Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
U.S. Wants More NATO Troops for Afghanistan; International Call to Arms; Timeline Concerns; A Lot of Americans Have No Bank Account; Off to the Army for One High School Football Star
Aired December 03, 2009 - 07:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to special edition of AMERICAN MORNING on this Thursday, December 3rd. Glad you're with us, I'm Kiran Chetry, here at CNN headquarters in New York.
JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: And good morning, I'm John Roberts, coming to you this morning from outside of NATO headquarters in Brussels, Belgium where for the next couple of days, the foreign ministers of the 28 NATO-member countries are going to be discussing the way forward in Afghanistan.
The Obama administration is looking for about 7,000 troops from NATO to go hand in hand with the 30,000 American troops that the President announced will be going to Afghanistan within the next six months. He made that announcement, of course, on Tuesday. The big question is -- how many troops will the NATO countries commit?
So far, the United States got commitments from countries like Britain, Italy, Poland, as well as Georgia and Slovakia, for a number of troops, just about over 3,000, but it's a far cry from the 7,000 that the U.S. is looking for. NATO, by the way, saying, well, maybe about the best we can do is 5,000 troops, and there were new concerns this morning as well in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, on this idea of a deadline.
Officials in Pakistan and Afghanistan are worried that the United States might decide in July of 2011 that it's done with the war in Afghanistan and get out and leave the country in whatever shape it is in at that point, and might that also cause a lot of Taliban to flee the border across the Afghanistan into Pakistan and cause even more problems from the Pakistanis. . Those are all questions we're going to put to special ambassador Richard Holbrooke, who is the point person for the Obama administration in Afghanistan and Pakistan. All of that coming your way in a just few minutes time. Right now, let's go back to Kiran in New York.
CHETRY: John, thanks.
And here are the other big stories we'll be covering for you in the next 15 minutes.
The White House is now accepting some of the blame for the security breach at the president's first state dinner and also making some changes to keep the president safer in the future, all while lawmakers are pressing for answers about how this could happen in the first place. We're live at the White House straight ahead.
And the president is turning his attention to the economy today, gathering the best and brightest for a jobs summit at the White House. The goal -- helping put America's 16 million unemployed back to work. But can all the brainstorming bring back the jobs? Our Jim Acosta joins us live with everyday Americans who are living the crisis.
And off to the Army -- a new recruit takes us through his final days at home before he leaves for basic training. Jason Carroll has the first installment of an "A.M." original series, "A Soldier's Story."
But first this morning, the White House is admitting it shares some of the blame for the security breach at President Obama's first state dinner. The administration is also making some security changes after a D.C. couple was able to slip into the event uninvited.
But the big unanswered question this morning is how did Tareq and Michaele Salahi actually get in? The couple and the White House are facing a call for answers from Capitol Hill. Our Suzanne Malveaux is tracking the story for us this morning. Good morning, Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Kiran.
Well, you know, the White House is taking responsibility in part for failing to properly vet the crowd entering the president's first state dinner. The deputy chief of staff put out this statement, saying that "The White House did not do everything we could have done to assist the U.S. Secret Service in ensuring that only invited guests enter the complex and that that is going to change."
Now, this acknowledgement comes after nine days of some tough questions concerning the president's security.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: The White House and Secret Service both say they weren't supposed to be there. But dressed to the nines, there they were, meeting the vice president and even the president himself.
So how did Tareq and Michaele Salahi get into President Obama's first state dinner? The White House is still trying to figure it out.
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Obviously there's an ongoing assessment and investigation by the Secret Service into what happened I guess a little more than a week ago.
MALVEAUX: Monday Press Secretary Robert Gibbs deflected questions asking if staffers should be at the gates with the Secret Service. But just 48 hours later changes, Gibbs says staff will start watching the doors.
GIBBS: Last night, was the first of many holiday parties that will happen in, in this complex over the next several weeks. We had staff at the security checkpoint to ensure that if there was any confusion about lists those would be double-checked with somebody representing the social office.
MALVEAUX: Lawmakers on Capitol Hill want answers, too. The House Homeland Security Committee will have a hearing today, but they may not have many witnesses. Social Secretary Desiree Rogers has been under fire since the security breach. But the White House says don't expect her to testify.
GIBBS: You know that based on separation of powers, staff here don't go to testify in front of Congress. You won't -- she will not be testifying in front of Congress.
MALVEAUX: And even though the Salahis are invited, they won't be coming, either. In a statement obtained by the Associated Press, their publicist says the Salahis believe, quote, "There is nothing further that they can do to assist Congress in its inquiry regarding White House protocol and certain security procedures. They therefore respectfully decline to testify."
But that's not sitting well with the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. Congressman Benny Thompson says if the Salahis are a no-show, he's ready to start handing out subpoenas.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: Kiran, as you know, the issue of White House staff members testifying before Congress is not new. When I covered President Bush, his top aides, you may recall, Karl Rove and Harriet Meirs, they refused to testify over firings of U.S. attorneys, citing once again the separation of powers, the idea that the executive branch, the White House, and the legislative branch of Congress, that they are coequal branches of government. Therefore they can't compel each other to act.
