know if I'll be all that upset if we don't.
MARTIN: Leslie, big deal or is this really a Washington, D.C. story? What's going on?
LESLIE SANCHEZ, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: No.
Well, I think -- well, first off, it is a self-inflicted wound. That was a -- I agree with James. Maybe the only part we agree on right now is, that was a horrible press conference. You have to thank -- this is -- you have to thank people like Dana Bash for pursuing this story.
There was an inconsistency story here. It is a very real -- I think John Boehner is right. She either comes forward with her fuzzy -- kind of her fuzzy math or fuzzy interpretation of this, or there's a larger issue with respect to the CIA.
Now, you're talking about people that are supporting the speaker. There's also Porter Goss and Peter Hoekstra that have come out and said their recollection of events, James, was exactly different.
CARVILLE: Right, right.
(CROSSTALK) LISA BLOOM, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Leslie -- but, Leslie, Leslie, if we think back to 2002, way, way back to 2002, when she wasn't speaker of the House, she was a congressperson from the minority party, isn't this a bit of a distraction from focusing on those who actually did authorize water-boarding?
SANCHEZ: Absolutely not.
If you think about it, there are statutes with respect to who is allowed to have that type of intelligence and that information. It's almost like pulling a string on a thread. It may unravel a series of things, the staff that was aware of this information. Were they sharing that information with their colleagues? Who was there? Where are the discrepancies?
And it is part of a bigger issue. I think that's where Republicans are trying -- and independents and Democrats, Americans are trying to fundamentally say, look, we have an inexperienced president making kind of wishy-washy statements with regards to everything from military tribunals to the release of...
(CROSSTALK)
YELLIN: Sorry to interrupt you, but isn't there a fundamental disconnect here, when the Republicans are saying they want an investigation into what Pelosi knew, but not into what the CIA was doing, what the administration knew, and what Congress knew as a whole? Why not just a full-bore investigation into all of it?
SANCHEZ: I don't -- politically, I don't know if there is an appetite for that in Washington. You're exactly right. I will be very fair about that.
People want...
(CROSSTALK)
YELLIN: No, Republicans want an investigation of Pelosi. They don't want an investigation of the whole megillah.
SANCHEZ: I think the -- what people fundamentally realize in this town is, there's mud on everyone's boots. And you start investigating, unraveling that, and there's a tremendous amount of concern about what that will say.
MARTIN: James?
SANCHEZ: I think full disclosure is something that needs to be done.
MARTIN: James, should there be an investigation, a full investigation?
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: I'm a little flummoxed. That people have a different recollection of a meeting that happened seven years ago, have a full investigation. How are you going to find out what happened? Somebody has a set of notes that says this. Somebody has a set of notes that -- and, again, nobody lied to start a war. Nobody did anything. It is a different recollection of a meeting.
I think the whole thing -- I agree with Senator Webb on Sunday morning who said, I really don't get what the big deal is about all of this.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Leslie, Leslie -- James, 10 seconds. Go ahead, 10 seconds.
OK.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: Well, James, we will go ahead and take it.
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: Leslie and James, you all can continue this in the green room. We certainly appreciate it. Thanks a bunch.
(CROSSTALK)
CARVILLE: Thank you, Roland.
MARTIN: Folks -- thanks a bunch. Folks, tonight, we are about to break news on a disturbing investigation into how some of America's most defenseless children are falling victim to extraordinary cruelty at their schools.
Also ahead, this teenager's parents say the way doctors want to treat him amounts to torture. Now that family's being told to follow doctors' orders.
McKell in Kansas thinks that's a bad diagnosis.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
MCKELL, KANSAS: I think it's absolutely wrong that the courts can step in and override a parent's decision on how they want to treat their child.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
MARTIN: Should a judge force medical treatment on a child against the parents' wishes?
We want the know what you think. Give us a call, 1-877-NO-BULL- 0. That's 1-877-662-8550. You can also e-mail me, Roland@CNN.com. And, as always, I'm on Twitter and Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) MARTIN: Folks, now we are about to break some news. There's a troubling look at what happens to some of America's most vulnerable kids when their parents aren't around to protect them.
They're special-needs kids in our public schools, students often with autism or other learning challenges. And, in most cases, the teachers are patient and dedicated professionals. But a new report exposes a dark side, with startling tales of teachers abusing kids in the name of discipline.
Some students have been hurt, traumatized or even killed by those they trusted.
Abbie Boudreau of our Special Investigations Unit has an exclusive first look at this report on teachers who cross the line.
Abbie, sure glad you're here.
ABBIE BOUDREAU, CNN SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS UNIT: Yes.
Well, Roland, it is called seclusion and restraint. Now, seclusion is just another word for time-out. Restraint is where a teacher or an aide actually uses their hands to control a child. And what the Government Accountability Office has found is that these techniques are causing a lot of harm to some special-needs students.
