Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Oil Continues to Spread in the Gulf; Obama Administration Expresses Doubt in BP's Ability to Handle Oil Spill Crisis; Royal Access Sting; Airline Summer Fees; "High Cost of College"
Aired May 24, 2010 - 07:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Good Monday morning. Thanks so much for joining us on the Most News in the Morning. The beginning of the week that leads into the first holiday weekend of the summer. It's a big one here. It's the 24th of May. I'm John Roberts.
KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: You're starting early.
ROBERTS: We've got to celebrate these things, you know, long in advance.
CHETRY: Yes, you got --
ROBERTS: Get ready for a little preparation for it.
CHETRY: Good morning to you. I'm Kiran Chetry. We got a lot of big stories we're following for you.
A look at the oil spill and the place you won't see it anywhere else. Our crew got an exclusive tour into the disaster area. Cameras going down more than 200 feet to see what's really happening. We're live in New Orleans next.
ROBERTS: A weekend storm system spawned this monster tornado in South Dakota. Have a look at that. It looks out everything in its path, including the power to a nearby community's tornado sirens. We'll hear some of the sounds from the photographer who took the pictures coming up.
CHETRY: Also the husband of late actress Brittany Murphy's husband found dead in their Hollywood Hills home. The cause of his death is still not clear. The LAPD is investigating.
ROBERTS: And as the oil continues to gush into the Gulf, BP is planning another attempt to stop the leak later on this week, probably Wednesday. The company will call a so-called "top kill." Basically they pump fluid that is denser than water into the site and try to seal it off with cement to hold all that oil down.
CHETRY: Meanwhile, tempers along the gulf coast are reaching a boiling point. Officials in Louisiana, including Governor Bobby Jindal, are demanding more from Washington and the Coast Guard. Governor Jindal says there needs to be a greater sense of urgency.
ROBERTS: This is a live look at the spill as it's happening. At the very least authorities say it's spewing 210,000 gallons a day, that would be 5,000 barrel a day figure that BP has been quoting. But you add in all of the time it has been leaking, more than a month now, that's 7.35 million gallons since the rig blew up.
CHETRY: CNN is the only network with an up close look this morning at what the spill is really doing deep down in the Gulf. Our David Mattingly took a boat and a crew to the mouth of Mississippi River and using special underwater cameras they got an amazing look at what was going on down below.
David joins us live from New Orleans with this CNN exclusive. Good morning, David.
DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Kiran. All along we've been able to see what's been going on with the spill on top the water and, thanks to the live feed from BP cameras at the bottom of the ocean, we can see what's happening at the source at the bottom.
But all of that area in between the massive area within the water column, we've never been able to look and see what's going on in there. The satellites can't look in there. So we went in for our own look and got our own ROV, not the kind like b pmt has been using. It's much smaller, about the size of a suitcase.
We put it into the water and went down 1,000 feet and looked at the water all the way up and down through the water column. The first thing we noticed when we went in was how thick some of this emulsified oil after it's been in contact with the dispersant really is.
We saw that pieces of that oil in those bands that we've come accustomed to seeing that stretch for miles across the ocean, we were able to see those pieces of oil down about 50 feet from the surface of the water.
So that goes down about 50 feet from the surface. Then we continue to go deeper, and what we did, we went all the way down to the bottom. We didn't see an abundance of sea life. We went down do a coral reef 200 feet down. Everything looked to be healthy. We saw a few fish.
We went down to 1,000 feet in one location and there seemed to be a lot of particles flying around down there. We couldn't really identify what they were. We did see some sea life. We didn't see too much that apparently had been disturbed.
But there's a lot of questions about what the long-term effects of oil is going to be as the hydrocarbons continue to pile up in that environment. So we'll get experts to look at our video and see what their trained eye might be seeing that we might have missed.
CHETRY: And the other thing about that video, it's hard to make out exactly what the damage is from seeing it. It's amazing, but can you tell there's been damage done or areas of it that seem to be affected by the oil? MATTINGLY: There's certain some things that look very unnatural down there. When we took our little ROV down a few feet and looked back up at the surface, it doesn't look like water. It looked more like a gel. This was water that was covered with dispersant.
And something we noticed when we were out there this time that was a little bit different than what we had seen about a week ago. About a week ago we saw the emulsified oil and a sheen on top that looked like an oily sheen. Now it looks like a sheen that might be left behind by sort of a dish water detergent. So that might be the dispersant causing the sheen as opposed to the oil.
But the character of the water really seems unusual when you look back up at it, a fish eye view of the surface. It just looked like a gel. It looked like a sort of a thick, sort of substance on top of the water and not like normally what you would see in the water.