But it wasn't until after there was litigation to enforce the subpoenas and Mr. Bush left office that they ultimately gave those depositions. So we're going to have to wait and see what happens in this case.
But Kiran, already there is some criticism, the Obama administration is getting some flak for this because Mr. Obama vowed during the campaign to be different than Mr. Bush in being open and transparent -- Kiran.
CHETRY: All right, well, we're going to be talking more about that throughout the morning. Suzanne Malveaux, thanks so much.
Coming up at 8:10 eastern, we're going to be speaking with Congressman Benny Thompson, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. He's going to be the one conducting this probe into what exactly happened.
So, what if the White House Social Secretary and the Salahis are no-shows for today's hearing? Are subpoenas next? That's ahead here on the Most News in the Morning.
It's five and a half minutes past the hour right now. Also new this morning, a jobs summit at the White House. President Obama and his economic team now brainstorming with business leaders. It's all going to be happening later today.
And topping the agenda, how to put America's 16 million back to work. It's certainly no easy task. Our Jim Acosta joins us live from Washington with an "A.M." original. And you had a chance to talk to people who are really living through this horrible situation of joblessness.
JIM ACOSTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's really tough, Kiran. And right now, there are really no big answers in site. So the White House says the president will hear from CEOs, small business owners, and union leaders at this jobs forum.
And once the forum is all wrapped up, the president may want to cross the Potomac and meet some of the real people who understand the jobs crisis all too well because they're living it.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ACOSTA: Just six miles from the White House, volunteers at this northern Virginia food bank are bagging up free groceries for the poor.
"PYTEE," UNEMPLOYED MOTHER: I got to the point where I put cans, expired food inside my cupboards. You know? I'm scared.
ACOSTA: That's where we met this unemployed mother. She asked us to call her Pytee.
"PYTEE": You know people are hungry out here. People are starving.
ACOSTA: She told us how she spends her days, scrambling from food banks to clothing distribution centers to make sure her family gets the basics. That's on the ten applications for jobs she says she's filled out since September.
"PYTEE": How can you work hard when you don't even have a chance to get into the door?
ACOSTA (on camera): Is this as bad as you've ever seen it?
CHRISTINE LUCAS, DIRECTOR, ARLINGTON FOOD ASSISTANCE CENTER: This is as bad as I've ever seen it, and I've been the director here for five years and I was a volunteer here for ten years before that. We've never seen anything like this.
ACOSTA (voice-over): The director of the food pantry, Christine Lucas, sees a hunger for work.
ACOSTA (on camera): Any message you would give from somebody who sees this on the front lines?
LUCAS: Anything they can do to stimulate jobs is a big help. I spoke to a business group the other day and I said, please, just don't -- if you want to help me, don't lay anybody off. We really need jobs.
ACOSTA (voice-over): The White House insists the president is taking on the unemployment crisis and that his jobs forum with political and business leaders is just the beginning. Republicans say that's the problem.
REP. MIKE PENCE, (R) INDIANA: We believe that it represents a tacit admission that the economic policies of this administration and this Congress have failed.
ACOSTA: Just around the corner from the food pantry, Andres Tobar says the politicians better hurry. He runs a day labor center where he notes jobs are drying up for the working poor.
ACOSTA (on camera): Is it a little scary when you take a look at what's happening right now?
ANDRES TOBAR, SHIRLINGTON EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATION CENTER: It is beyond scary, at least in terms of the glimpses that we're getting here. For the day laborers, it's devastating.
ACOSTA (voice-over): And it's devastating for people like Pytee who doubts there's much the president can do for her.
"PYTEE": I feel he can't bring us out of this mess. We're going to be a third-world country pretty soon.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ACOSTA: Strong words from just an average, ordinary person who's struggling to make ends meet.
And after this jobs forum, the president takes his message on the road to Allentown, Pennsylvania, a stop where he'll be able to see the struggle for work firsthand. The jobless rate there is almost identical to the national average, 10 percent.
And Kiran, just an indication as to how much the folks over at the White House are racking their brains over this, the White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked about the jobs forum yesterday. He said simply, they are looking for ideas.
CHETRY: They need answers, that's for sure. So we'll see how this turns out. Jim Acosta for us this morning. Thanks so much.
ACOSTA: You bet.
CHETRY: Also new this morning, she has denied having an affair with Tiger Woods, but New York nightclub hostess Rachel Uchitel is expected to issue a new statement through her attorney at a news conference in a few hours.
Meanwhile Tiger Woods has apologized on his Web site for unspecified transgressions and personal failings after a magazine published a voicemail message from Woods to another alleged mistress.
Bank of America says it will repay the $45 billion bailout it received from taxpayers. The bank has been having a tough time finding a new CEO willing to accept government restrictions that are tied to the TARP money. The news sent the company's stock up in after-hours trading. Stephanie Elam is keeping tabs on that for us this morning.