Here's what the chairman of the committee that ordered the report told us just a couple of hours ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. GEORGE MILLER (D), CALIFORNIA: I think what we're going to hear from the GAO is that very often special-needs children are subjected to policies of seclusion and policies of restraint that have, in fact, turned out to be lethal in a number of instances. Children have died at the hands of the people who are supposed to be taking care of them in the public school system.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOUDREAU: The GAO report also points out that some special-needs teachers are inadequately trained to deal with these special-needs kids. And it says that restraint is being used to punish children without parental consent.
Bottom line here, Roland, there are no federal laws saying what a teacher can and cannot do to a special-needs child. And we're hearing more and more stories of injuries and even death, as you just heard.
MARTIN: So, what about the time-out part of this? Are teachers allowed to put special-needs kids in time-out? And does it work?
BOUDREAU: Well, I mean, that's one of the most troubling aspects of special-needs education. The GAO report that we will find out more about tomorrow, it documents cases where kids have literally been placed in rooms sometimes no larger than a closet for extended periods of time.
We went to Utah recently to investigate a case just like this. The parents of an 8-year-old boy there say he was put into a cubicle in the classroom for hours, and they weren't even told about this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BECCA PECK, MOTHER OF AUTISTIC CHILD: Then I started thinking, what was he thinking? What was what was he thinking? "Why is my mom letting this person do this to me? Why am I here?"
I mean, I -- I mean, I trust no one now. Now I question everybody.
JOSHUA PECK, FATHER OF AUTISTIC CHILD: Yes, we felt that it was so -- it's so sad, that we felt it was a form of torture to him. But he -- being autistic, he had no way to express it or no way to tell.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BOUDREAU: Utah's Department of Child and Family Services found that Garrett (ph), the young boy that we were just talking about, had been in a time-out for a minimum of two-and-a-half-hours.
The department says it was unpersuaded by the teacher's claim that he had been in three time-outs that day for a total of 29 minutes. Now, CFS found that the teacher had caused Garrett emotional maltreatment. The school district would not comment, because that finding has now been appealed to the juvenile court.
But the district did confirm that the teacher is still working. And, Roland, that's another disturbing thick about special education in public schools. Teachers that are involved in some of these cases where children get injured often go right back to work, which is -- I mean, that's part of the report and we're going to find a lot more about that tomorrow.
MARTIN: All right, Abbie, thanks a bunch. We appreciate it, Abbie Boudreau.
Folks, let's bring in Barbara Trader. She's the executor director of TASH, an organization promoting inclusion for people with disabilities. she's coming live from Washington, D.C.
Now, Barbara, for people who have special-needs kids or work with special-needs children, how upsetting is the information that you are seeing in this report?
BARBARA TRADER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TASH: Well, for our community, we are, first of all, not surprised.
We have been hearing these reports for years now. And we're very upset that so many children have had to go through these instances of seclusion, restraint, and even death, without much oversight or interest in previous years. We are thrilled that there will be congressional hearings tomorrow, so we can begin to understand the full extent of what this problem is, and to offer up what the best response is to a child who so far doesn't know how to behave in a classroom. And that's the use of positive behavior support.
ERICA HILL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Barbara, Abbie pointed out that there were not federal guidelines. But it's really important, too, to put this in perspective for people at home, whether they have special- needs children or not.
TRADER: Right.
HILL: Give me an idea. How prevalent is this? Not every special-needs teacher is doing something to harm their child. There are a lot of incredibly wonderful people out there who want nothing more than to help these children.
TRADER: Right.
There are schools that completely ban the use of restraint and seclusion. There are a whole school districts that use what is known as positive behavior supports in their entire classroom environment throughout the system. And then there are those school districts that don't take leadership on this issue. And...
(CROSSTALK)
HILL: Do you have any idea, though, of, number-wise, how that breaks out across the country?
TRADER: No.
HILL: Is this a really small number of schools, say, 3 percent, or...
TRADER: No.
One of the problems with the fact that we have such a lack of regulation and a lack of accountability is we don't have any data. So, in less than half of the states, states are required to tell teachers -- schools are required to tell parents that an incident occurred. We're all over the map.
(CROSSTALK)
ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Barbara, can I ask you something? Is this an issue of -- I know you and other groups that advocate on behalf of these children talk about techniques that can be used for teachers to better deal with children with problems.
TRADER: Right.
VELSHI: Is this a money issue or is this is a training issue, or both?
TRADER: It's definitely not a money issue.
We have known about positive behavior supports as the way to guide students who have behavior challenges. They also work for all students. And we have known about these techniques for 20, 30 years. And they're very -- the evidence is there. They work. And then we are not in a situation where restraint is required.