CHETRY: Amazing pictures. David Mattingly for us this morning, thank you.
ROBERTS: With the scope of the environmental disaster widening with each minute, Wednesday is shaping up to be a critical day for BP. That's when the so-called "top kill" operation is expected to begin. What you're looking at now is a live picture from BP of the leak some 5,000 feet down in the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.
The oil giant is hoping to plug the gushing well, first of all, with heavy mud, followed by cement. Earlier on "AMERICAN MORNING," BP's chief operating officer for exploration and production Doug Suttles put the odds of success of the top kill operation at slightly better than 50/50.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOUG SUTTLES, COO FOR EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION, BP: The challenge here is what we don't know, the details you can't measure when something is on the sea bed. I've been asked this before and people have asked me on a scale of one to ten what would I say. It's not a 10. It's not that certain. It's about a five and in my own personal view about a six or seven.
We're going to give it every shot and make sure everything is ready before we go because we need it to work.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTS: The White House meantime is coming down on BP this morning, bashing the oil giant for taking too long to stop the oil leak in the Gulf. Our Ed Henry is live at the White House for us this morning. And Interior Secretary Salazar visited BP headquarters yesterday and had some pretty choice words for the oil giant when he emerged from that meeting. What did he say?
ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, John. You're right, he jumped all over BP, suggesting he doesn't have complete trust in the company because of shifting statements about how quickly they were going to get on top of this.
I think it's fascinating when you look at this because just a few days ago Robert Gibbs last Thursday and Friday was really pressed by reporters in the White House press corps about why doesn't the government step in here, why is it relying on BP?
And Gibbs repeatedly said because of existing law, the government can't step in. It's the company that's responsible. And practically speaking, he said the government did not have the equipment to do what the company can do. And yet yesterday, the interior secretary Ken Salazar said just the opposite. He said the government may have to step in after all.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEN SALAZAR, INTERIOR SECRETARY: I am angry and I am frustrated that BP has been unable to stop this well from leaking. If we find they are not doing what they are supposed to be doing, we'll push them out of the way appropriately and move forward to make sure everything is being done to protect the people of the Gulf coast.
Do I have confidence that they know exactly what they are doing? No, not completely. Since the incident began I promised we would keep our boot on BP's neck, and in the past few weeks we have absolutely been doing that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HENRY: They have said that repeatedly, the administration, that they're going to keep the boot on the throat of BP. But the longer this drags on the more that will really be in question about how much pressure the government has been putting on the company.
To give you an idea of the heat the administration is feeling right now, the president's schedule now today will have a conference call at noon. This is a call that's been going on frequently with administration officials and BP and others in the region trying to figure the situation out.
Today the president will get on the call today talking to governors in the region affected by all this, this call, with governors to make sure that they are sending the image that the administration is on top of it.
ROBERTS: Let me come back to what Salazar said. He said if they don't get on the stick here, the government will push them out of the way appropriately. Did anybody say, "And do what, Mr. Secretary?"?
HENRY: That's a good question. We were pressing Robert Gibbs late last week on that very point, and he repeatedly said the government doesn't really have the kind of equipment that the company does, so you can't just step in here thousands of feet below the surface and just take care of this.
So if the company can't take care of it, how can the government? Presumably if the government had better ideas than BP, they would have jumped in sooner.
ROBERTS: Sounds good in front of a microphone, doesn't it, Ed?
HENRY: Sure does.
ROBERTS: Thank you. Ed Henry, this morning.
CHETRY: There's a strange and sad twist this morning in the story of late actress Brittany Murphy. Police say her husband Simon Monjack was found dead in his bedroom last night. It is not clear how the 39-year old screenwriter died. There you see him in an interview with Larry King with Brittany's mother Sharon as they talked about their grief at the loss of Brittany.
Police say they found him unconscious and still trying to determine the cause of death.
ROBERTS: It was five months ago that Murphy herself went into cardiac arrest at their Hollywood home, died from what coroners say was a mix of pneumonia, iron deficiency, and whole bevy of prescription drugs.
CHETRY: Also new this morning, President Obama is backing South Korea's response toward North Korea. Seoul is cutting trade, closing off its waters, and promising Pyongyang will pay a price for sinking one of its warships in March. South Korea's president is also asking the U.N. Security Council to respond.
North Korea is denying any involvement in the attack.
ROBERTS: It was a white knuckle weather moment. A couple captured this massive twister. The storm even knocked out tornado sirens across Edmund County. Authorities say thankfully, though, no one was hurt. Look at those pictures. Wow
CHETRY: It's hard to believe no one was hurt when you look at that.