And say bye-bye to the Beetle. Volkswagen announcing it is halting production of the Beetle. It will make 3,000 more "final edition versions." So what will take its place in 2011? The Volkswagen company said it will be something Beetle-ish. There you go -- John.
ROBERTS: All right, Kiran.
We're back live outside of NATO headquarters in Brussels, where for the next couple of days the topic will be about the way forward in Afghanistan, how much help could the United States expect from its NATO allies, and what's the situation on the ground now in Afghanistan and Pakistan in regard to the idea of a timetable? All questions that we'll put to Ambassador Richard Holbrooke coming up after the break. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: We're back with the most news in the mortgage in front of NATO headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. We're joined now by Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, the point person for the Afghanistan and Pakistan for the administration. Mr. Ambassador, good to see you out here this morning in the rain.
AMB. RICHARD HOLBROOKE, U.S. SPECIAL REP. FOR AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN: Why aren't we indoors, John?
ROBERTS: It's a tough issue.
HOLBROOKE: You're a tough guy.
ROBERTS: We have to tough it out.
Question for you -- you're here to twist arms in a nice kind of way with the other 27 NATO allies looking for a commitment. This administration would like about 7,000 troops in addition to the 30,000 Americans that the president announced will be going over. How many can you get from NATO?
HOLBROOKE: Well, first of all, the secretary of state will arrive early in the morning. And I've been here for two days. I'm not coming here to get a specific number. This is to reaffirm NATO's full commitment after the president's historic speech Tuesday night.
And on the basis of all the talks I've had here with NATO foreign ministers and other representatives, I am tremendously gratified by the support we've gotten. It's been overwhelming. As for specific resource increases, we announced ours. Other countries are coming forward. It's assembling. There will a NATO ministerial meeting tomorrow with Hillary Clinton representing our country. Next week there will be a force generation meeting here at the NATO headquarters in the lower level. There will be a meeting in London at the end of January.
It's coming together very nicely, but we do have not have a specific numerical goal here. This is about support.
ROBERTS: Britain has offered 500 troops, Italy looks like it will come forward with 1,000. Small, tiny Georgia will commit 900, Poland, 600, Slovakia, 250. What about France and Germany? What can you expect to get from them?
HOLBROOKE: I'll let them speak for themselves. I served as ambassador to Germany. I think everyone has to respect their democratic political processes.
But I think everyone knows where Chancellor Merkel stands on this issue, and she'll work it, and she said she'll make her announcements at the end of January in London.
As for France, again, I'll be meeting with the French foreign minister later today, and Hillary Clinton will meet with him tomorrow. And the French will work it out their way.
But both countries are supporting the president. They're giving us what we want in terms of a unified front. And we're very gratified at the response to the president's speech. It's been overwhelming. And it's bringing us together as a unified coalition.
ROBERTS: This is different than any of the meetings that have gone on before. Because at this point, based on the president's speech on Tuesday night, you are now looking at an exit strategy. The president talked about --
HOLBROOKE: I beg to differ, John. That word was not in the speech. It is very misleading. And let none of your viewers think that that phrase -- we will not stay forever an open-ended commitment on the military troops is clearly ruled out by nature of the obvious reasons.
ROBERTS: And the president has said he doesn't want to leave this for the next president. So that would indicate whether it's a three-year or seven-year timeframe, there is some sort of exit strategy that he is looking at.
HOLBROOKE: Right.
ROBERTS: I wanted to ask you about this date of July 2011, because as you know, there's a big point of contention on Capitol Hill during the hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee yesterday. It's also causing anxiety in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Officials there concerned that maybe this will be a repeat of 1989, when the U.S. in the words of officials in Pakistan and Afghanistan, cut and ran.
HOLBROOKE: In 1989, that's exactly what happened. It was a terrible mistake with consequences that haunt us to this day. The president made absolutely clear in his speech, that our resolve is undiminished. There's been no change in our strategic goals, which is to destroy Al Qaeda, which pose as a clear and present danger to the United States and to the great capitals of Europe, including this city, the capital of Europe. And we're not going to. We're not going to do that.
What the president said, and it's been misrepresented by some people in the United States, and by the Taliban simultaneously for entirely different reasons. What the president said was -- that in the summer of 2011, we will begin -- begin to draw down some of our combat troops.
But there are two other major components to our presence. There's training Afghan police and army. He made clear in the speech that that is the key to our gradual departure. That as you train the police and army, Afghanistan in a responsible way is France takes over the responsibility for its own security. And then there's the civilian effort, which is what I'm responsible for.
ROBERTS: And this is something that you're not very happy with at present in Afghanistan?
HOLBROOKE: The civilian effort? Well, the civilian effort has made tremendous strides this year. We have significantly increased our efforts, as the president mentioned in agriculture.
ROBERTS: But you have been critical about it in terms of nationwide and how the allies get it together.