So, training, teacher training, widespread teacher training and leadership at the top of the administration is really what's required.
MARTIN: Barbara Trader, executive director of TASH, in Washington, we certainly appreciate it. Thank you so very much.
TRADER: Thank you.
MARTIN: Folks, out on the West Coast in California, they're beginning to hear the rumblings of a major financial earthquake. A governor says, if a vote tomorrow doesn't go his way, the state will be in the hole for over $21 billion -- that's billion -- a doomsday scenario straight out of an Arnold Schwarzenegger action movie. We have got the story in six minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: It was the best possible prognosis for a kid with a cancerous tumor: We can cure it with chemo. The problem is, the parents said no, that's against their beliefs.
A judge stepped in and ordered the teenager's treatment. Is that right or wrong?
Panel, what do you think?
BLOOM: Clearly right. And there's a long line of precedents that parents cannot deny medical care for their children, even on religious grounds. In fact, if they did deny it, and he died, they could be charged with homicide.
VELSHI: Does that apply if the treatment can be invasive and can be -- chemo is not an easy treatment.
BLOOM: Right. Right. I mean, you're right. And they're going to look at the tests. But if it's something as open and shut as chemo can cure him, without it, he's going to die, forget it. It's going to be ordered.
MARTIN: All right. We have got more on this later with our panel, folks.
Should a judge force medical treatment on a child against the parents' wishes?
Here's Joann from Texas.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
JOANN, TEXAS: You cannot allow a child to suffer for unique and varied religious reasons. Can't do it.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
MARTIN: Folks, what do you think? Give us a call, 1-877-NO- BULL-0. That's 1-877-662-8550. Also, drop me an e-mail and hit me on Twitter and Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: Well, that song is "Mo Money Mo Problems."
HILL: How about no money?
(LAUGHTER)
MARTIN: Yes, that's kind of...
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: Folks, millions of Californians are heading home from work right now. And here's a live picture from San Francisco. And, in just a few hours, they will be making a critical decision on their state's future.
Today, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger warned that, if voters reject a set of ballot measures tomorrow, it could cost California billions of dollars. But even that threat may not be enough to change minds. And it could lead to a financial doomsday.
Ali Velshi is here to help break it all down for us -- Ali.
VELSHI: Yes. Well, you know what? Governor Schwarzenegger is saying a whole lot of things, not just financial doomsday. He's saying a lot of state workers could lose their jobs. He might have to release 30,000 inmates into the population because the state has got no money to take care of them.
Let's talk about why California matters. First of all, if you don't know, two of our panelists here are from California. That's why it matters to us.
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: But one in eight Americans live in California. This is a very, very populous state, bigger than Canada, where I come from.
And it, by the way, has the largest economy of any of the states in the United States. If you took California out of the United States and just treated its own economy, it would be one of the biggest in the world, one of the 10 biggest economies in the world, bigger than Spain, bigger than Canada. I like to bring that up, even though...
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
VELSHI: ... Canada.
Now, here's what's going on. There are a lot of issues. There are about five propositions, fix or six.
What is it, Jessica?
YELLIN: Six.
VELSHI: There are six propositions tomorrow. Five will likely be defeated. One of them might go in. But they're all designed to help the economy out or to get California out of its serious budget problems.
When we talk about the budget -- I'm just talking a lot because I'm expecting something to happen here on the screen.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: There we go.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: OK. There we go.
VELSHI: Here's the consequences if these budget -- these propositions don't pass. But, frankly, some of these might be consequences anyway, because the state is in such dire straits. They're talking about shortening the school year by seven days.
And we have heard all sorts of suggestions out of California about how to deal with school problems. They're going to be laying off teachers. Some have talked about shortening each school week, ending health care for over 200,000 children, and 5,000 state employees likely lose their jobs.
But, again, the governor has said that it could be substantially worse than that.
MARTIN: So, obviously, better to ask, how did they even get in a situation where they might be $21 billion short?
VELSHI: Well, California has been in a boom-bust situation I think since sometimes in the 1800s.
And what -- it has been in budget problems for a long time. So, happened is, when this recession set in, it hurt states disproportionately. People lose their jobs. Businesses go out of business. They don't pay tax. The state revenues shrink. But the burden on the state becomes bigger, because you have got people to actually help out.
And, as a result, California didn't do planning in the last couple of decades that actually allowed them to have surpluses, even when things were good.
YELLIN: And I have to say, there are a number of other states along the coast in California that...
VELSHI: Sure.
YELLIN: ... say -- worry that they're next, because states can't keep printing money, the way the federal government...
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: That's right.
YELLIN: If they go into deficit -- oh, Oregon, there are op-eds you will see all over the Oregon newspapers saying, is this going to happen to us? And there -- there's a lot of cascade concerns, because states cannot just print money, the way the federal government can, to close the government.