ROBERTS: The Duchess of York has landed herself in a pot the hot water. Fergie's money troubles may have pushed her into at least trying to take a bribe. Just ahead find out how she's handling the accusation from a British tabloid and the royal reaction to a right royal controversy this morning. It's 11 minutes after the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Developing story out of London this morning. The Duchess of York accused of a royal indiscretion after a British tabloid posted a video showing Sarah Ferguson offering to sell access to her ex-husband, Prince Andrew. According to the videotape and the story, she wanted some 500,000 British pounds, which is a little more than $700,000.
CHETRY: The prince denies knowing anything about it and Fergie herself says he did not. The palace says he's always been a man of integrity. She's falling on her sword, calling the video "embarrassing and inexcusable."
Our Phil Black is live outside of Buckingham Palace, and they're having some sort of emergency meeting about how to deal with this, right?
PHIL BLACK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We believe so. We understand that the Duke of York is returning to London today. That is Prince Andrew, Fergie's ex-husband, and is likely to hold a meeting here at Buckingham Palace. This is just the latest Fergie scandal for the tabloids and it is a big one.
Let me show you the paper concerned. This is it, "Fergie Sells Andy for 500K." As you mentioned, that's British pounds, a bit over U.S. $700,000.
This wasn't just a newspaper story though. This was a sophisticated sting operation involving an undercover reporter posing as a wealthy businessman who managed to infiltrate her public circle and set up a series of meetings during which the offer was made for her to introduce him to her ex-husband but at a price.
During a final meeting that took place, with the hidden cameras rolling and the video highlights released by the "News of the World" on their Web site show Fergie at first demanding $40,000 as a deposit. She receives that money there on the table in front of the cameras and she makes the further demand that U.S. $700,000 to pull off the deal to set these two guys up, introduce him to her ex-husband, to his contacts, and provide access to the information that Prince Andrew has, as this country's special representative for trade and investment.
It's an unpaid job that he does for the service of the British people and the idea of Fergie cashing in on that in this very, it would seem, dishonest way, has not gone done well in this country.
ROBERTS: So, Phil, I mean, what might happen here? Obviously, this was a newspaper that did this. It wasn't like it was Scotland Yard that did it, so there's going to be no, I take it, criminal investigation or criminal liability here.
And -- I mean, she's already sort of kind of out of the royal family, even though she still lives in the royal residence with Andrew. What could potentially happen to her here?
BLACK: Well, this sort of method of entrapment, if you like, is often used as an investigative technique by the British media -- across the British media to great effect. But it is used most often by the "News of the World" -- most often and to greatest effect. No doubt.
It's unclear if she has broken any law here. But she has certainly behaved in a way that even for an ostracized member of the family as she is, is not acceptable. So, it's a bad look. It has brought great embarrassment to the royal family. Prince Andrew has had to disassociate himself from it.
To what extent she is able to weather this storm now remains to be seen -- John, Kiran.
ROBERTS: No wonder the queen always looks like she has a headache. What do you think?
Phil, thanks very much.
Wow.
CHETRY: I know -- it's unbelievable. They still live in the same house. She rents a room in his royal residence.
ROBERTS: Because that's why she needs the money.
CHETRY: Yes.
ROBERTS: New airline fees just in time for summer. Our Christine Romans lays them all out for you coming up next. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC)
CHETRY: Welcome back. Christine Romans is here "Minding Your Business" and she is talking about summer travel. If you're flying, consider it all one big peak.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: How can you -- as my friend here in the New York once says, how can you have a peak when there are no valleys? How can it all be a peak?
Of the summer, 74 days, how many days do you think the airlines are going to consider peak travel days?
ROBERTS: Seventy-two?
ROMANS: Seventy-three -- all but one of them. July 4th is the only day, because it is traditionally the least traveled day of the summer. That's the only day you will not be hit with big fees, surcharges for peak travel days this summer when you do your summer travel. This is, according to Rick Seaney at FareCompare.com. He analyzed all this for "USA Today." It's on the front page of paper today and will likely make you spit out your coffee.
The most -- the biggest fees, $30 on Sunday, because that is the most traveled day. On Monday, you can -- if you travel on a Monday, $20. Tuesday and Wednesday, relatively cheap, $10 each way. Thursday and Friday, $20 each for a family of four that works out to about $240 extra for a roundtrip to see grandma this summer.
Let's talk about who's doing this. This is from June 10th to August 22nd. Again, just about every single day, there will be these surcharges -- America Delta, Continental, United and U.S. Airways. There are a small number of sale fares -- a small number of sale fares that will not be included and Southwest and JetBlue, for the record, have no surcharges on any flights. Can I see the steam coming out of your ears now, John?