HOLBROOKE: Let's distinguish between two things. Our civilian efforts have been inadequate in the past, including agriculture, police training and so on. We're increasing those substantially. And the president mentioned those. And those will go on for a long time. 1989 will not be repeated.
Now on the point you're talking about, every other country has its own individual efforts. The kind of unity that the military command now has an Afghanistan. It took them six years to get to the point where a commander like Stan McChrystal can wear both an American hat and a NATO hat and an international hat. That's very unusual. We've got it in place in the military side. We don't have it in place on the civilian side. As both Secretary Clinton and I have said in the last few days, we think that we need better coordination of the international civilian effort.
Yesterday, I met with my counterparts from 20 nations. They all agreed we've got to have better coordination. But sorting this out will take sometime. We want to strengthen the U.N. We want to strengthen the civilian presence of other institutions and we've got to work more closely together.
ROBERTS: All right. Well, we'll see if that's possible. Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, always good to see you. Thanks for joining us this morning, sir.
HOLBROOKE: Thanks, John.
ROBERTS: All right. Kiran?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Twenty-one minutes past the hour now. Stephanie Elam is here "Minding Your Business" this morning.
We're talking about just some of the basics of getting on the road to fiscal responsibility and health. Right?
STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Right. And one of those might be having a bank account. But can you believe, Kiran, 17 million Americans do not have a bank account in this country. That's a pretty huge number. And if you take a look at this, it means that at some point 7.7 percent of U.S. households are without a bank account. And that means that they're considered unbanked.
Now, 43 million adults or 18 percent are considered underbanked. And the whole idea of that is they may have a bank account but they really tend to rely more on pawnshops, payday lenders, those sort of things to take care of their daily financial needs.
Now if you take a look at this number, that means altogether, nearly 26 percent of households in the United States are either underbanked or unbanked. And that's a pretty high number, though.
This is coming from the FDIC. They did the survey just to find out exactly what is going on with America's people. And if you take a look at it by the numbers of how much people are making, if they're making under $30,000 a year, it's more likely that 71 percent of them will be unbanked. Up to $50,000 a year, four percent would be unbanked. And above $75,000, only one percent are likely to be unbanked.
So it shows you that the less income people are making the more likely that they are to be underbank or unbanked. They do say that that has to, a huge part of it, people just say, the reason why I don't use a bank account is because I don't have the funds. That's the main reason that people gave for the situation.
And also, Kiran, if you take a look at it by race, the unbanked numbers are bigger for minorities. Like 21.7 percent of black households, over 19 percent for Hispanic households. And then if you look at the groups that are less likely to be unbanked, it would be Asians and whites. Same thing if you're looking for underbanked, 31.6 percent of black families and 28.9 percent of American Indian families. So really it does show that there's also a discrepancy on how people view it based on where they're coming from.
CHETRY: There's some mistrust out there about that as well. Are you going to get feed to death as it worked? You don't have a lot of money like you're putting into a bank. You get -- you see it half gone with a lot of things you do. ELAM: And a lot of you feel like they just need to keep it close to them. But it would be much safer to put it into a bank account because it has been insured by the FDIC. And so if someone comes and steals the money under your mattress, there's no getting that money back. But if you do have it in an account, then it's insured.
CHETRY: Very interesting picture, though.
ELAM: It is very interesting.
CHETRY: All right. Stephanie, thank you.
ELAM: Sure.
CHETRY: Still ahead, a soldier's story. AMERICAN MORNING is doing a special series where we follow three people from the home front to the battlefront. Will McLain is somebody that Jason Carroll sat down with. His decision to go to battle. And he's going to be joining us with more.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Twenty-seven minutes past the hour. Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning.
Today we kick off an "A.M. Original Series," one that will track three military recruits, from their final days as civilians all the way through their deployment. Our Jason Carroll has been given unprecedented access by the Pentagon. And this morning, it's off to the Army for one high school football star, who traded the gridiron to be all he could be, literally. And Jason Carroll is here with much more on the story.
We were talking about how important you felt it was to show the whole story, for people from deciding on recruitment all the way into what it's like to actually go to war.
JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Right. We've never done it. It's something that I've always wanted to do. And thankfully with the help of the Pentagon now we've been able to do it.
You know, with so many men and women putting their lives on the line in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, we set out to chronicle what the military experience is like for them from the moment they leave home, through deployment. And we begin with Will McLain.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CARROLL: This is Will McLain, 18 years old and a week away from taking the oath to enlist in the Army.
WILL MCLAIN, U.S. ARMY RECRUIT: More people in here.
CARROLL: We gave him a video camera to show how he was passing the time. There were lots of parties. MCLAIN: It's always funny, because even when I'm partying with my friends or something like that they always have to throw those Army jokes in.
CARROLL: How have your friends taking the news so far? What have they been...
MCLAIN: They think I'm doing a good thing. Like they figured it's better than just rotting away in Rosamond (ph), you know.