MARTIN: I have covered city government, county government, on the local level. Here is what keeps bothering me. People want more services, but then they say, I don't want to spend any more money from the taxes.
VELSHI: Right.
MARTIN: OK. Something has to give. You either have to raise revenue, or you have got to cut services.
VELSHI: Yes.
The problem here is that, in a recession, it is tougher, because you're losing the normal revenue base that you have. You're losing people who normally go to work and pay taxes, pay taxes. California has got some of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. That tax base is disappearing. So, that's the problem.
(CROSSTALK)
HILL: And the number of earners is also down.
(CROSSTALK)
BLOOM: Sorry. Go ahead.
HILL: I was just going to say, the number of earners is also down for the first time this year in California, which that in itself is a huge issue.
MARTIN: Right. Right. Right.
VELSHI: This is how recessions have a multiplier effect.
Normally speaking, yes, you need to raise taxes -- raise revenue or raise taxes. California's moving backward.
(CROSSTALK)
BLOOM: And who are these 5,000 employees who are about to lose their jobs?
YELLIN: Some of the ads say that, in time, it could be firefighters even. Some of the people who are worried say this could be fire...
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: State troopers, possibly. Teachers, of course, we know about. That's a big issue in California.
HILL: And you -- Jessica brought up a great point today in our meeting in talking about firefighters. And it is fire season.
YELLIN: Right. And it could happen in the middle of fire season. It might not happen for a while.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: It matters to neighboring states that California firefighters are on the job.
YELLIN: Wow.
MARTIN: All right. We will see what happens tomorrow, folks.
Things are certainly tough in California and much of the nation, but somebody out there is still living a little large. Wait until you hear how much they paid for this used Ferrari. Show the photo. There it is.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: All right. You folks at home are fired up about tonight's question: Should a judge force medical treatment on a child against the parents' wishes? Lots of strong opinions on both sides.
Now, we want to know what you think. Give us a call, 1-877-NO- BULL-0. That's 1-877-662-8550.
But, first up, here's Erica with the briefing.
HILL: And, Roland, want to get this story that is just coming in to us, a man fatally shot this afternoon at the entrance to L.A. upscale Beverly Center Mall. Now, the shooting happened just a couple of hours ago. Police have sealed off the crowded mall. They're continuing to search for two suspects, but, again, a man fatally shot there at the Beverly Center in L.A.
An assistant principal at a New York City died of complications linked to swine flu. Mitchell Wiener died last night, just six days after becoming ill. Four students at his school also have the H1N1 virus. Worldwide, 76 people have died related to swine flu. A Louisiana middle school student in critical but stable condition tonight after shooting himself in the head today. The 15- year-old boy whose name is not being released walked into a classroom and fired a shot over a teacher's head, then went to a restroom and shot himself. The school was locked down. Students were evacuated.
Astronauts on the shuttle Atlantis completing their fifth and final spacewalk today. And we have some pictures to show you. They have been making repairs to the Hubble Space Telescope which should keep it working for another five to ten years. Not exactly an easy feat either.
Some people still spending despite the bad economy. Check this out, a 1957 Ferrari Testarossa race car selling at auction yesterday for get this, a record $12 million. The identities of both the buyer and the seller were kept secret, but I think Ali really is going to miss that car.
ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Times are tough.
LISA BLOOM, ANCHOR OF TRUTV'S "IN SESSION": That's a pretty one.
HILL: Wind in your hair, oh.
VELSHI: I had a dream last night that I was going into space last night.
ROLAND MARTIN, CNN ANCHOR: That's cold. That's cold.
VELSHI: But I saw "Star Trek" on Saturday night.
BLOOM: In a Ferrari?
VELSHI: No, in a spaceship.
HILL: Were you performing maintenance on the Hubble Telescope?
VELSHI: No, no, no. Nobody ever invites me to perform maintenance on anything.
BLOOM: And that's relevant to the story because --
VELSHI: No, the spacewalk. And I saw "Star Trek."
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN NATL. POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: You saw "Star Trek."
VELSHI: Saturday night, yes.
MARTIN: OK.
VELSHI: That's all I got for you.
MARTIN: President Barack Obama and Israel's prime minister had one of those discussions at the White House today, the kind they usually call productive. Productive, yes, but they still have their differences and those could be speed bumps on the road to peace. We'll have the latest in three minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: Folks, the future of the Middle East took center stage at the White House today when Israeli's prime minister had an Oval Office meeting with President Obama. But on the agenda, more than just U.S./Israeli relations. Jessica Yellin is here with more -- Jessica.
YELLIN: That's right, Roland. When President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu met today, Iran and its nuclear ambitions stole the show. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Iran is a country of extraordinary history.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Iran openly calls for our destruction.
OBAMA: Iran has been pursuing its nuclear capabilities.
NETANYAHU: But if Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
YELLIN: So they were there to talk about Israeli/Palestinian peace but they ended up talking about Iran and here's why.
Look at the map. Iran is at the center of the Middle East in missile range to both Israel and Iraq. And there are shared concerns that if Iran develops a nuclear weapon, they will attack Israel or U.S. troops in the region or even both. So Iran also funds some of the groups that launch rocket attacks on Israel and that's a point of extreme concern to the Israeli prime minister.
Now, both sides here want Iran stopped but the disagreement is about how. Today, President Obama insisted that he wants to try diplomacy and he set for the first time a deadline saying that Iran has until the end of this year to start talks about its nuclear ambitions or face sanctions.
Well, Netanyahu made it clear that he'll go along with the president's plan. He'll try to engage first, but it is widely understood that if diplomacy does not work, Israel will seriously consider unilaterally attacking Iran to take out its nuclear sites.
Now, of course, the other issue on the table, peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Today, President Obama pushed Prime Minister Netanyahu to openly support a two-state solution that would give Palestinians their own country next to Israel and President Obama wants Israel to halt construction of new Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories.
The Israel prime minister would not go there. He just said Palestinians, they first have to change their policy and accept that Israel has a right to exist.
And finally, Roland, we should note that President Obama will host Palestinian Authority President Abbas next week.
MARTIN: All right, folks. With us from Washington is Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. Mideast negotiator. He's now a public policy fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and author of "The Much Too Promised Land: America's Elusive Search for Arab-Israeli Peace." Also Hisham Melham, Washington bureau chief of Al-Arabiya, a news channel based in Dubai.
Aaron, I want to start with you. Do you think today's focus on Iran was a distraction or is Iran really standing in the way of peace in the Middle East?
AARON DAVID MILLER, FMR. U.S. MIDDLE EAST NEGOTIATOR: I don't think it was a distraction. In fact, the common ground that the prime minister and the president seemed to find on this issue was really quite remarkable.
You know, this meeting had been billed as a meeting between president yes we can and prime minister no you won't. And despite these substantive differences that divide these two guys, the fact is, on Iran, the president seemed to give a nod to Prime Minister Netanyahu by emphasizing that the talks won't go on forever.
BLOOM: Hisham, President Obama has done some work to improve his credibility in the Muslim world. Do you think he's seen as an honest broker in the Middle East?
HISHAM MELHAM, AL-ARABIYA: I think most Arabs see him as an honest broker, especially those who remember painfully the Bush years and how the president, the former president, notwithstanding, talking once in a while about peace and repeating for pro forma (ph) some of the fundamentals of the American position.
He really did nothing personally. He was not engaged personally. He was not curious, intellectually even to know more about issues unlike his father and unlike President Bill Clinton. And also because the president really ignored Arab/Israeli peacemaking seriously, we had two devastating wars, one in 2006 and one in 2008. And now we are living with the catastrophic effects of those two wars.
I think President Barack Obama understands that he should be engaged personally. He does not want the prime minister of Israel to reshape, to redefine or even reframe the issue as only Iran.
VELSHI: Yes.
MELHAM: Now, the Israelis have good reason to be alarmed by Iran but I think they are alarmists.
VELSHI: Let's --
MELHAM: They and some Arab states, too.
VELSHI: Let's explore that a little bit.
Aaron, they seem to share a common enemy in Iran. The last half a century, American presidents have been trying to deal with the Middle East. Does the emergence of Iran as a bigger threat mean that we could be closer to a resolution on the Israeli-Palestinian issue?
MILLER: I don't think so. We've seen this movie before. The previous administration linked Iraq to the ultimate resolution of the Arab/Israeli issue and that's not going to work.
Look, this is a 100-year headache. It's like a year of root canals.
A president needs to determine that it's in the American national interest on the merits of the case and try to determine whether the gaps between Israelis and Palestinians and Israelis and Syrians can be bridged. And if the president is tough enough, smart enough and fair enough, who knows? Barack Obama may be able to make some progress but not by linking it to an issue, frankly, which is not going to drive the process.
MELHAM: It's not direct linkage but obviously one reason why Iran has been for all intents and purposes, unfortunately, has become the Mediterranean power because of its influence in Syria, its sponsorship of Hezbollah, and its support of Hamas and Gaza is the ongoing unresolved dispute between the Arabs and the Israeli. You resolve this issue as the president of the United States said today, again, reiterated again, then you are -- we will prevent Iran from meddling in the affairs of the Arabs and the Israelis.
MILLER: But, Hisham -- Hisham, you know the Iranian file it's going to be a long movie. I mean, it's going to take a while to close this thing. And the reality is we can't wait.