ACOSTA: Rosamond, California, Will's hometown. It's in the western Mojave Desert, a large stretch of land with a small population, about 14,000. A place where dirt bike riding is surpassed only by motorcycle racing in popularity. A place Will McLain can't wait to leave.
MCLAIN: I'm kind of glad to be getting out of this little town, you know, because it gets old. There's a lot of things you will miss here.
ACOSTA: We met up with Will, his last day at home before he left to join the Army. A day his 12-year-old brother didn't want to leave his side.
MCLAIN: I think it kind of hits him more that I'm leaving. Like, this last week I think it's truly hit them and my family.
ACOSTA: Like a lot of high school football players, McLain had dreams of pursuing a career in the pros.
MCLAIN: I could think was that I'm going to go pro, no matter what. You know. And then pretty much, I guess in junior, I realized there were a lot bigger fishes in the sea.
ACOSTA (on camera): Yes.
(voice-over): McLain says early this year, he began to really think about the advice from his uncle.
MCLAIN: I know my uncle always use to tell me, you know, you need to have a back-up plan. You need to have a back-up plan. And that's what I figured the most, I would do the best bet (ph).
ACOSTA: Will had grown up with guns and always liked the idea of joining the military. So he tried to convince his parents to allow him to enlist before his 18th birthday in May.
MCLAIN: They didn't want to sign the papers and I needed to come back a year later. Like I hate you, you sign the papers. So this way, they made me wait until I was 18 so that, you know, the blame is fully on me. The way my mom worded it, she doesn't want to be responsible for sending me to Afghanistan.
ACOSTA: And now with time running out at home, reality is setting in. MCLAIN: I'd say about a week ago it truly hit me. That's when I forgot how to sleep and stuff. I just pretty much lay there and think about it, oh, man, you know, I'm leaving in a week. I'm leaving in three days. I'm leaving in a day.
ACOSTA: For Will's parents, Bill, a construction worker, and his wife Laurie (ph), Will's future now taking shape.
BILL MCLAIN, FATHER: We're all worried that he'll come home in one piece. He might be 5,000 miles away. But he knows there's people that care about him.
CARROLL: The next morning came the good-byes. And one last word of advice.
BILL MCLAIN: Head down, brain on, OK? She wasn't looking forward to this moment.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CARROLL: Yes. I'm sure there were a lot of mothers out there who have moments like that. Next, we'll show you what happens as Will, the civilian, becomes Private Will. He'll be heading to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. That's where he'll be completing his 13 weeks of basic training. And again, it's not just going to be Will who we're going to be following. We're actually going to be following three of these recruits, heading into different parts of the Army and chronicling their experiences as they go along the way.
CHETRY: I mean, just from a mother's perspective, you know, it really takes a lot yet to just -- you have to allow your children to make their own decisions. But when it's one that you're so fearful for their safety. And especially knowing, you know, we're in an active war. We're in active wars and we don't know how long we're going to be in it.
CARROLL: And you heard from her there, this was not a decision that they were completely behind. This was a decision that they wanted him to make. Again when he wanted to do this when he was 17, they said no way. No way are we going to allow you to do this. We're going to wait until you turn 18, then you make the decision.
CHETRY: Well, we'll look forward to seeing how it goes for him and the other two. Jason Carroll, great job. Thank you.
CARROLL: You bet.
CHETRY: Right now it's 31 minutes past the hour. A look at the top stories. The alleged White House party crashers have now declined an invite. That would be an invite to appear before the House Homeland Security committee. A spokesman for the Salahi say they have already given information to Congress and the Secret Service and have nothing more to say. One House member says the couple may be served with a more forceful invite, a subpoena.
Also, New York state lawmakers rejecting a bill to legalize same- sex marriage. The vote was 38-24. Advocates of gay marriage say Republican supporters of the bill were scared off by the recent election in New York's 23rd congressional district. In that race, a Republican who supported gay marriage was forced out of the running by hardline conservatives.
The first woman accused of having an affair with Tiger Woods is going to be holding a news conference. New York nightclub hostess, Rachel Uchitel has denied that affair so far. Her lawyer, Gloria Allred said that she will be appearing at a news conference, but will not be speaking. Allred will be speaking on her behalf. Woods has apologized on his web site for unspecified transgressions. We'll have more on that a little bit later.
But meanwhile, let's head back to John in Brussels, Belgium this morning. Hi, John.
ROBERTS: Hey, Kiran, a rainy day outside of NATO headquarters here in Brussels. But inside, it's very dry and there are a lot of people who are talking today about the way forward in Afghanistan. Just how many troops will NATO countries commit to the conflict there. In addition to the 30,000 that the United States is sending in.
The United States wants as many as 7,000 NATO troops. It doesn't look like it's going to get that number at this point. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be here first thing tomorrow morning, she'll attend the ministers' meeting. They don't want to twist arms too hard.