MELHAM: But you can have the movie and we can have a sequel as long as there is view in the Middle East that there is a serious engagement on the part of the United States. The United States whether we like it or not is the indispensable player here. And the Arabs and the Israelis aren't going to solve their own defenses alone, and the Israelis cannot deal with the nuclear threat from Iran on their own because they'll create a catastrophe that will affect the American interest not only the Israelis but the Arab interest.
HILL: Hisham, I have to cut you off there because we do need to get this one last question in. But obviously, there is a little bit of resistance here when it comes to dealing with two things at once.
Aaron, is there any way that both the U.S. and the Middle East can deal with Iran at the same time while the U.S. still wants to push for Israel pushing a little harder for a two-state solution?
MILLER: No. I think both countries -- in fact, the bottom line in today's meeting is that there's clearly more common ground despite the differences and both the prime minister and the president, I think, have implicitly agreed that they're going to have to push two tracks at once. One, trying to stop the Iranians from completing the enrichment cycle and weaponizing and, number two, exploring with a real seriousness the prospects for a two-state solution. We can do both at the same time.
MARTIN: Aaron David Miller, author of "The Much Too Promised Land," and Hisham Melham with Al-Arabiya TV. We certainly appreciate it. Thanks so much.
MILLER: Appreciate it.
MARTIN: Folks, she could have been the next Kennedy to make a name in politics. So why did Caroline Kennedy pull herself out of the running for a U.S. Senate seat? We'll hear what she's saying now.
Plus, the family of a Minnesota teenager says they're not refusing treatment for his cancer but they don't want the treatment being ordered by his doctors. Now a court says they have no choice.
Marshel on Facebook writes, "No god that I know of would allow a child or anyone that can get well with treatment be against it. That is called healing."
Should a judge force medical treatment on a child against the parents' wishes? 1-877-NO-BULL-0. That's 1-877-662-8550. And drop me an e-mail or hit me on Twitter or Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: Folks, we got big news tonight of a new job for a former president. Here's Jessica Yellin breaking it down in the "Political Daily Briefing."
YELLIN: Thank you. Roland, we have just learned former President Bill Clinton will be the United Nations new special envoy to Haiti.
Haiti is the poorest nation in its hemisphere and both Clintons have recently visited there to draw attention to its struggle. It is believed that in this role, former President Clinton will help attract investment to the country.
And also right now, Vice President Joe Biden is headed overseas. He will spend the next three days in the Balkans giving attention to a region still shaken after years of ethnic conflict. The vice president will visit Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Kosovo.
Also tonight, the longest serving U.S. senator is in the hospital. Today we learned 91-year-old Senator Robert Byrd was taken to the hospital on Friday with a higher than normal temperature, caused by a minor infection. The West Virginia Democrat is responding well to antibiotics and we're told he'll be released in the next few days.
Well, listen to this one. Caroline Kennedy puts a rumor to rest. On NBC's "Today" show this morning, the daughter of the late JFK was asked about reports that she gave up her bid to take Hillary Clinton's vacant U.S. Senate seat because her children pressured her to drop out. Here's what Kennedy said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAROLINE KENNEDY, SOUGHT APPOINTMENT TO U.S. SENATE: Anybody who knows my children and knows me knows that that is absolute nonsense. But, you know, all in all it was a great experience for me. I know you may find that hard to believe but I met a lot of interesting people. I saw, you know, how much there is to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
YELLIN: She added that dropping out was the right decision and it doesn't matter to her what anyone else thinks.
And finally, couldn't leave this one out. Today, CNN won a Peabody Award for its coverage of the 2008 presidential election. And Wolf Blitzer received the award with this joke. Listen to Wolf.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Think about this. George Foster Peabody -- watch this -- and Wolf Blitzer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
YELLIN: Not bad, right?
HILL: I like it. I want to know who pointed that out to Wolf. Was it you, Chad.
YELLIN: He was challenged to a joke-off by "The Onion," the funny newspaper.
VELSHI: Right.
BLOOM: I think he wins.
VELSHI: And Brian Williams, who's emceeing the thing at that point said -- at one point a few minutes later said, you know, I just want to make it clear that's George Foster Peabody, so that Wolf Blitzer doesn't leave thinking that there was actually a coin struck in his honor.
MARTIN: Always --
VELSHI: Might be a coin struck in Larry King's honor.
YELLIN: There might be.
MARTIN: And, of course, the king, he's up next. Larry, what you got on tonight's show?
LARRY KING, HOST, "LARRY KING LIVE": Roland, we got a big show. We are going to deal first with the Farrah Fawcett matter. We'll be talking to various doctors, cancer experts, including her physician in Germany where she went for treatment. Then we're going to deal with the arraignment of Drew Peterson today in Chicago. And then we'll talk about the death of the woman from the swine flu. We're going to have her husband on. He is suing over that death.