But they certainly want to make the point that they believe that Afghanistan is the world's problem, as we were talking with Ambassador Richard Holbrooke just a few minutes ago, that Al Qaeda represents a threat not just to the United States, but to all of the world, particularly here in Europe. And it is incumbent upon the member nations of NATO to get together and support the cause there.
Secretary of state Clinton before she heads here is going to make an appearance today before the Senate Foreign Relations committee. Yesterday she was on a bit of a hot seat before the Senate Armed Services committee along with the secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.
Some pretty pointed back-and-forth over a number of points, Democrats unhappy that the United States is sending 30,000 more troops there. Republicans unhappy about this idea of what they call a timeline. And that would be the beginning of the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan in July of 2011.
Our congressional correspondent, Dana Bash, wraps up yesterday's hearings.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Tough questions for the president's national security team. Most not about the 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, but confusion over whether the July 2011 date to start withdrawing is a hard deadline. VOICE OF SEN. CARL LEVIN (D), CHAIRMAN ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: It is that date conditions? Based or not?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, sir.
BASH: That sounded definitive. But the date-certain became less certain, when pressed by GOP senators, who call a deadline a dangerous signal to the enemy.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: Will we withdraw our forces based on conditions on the ground? Or based on an arbitrary date?
ROBERT GATES, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We will be in a position in particularly uncontested areas, where we will be able to begin the transition.
MCCAIN: Let's suppose you're not?
GATES: I think we will be in a position then to evaluate whether or not we can begin the transition in July.
MCCAIN: Which is it? It's got to be one or the other? It's got to be the appropriate conditions or it's got to be an arbitrary date.
GATES: We will have a thorough review in December 2010. If it appears that the strategy is not working and that we are not going to be able to transition in 2011, then we will take a hard look at the strategy itself.
BASH: Later Secretary Gates admitted after the December 2010 assessment --
GATES: the president always has the freedom to adjust his decisions.
BASH: Secretary Clinton signaled flexibility, too.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Have we locked ourselves into leaving, Secretary Clinton, in July of 2011?
HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: I do not believe we have locked ourselves into leaving. But what we have done is to signal very clearly to all audiences that the United States is not interested in occupying Afghanistan.
BASH: But the defense secretary conceded the exit date is aimed in part at politics at home.
GATES: I think the other audience, frankly is the American people, who are weary of, after eight years of war, and to let them know this isn't going to go on for another 10 years.
BASH: That didn't convince some of the president's fellow Democrats at another hearing later in the House.
REP. ELIOT ENGEL (D), NEW YORK: My fear, as is the fear of so many others, is that we could easily get bogged down in an endless war.
ADMIRAL MIKE MULLEN, JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN: This is not open- ended and we're are not going to escalate.
BASH (on camera): The defense secretary who called the region the "epicenter of extremist jihadism," got quite passionate at one point. Saying every service member is deployed with his signature. And if he thought they would get bogged down with no hope of success in Afghanistan, he "wouldn't sign the orders."
Dana Bash, CNN, Capitol Hill.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ROBERTS: And again, the secretary of state appearing today before the Senate Foreign Relations committee. From there she'll get on a plane and she will be arriving tomorrow morning first thing here at NATO headquarters to talk to the other ministers of the NATO countries to see what they are willing to contribute to the way forward in Afghanistan. Kiran?
CHETRY: All right. We look forward to hearing from her. John, thanks.
And also a quick programming note, you don't want to miss an exclusive interview this Sunday, Afghan president, Hamid Karzi, speaks with our own Christiane Amanpour for the first time since President Obama announced his new war strategy. We're going to get Karzai's reaction, only on "Amanpour" this Sunday at 2:00 p.m. Eastern.
And still ahead, the NFL coming out with new rules that go into effect this week regarding how the league handles players with concussions. We're going to be talking to a doctor who was once the team doctor for the Pittsburgh Steelers about how significant these changes are. Will they help protect players from head injuries and neurological troubles down the road. It's 37 minutes past the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning.
The NFL is set to enforce its toughest rules yet when players can return to practices or games after suffering head injuries or potential concussions. These new guidelines go into effect this week. And it's the latest move by the league it try to address a hot-button issue.
But does the new concussion policy go far enough? Joining us now from Morgantown, West Virginia is Dr. Julian Bales, chairman of neurology at the West Virginia School of Medicine, also the former team doctor for the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Dr. Bales, thank you for being with us this morning.
DR. JULIAN BALES, WEST VIRGINIA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: Thank you. Good morning. CHETRY: First of all, break down for us, please what they're saying in terms of assessing concussions and how this policy means changes on the field?
BALES: Well, the changes are that the patient cannot, or that the athlete cannot go back to play if he has any symptoms or signs of concussion, either during that game or practice. Also, he must later have a normal neurological examination, a normal neuropsychological examination and also be cleared by an independent physician who is not a part of the official medical staff of the team. So, four big changes that are new.
CHETRY: Go ahead.
BALES: In addition, you know, they emphasize rightly so that the player has to be candid. The player has to come forth, because many of the signs and symptoms of concussion, you don't know that. It's something that they're feeling, you can't see as a trainer or a coach or even a team physician.
CHETRY: Right. It's something that the athlete sort of has to convey to you, and that's where we get into some murky waters. The AP did a survey where nearly a fifth of the players that they asked, NFL players, admitted that they had hidden or played down the effects of a concussion because they wanted to keep playing for their team. So how do you enforce that?
BALES: Well, it's voluntary enforcement. It's as we've often done, trying to get other teammates to suggest if they're worried about someone, a fellow player, not performing, not making their assignments, not acting right. Remember only about one out of 10 concussions in sports is the player knocked out. So 90 percent of the time he or in other sports, like soccer, she is walking around and maybe just confused. Maybe with a memory problem. So it's very subtle.
CHETRY: Yes, it is very subtle. You know, when we talk about how big of a problem this is or why, you know, the league is addressing this. We know there's a University of Michigan study, commissioned by the NFL and part of the study found that Alzheimer's disease or other similar memory-related diseases appear to be diagnosed in former players in the league vastly more than in the general population. A rate of 19 times the normal rate for men ages 30-49. Is this part of an admission by the NFL that concussions from football may lead to permanent brain damage?
BALES: I think we've got a lot of emerging evidence the last few years. The Brain Injury Research Institute here at West Virginia, we have autopsied several players that have shown that. That's the worst-case example. That's what we don't want to happen. But I think it's a culmination of many things. I think the science is emerging and now we know more than ever about the importance of proper and conservative management, if you think someone's had a concussion.
CHETRY: Right. And you were there, you were the team doctor for the Steelers. Some have said the only way to really tackle this is to take the head out of the game. Make changes to the way football is played. Is that something that you think is realistic and we could be moving toward down the road?
BALES: I hope we do. It's going to be difficult. It's traditionally gotten more head into the game as the helmets have gotten bigger and heavier. I think that's an important long-term goal. And I think that I'm afraid that's where we have to go. Commissioner Goodell has implied, also, that rules changes to take the head out of the game will continue.
CHETRY: All right. Dr. Julian Bales, great to talk to you this morning. Thanks for being here.
BALES: Thanks for having me.
CHETRY: Still ahead, a key security post still vacant. Our Jeanne Meserve explains why there's still no head of the TSA. Forty- four minutes past the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning.
Now to a developing story, one of the country's most important national security posts remains vacant this morning. A single senator is holding up confirmation of the man nominated to head the Transportation Security Administration. But why?
Well, as our Jeanne Meserve found, it's politics as usual.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Fifty thousand transportation security officers screen, inspect, question and observe at the nation's airports to keep dangerous people and items off planes. Senator Jim DeMint believes giving them collective bargaining rights would hurt security.
SEN. JIM DEMINT (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Collective bargaining would standardize things across the country, make it much less flexible, much harder for the agency to adapt to changing threats around the world.
MESERVE: Harder, for instance, to react to something like the 2006 plot to blow up airplanes with liquid explosives. Within hours, the TSA ramped up security and changed policy to ban carry-on liquids.
The union representing 12,000 TSOs says DeMint's argument is rubbish, pointing out that employees of the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Federal Protective Service and others all have full union representation.
JOHN GAGE, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES: You know, no one talked about union membership when the cops and the firefighters went up the stairs at 9/11 at the World Trade Towers. No one talks about our two officers, two union members who took down the shooter at Fort Hood. There was nothing in their union membership that stopped them from doing their duty.
MESERVE: During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama wrote the union that giving TSOs collective bargaining rights would be a priority. Unions gave him valuable support in the election.
DEMINT: It's all about politics. It's payback to the unions.
MESERVE: DeMint pushed the issue at a hearing Wednesday.
DEMINT: How can unionization and collective bargaining enhance security at our airports?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, senator, the answer is collective bargaining and security are not mutually exclusive concepts.
MESERVE: DeMint is holding up the confirmation of Erroll Southers to head the TSA to make his point, though Southers has been noncommittal on the union issue, telling Demint he wouldn't recommend anything that would potentially compromise the safety and security of the flying public.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think that the -- the nominee is -- understands the confirmation process and that he doesn't want to say anything controversial.
But, ultimately, once he's confirmed, it's not going to be his choice. It's going to be the -- the choice of the secretary and ultimately the choice of the president, and the president's made it clear where he stands.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MESERVE: Meanwhile, the union is accusing DeMint of jeopardizing security by holding up the confirmation of Southers to fill a critical aviation security position.
Back to you.
CHETRY: And also, you know, Jeanne -- I mean, when you talk about it, obviously, you know, it doesn't look good not to have a leader, not to have, you know, somebody heading up that vital administration, but is it hurting the TSA? Is it hurting the job they're doing?
MESERVE: Well, you know, this is a new agency and I don't think anybody would dispute that the agency would be better off if the administrator was in place.