And also, Roland, big news. Tomorrow morning on sale, "My Remarkable Journey." My autobiography. It's funny, it's fun and the proceeds, most of the proceeds go to the Larry King Cardiac Foundation.
MARTIN: And, Larry, I can agree because I actually finished reading it on Saturday. It is a fantastic book.
KING: Thank you. I'm real -- coming from you, I appreciate it. Now I'd like to do what you do every night, which is what? What do you say at the end?
ALL: Holla.
KING: What?
MARTIN: Holla.
KING: Holla.
ALL: Yes.
MARTIN: There you go.
KING: Which is, by the way, Roland, a Jewish bread.
MARTIN: Is that Jewish bread?
BLOOM Challah.
YELLIN: Spelled differently.
BLOOM: That's Challah.
MARTIN: Leave it up to Larry. All right, guys. Rack that up and we'll play it at the end.
Larry, thanks so much.
Folks, we got a hot topic tonight and we've been hearing from you about this all day. A judge has ruled that a 13-year-old boy with cancer must see a physician even though his parents object. So the question tonight, should a judge force medical treatment on a child against the parents' wishes?
Lots of strong opinions on both sides. Give us a call. 1-877- 662-8550. Or drop me an e-mail or hit me on Twitter and Facebook.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: Folks, if your child was fighting cancer, you want to hear a doctor say we can save his or her life. A Minnesota couple heard that and basically said, no thanks. We'll take care of it ourselves.
Senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen is in Atlanta following this case. Elizabeth joins us right now.
Now, Elizabeth, this child is being forced to have chemotherapy treatment for his cancer against his parents' wishes. So what's the deal?
ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: What the deal is that the parents say we don't want anymore chemo.
Danny Hauser who's 13 years old and lives in Minnesota had one round of chemo and his parents said it made him so sick they didn't want anymore. What they want is so-called natural remedies, things like supplements and herbs and a special diet and sweat lodges. They say they adhere to these beliefs through a group that they belong to, a so-called Native American spiritual healing group.
Well, as you said, the court ordered them to go visit an oncologist and they said that they simply have no choice in this matter.
Now, let me read you a statement from the parents. The parents said through their attorney, "The Hausers believe that the injection of chemotherapy into Danny Hauser amounts to an assault upon his body, and torture when it occurs over a long period of time" -- Roland.
MARTIN: All right. So what happens now?
COHEN: What happens now is that they now have to see an oncologist. In fact, they have to choose an oncologist by tomorrow who no doubt will start more chemo and radiation.
MARTIN: All right, Elizabeth, hold tight one second. I want to bring our panel back, Erica Hill, Ali Velshi, Jessica Yellin and truTV's Lisa Bloom. Also joining us is Art Caplan. He's a chairman of the Medical Ethics Department at the University of Pennsylvania.
Now, Art, should courts have the right to force unwanted medical treatment for children?
ART CAPLAN, MEDICAL ETHICIST: I think they should. You get into situations where a minor child who really doesn't know enough to subscribe to the parents' beliefs, the religious beliefs or whatever the health attitudes are. In a life and death situation, I think you've got society has to step in sometimes and say, look, you can believe what you want but you can't kill your child when we have an effective treatment in the name of your personal beliefs. So there has to be a limit I think on how far parents can go.
BLOOM: And, Art, I know that in this case, the boy did have chemo once. It shrunk his tumor.
CAPLAN: Yes. BLOOM: He stopped the chemo. The tumor has now expanded. I mean, is this an open and shut case because the treatment seems relatively clearly that it works?
CAPLAN: Yes, you know, that's a good point. This is really close to open and shut because for his kind of cancer, you've got a 95 percent success rate in curing it with a chemotherapy. So, you know, if it was more experimental or something that just didn't work very well, you give the parents more slack.
But in this case, you've got a 13-year-old with developmental disabilities. The parents are pursuing a path that doesn't have much evidence behind it, and the medicine is known to work. It's really got the track record.
MARTIN: Hey, Art, I want to go to Jeri from a gorgeous town, Lake Jackson, Texas.
Jeri, what's your comment?
JERI, TEXAS (via telephone): My comment is that doctors are human beings. They're not always right and we have such serious child abuse in this country. The government should be focusing on protecting seriously abused children instead of interjecting itself in the case of a loving, caring family dealing with the tragedy of childhood cancer who happens to disagree with the course of treatment. If that medical course of treatment goes wrong, what's the government's responsibility then?
MARTIN: All right, Jeri, thanks so much. Appreciate it.
Art, go right ahead.
CAPLAN: Well, things can go wrong. There's no doubt about that. But as I said, in this kind of cancer, given the treatment that's out there, you are almost certain to hit a home run.
It seems pretty difficult to say the government doesn't have any business protecting a young 13-year-old boy with a lot of developmental disability who can't really make a choice, can't really fend for himself.
His parents' wishes -- you know, you do want to try and respect it. And I hope that the doctors work it out so they can do both. I mean, that would be the ideal situation. When push comes to shove with this kind of cure rate, I do think society has got a role to step in there.
MARTIN: Elizabeth, go ahead and weigh in.
COHEN: You know what, Jeri makes an interesting point which is that doctors are not always right. And I agree with her, doctors are not always right.
But in this case, this is a standard treatment that's been going on for a long time that has really a remarkable success rate and you're talking about the life and death of a child. This isn't just like deciding whether or not to have a tonsillectomy. It's a very different decision.
CAPLAN: And so when we get in situations like insulin for diabetes, antibiotics for meningitis, this kind of radiation for this kind of cancer, you're going to find again and again doctors saying, please, judge, let us save this child's life. You can't ask this child to be sacrificed in the name of a religious belief or a personal health belief.
YELLIN: Elizabeth, let me ask you just to be devil's advocate here. This isn't setting a bone. We're talking about chemo, radiation -- devastating treatments that you really need a parent's support there with you.
CAPLAN: Yes.
YELLIN: So I'd like to ask Elizabeth, what kind of treatment can you imagine, can you envision, what kind of life for this child if their parents aren't supportive while they're going through this?
COHEN: Right. That's a good point. I mean, one hopes that the parents will be supportive. I mean, certainly when you see them, they seem like loving parents.
One would hope that they would be supportive. They said that their son will abide by this ruling.
But, Jessica, you're right. There's no question. This is tough, tough treatment. It can have long-term effects and short-term. They can cause extreme nausea. They can cause extreme fatigue, which I think is what they saw in their child the first time. And I think that that definitely frightened them.
If they're not supportive, boy, that is just terrible. That's not a choice. That would just be a terrible thing to do to a child.
MARTIN: Art, hold tight. Art, hold tight. Art, hold tight one second. We're going to come right back and weigh in on this, OK.
Folks, the judge overruled the parents in this case ordering cancer care for the teen. Edub1914 on Twitter calls it "just another example of big government trying to control everything we do."
We're still taking your e-mails, tweets and Facebook posts. More of your comments next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARTIN: We're back now with Erica, Ali, Jessica and Lisa, along with ethicist Art Caplan, and senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen.
And our question tonight, should a judge force medical treatment on a child against the parents' wishes? Here's a voicemail from Deb in Georgia. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DEB, FROM GEORGIA (via voicemail): I think a child -- a judge should step in when a child's life is in jeopardy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARTIN: All right then folks, we are back. Erica, go ahead.
HILL: Well, in talking about this, we're talking a lot about a child and a child cannot make decisions for themselves because they are a minor.
Art, I want to throw this out to you. We've been hearing that from people and I think it's a valid question. What about when it comes to an adult? Could the law, could the courts step in and say you have to have this treatment to save your life, even though you're over 18? We think you're making the wrong decision.
CAPLAN: No. We've had lots of situations where Jehovah's Witnesses said no to blood transfusion and left behind a family, could have been saved but you don't have to accept treatment. It is a fundamental right, a basic right that competent adults can say no to any and all medical care. But kids --
BLOOM: And, Erica, just on that point, I mean, I would emphasize that parents have a legal obligation, not only to give food and shelter and education to their children, but to give them their medical needs, to meet their medical needs and they can be criminally charged with up to and including homicide if they fail to do that. That's a legal obligation every parent has in this country.
YELLIN: Even if it violates their religious beliefs?
BLOOM: Yes. Yes. And religion is not an exception to that.
CAPLAN: So we put, if you will, the child's best interest ahead of parental discretion in life and death situations. But I was going to say before just jumping in now, we don't want to divide the family.
MARTIN: Right.
CAPLAN: You got to try and keep them together because this kid has got to go home, and you don't want to get into a divided situation so they got to work with them.
MARTIN: OK. All right, Elizabeth Cohen --
COHEN: Most of the time I think the courts would do decide in favor of the parents...
MARTIN: About five seconds, Elizabeth.
COHEN: ... because it's not a life and death.
MARTIN: All right. Elizabeth Cohen, Art Caplan, we certainly appreciate it. Thanks so much.
I want to thank all of you who called and e-mailed a comment. Your voices are extremely important and we love hearing from you.
Of course, Larry King is up next. So what do you have to say about that, Larry?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Now I'd like to do what you do every night which is what? What do you say at the end?
ALL: Holla.
KING: What?
MARTIN: Holla.
KING: Holla.
ALL: Yes.
MARTIN: There you go.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