But, that said, people who I've talked to who are currently in the TSA or who were even in the TSA in the last administration say that things are going pretty well, that the career employees who filled those jobs on a temporary basis are doing a good job and they point specifically to the Thanksgiving travel period, which was extraordinarily busy and went off without any major glitches.
CHETRY: True. All right, Jeanne Meserve for us this morning. Thanks so much.
Let's head to Brussels, Belgium. That's where John is this morning. Hey, John.
ROBERTS: Good morning to you, Kiran.
And here's what's coming up on the next hour of the Most News in the Morning, live here from outside of NATO headquarters.
A Senate report released at the end of last week said that back in December of 2001, Osama Bin Laden was definitely, without question, at Tora Bora and that the United States could have done more at that time to get him, and, by not getting him, allowing him to escape, we've been feeling the repercussions of that ever since.
That Senate report mirrors almost to the word what former CIA operative Gary Bernsten wrote in his famous book, "Jawbreaker: The Story at Tora Bora." Gary Bernsten was there with a small component of CIA officers as well as a small component of special forces. They knew that they had Bin Laden there. He called for reinforcements and was denied.
Gary Bernsten joins us in our next hour to talk more about that and as well his new concerns for about what's going on in Pakistan, how many militants are there really out there and just what is the extent of the secret war that the United States is fighting in Pakistan?
All of that ahead, coming up in our next hour of the Most News in the Morning. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: That's a beautiful shot this morning of New York Central Park.
Welcome back to the Most News in the Morning. Fifty-five minutes past the hour now.
The mammogram guidelines that caused such an uproar last month have been given a thorough examination on Capitol Hill. The task force that issued them is now trying to clear up the confusion about when women should be screened for breast cancer.
We're paging Dr. Gupta, CNN's Chief Medical Correspondent, joins us now from Atlanta. So, it's funny because you and I were both talking to one of the women on that panel, and she's a nurse, and we said to her, are you guys trying -- are you guys going to change your mind? Are you guys going to clarify a little bit? What are they saying now?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I -- I think they were trying to articulate a -- a bit of a clearer message overall about mammograms.
What was interesting about these hearings, though, Kiran, listening to them, is that the discussion really seemed to go toward health care reform, and, more specifically, what -- what recommendations like the ones that came out of the task force or even panels like the task force, what sort of impact they could have on health care reform?
Now the task force really couldn't answer that particular question, but -- but they did try to be a little bit more clear about mammograms. Here's what they said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. DIANA B. PETITTI, VICE CHAIR, US PREVENTATIVE SERVICES TASK FORCE: The task force is saying that screening starting at 40 should not be on automatic nor should it be denied. Many doctors and many women, perhaps even most women, will decide to have mammography screening starting at age 40.
The task force supports those decisions. The task force communication was poor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GUPTA: There are really three major points that I -- that I sort of took away from -- from the hearing from them. They -- they're saying that mammograms, overall, are more effective starting at age 50. It doesn't mean that they're not effective starting at an earlier age.
They're also saying that there is some psychological harm in a woman having what's known as a false positive. So they go to the doctor, they find some sort of abnormality, it leads to biopsy. They say there's some psychological harm to that. And they also say that the -- the decision as to when to begin screening should always be predicated on a conversation between the patient and her doctor.
Part of the issue here, Kiran, I think part of the reason this became so controversial, one is that there's a significant percentage of women in the country who already don't get screened who should be getting screened, and a lot of people fear that this may make those numbers even worse. But also that conversation between the patient and the doctor, it's important to keep in mind that the vast majority of women who get breast cancer never had a risk factor and they don't have any family history.
So it's really hard to sort of siphon out who is the best candidate for a mammogram. It's not a perfect screening test, but -- but it's the best one that we have. And that -- that was sort of the message that came out of there.
CHETRY: The other thing that a lot of people were shocked by in this panel, in the recommendations, is to stop doing self-exams, or that doctors should tell patients to stop with the self-exams.
Some of the reading that -- that we've all done says that -- say that 70 percent of people discovered a lump or discovered their breast cancer through a self-exam. GUPTA: Right. And -- and, you know, I think that there was a -- a fair amount of -- of backpedaling when it came to that as well. You know, if you really look at the language, what they were saying is the time spent to teach someone how to do a proper self-exam, could that time and could those resources be spent better doing something else?
But -- but this is striking right at the heart of the issue. How do you determine if something is going to be medically effective for large populations of people? And that's sort of that constant friction point between public health and between individual risk, and I -- and I think the self-exam really -- really, again, demonstrates that.
CHETRY: You would tell your patients to keep doing self-exams?
GUPTA: I would. And -- and I think that they should be taught how to do that, and I would -- and I think most doctors that I've talked to about this, including, you know, major cancer societies, will continue recommending mammograms starting at age 40 as well.
CHETRY: All right. Sanjay Gupta clearing up some of the confusion this morning for us. Thank you.
GUPTA: Thank you.
CHETRY: And our top stories are coming your way in just 90 seconds. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