ROBERTS: Oh, you know, I'm just -- I'm so sick of this whole thing, the way that they play the fare game online because I travel a lot, right? So, you go on a particular airline that I travel a lot's Web site and the ticket will be one price. Then an hour later, as more people log on to start taking a look, you know, because you're getting into peak periods, suddenly, the fare goes up 100 bucks.
ROMANS: And this is why --
ROBERTS: Then in the middle of the night it goes back down.
ROMANS: Right. And the reason they do this and --
ROBERTS: I know what they're doing.
ROMANS: -- they say for the summer fares that, administratively, it's easier just to like slap on fares on certain days when they know they're going to be able to get more revenue and then not -- you know, make it just a total fare increase.
Also -- I also think that people don't really realize it and then suddenly, they're like, wow, the trip was at 240 bucks more than I thought it is going to be. This -- you know, this makes people crazy.
CHETRY: But the bottom line is the airlines are still losing money, right? They're still losing money hand over fist.
ROMANS: Oh, yes. Exactly. And that's the bottom line. They are going to way a fee you.
We were saying it is nickel and dime. But now you're being tenned (ph) and twentied (ph), you know? I mean, you're going to be tenned and twentied pretty much on everything you're going to do with the airlines for the foreseeable future.
One airline does it. All of them jump in. And this is just the way it is.
ROBERTS: It's a vicious game and, you know, the consumer is the one that gets screwed and it's just no way to run an airline.
ROMANS: Gas prices are down 5 percent over the past few weeks, maybe you should just drive. I don't know.
CHETRY: There you go.
ROMANS: Make your voice to hear it. I don't know.
ROBERTS: Long way to drive back and forth.
ROMANS: I know John is live drive, wow, that's going to eat up all of my travel time.
(LAUGHTER) ROBERTS: Christine Romans this morning -- thanks.
You know, it's almost like Jim Carrey in, was it, "Liar, Liar," right, when he tries to get his car back?
CHETRY: Exactly.
ROBERTS: Next, we begin a weeklong series in the cost of college. A lot of American families facing very tough choices in this recession: pay top dollar for their kids to attend prestigious universities or search for bargain tuitions.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Time now for an "A.M. Original," something that you will see only on AMERICAN MORNING.
CHETRY: Are you eating something?
ROBERTS: I got a little bit of muffin in my mouth there.
CHETRY: Let me just do it here.
ROBERTS: Sorry. Go ahead.
CHETRY: It's all right. You keep chewing. It usually happens to me, not you.
College costs skyrocketing and a recession raging, and it's not just about getting into the best school these days.
For many students and their cash-strapped parents, prestige is actually taking a back seat to price. Alina Cho is here with the first part of our weeklong series, "The Cost of College".
And, boy, a lot of people are now --
ALINA CHO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What do you think, John?
CHETRY: It used to be a no-brainer that if, you know, you're going to graduate, if you did well, you're going to go to college. Now, people have to rethink that because of the financials.
CHO: Yes. I mean, listen, you know, when you're watching your dollar and every single one, every single last penny, what you do is you're comparison shopping, right? And that's exactly what these kids and parents are doing these days.
Here's a lot of -- good morning, guys -- more and more kids are graduating from college. They can't find a job and many are in debt. At the same time, colleges and universities are feeling the pinch, too. Endowments are down. So, tuition in many cases is up.
So, what we're finding is that some kids these days are actually turning down top tier schools in the name of value.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHO (voice-over): Liam Coffey is a college admission officer's dream -- valedictorian, varsity hockey, honor society. His pick of schools -- he got into Boston College, was wait-listed at Brown and Cornell, but his choice, TCNJ, The College of New Jersey, a state school.
LIAM COFFEY, FUTURE TCNJ STUDENT: Four years at TCNJ is less than one year of Boston College. That right there is -- the point that sold me.
CHO: Especially now.
DENNIS COFFEY, LIAM'S FATHER: But I think with this economy, it's a lot more real to the kids and the parents because the money is just not flowing the way it used to.
CHO (on camera): The reality is, in this economy, kids can't find work. So, in growing numbers, they are going to or staying in school. Seven in 10 high school grads now go straight to college. That's a record.
But they're also paying more. Average cost at a private institution, including room and board, is more than $35,000 a year. At the public school, it's $15,000. It's why the buzz word these days is value.
(voice-over): Liam's school, where application were up 8 percent this year, even has a value comparison calculator on its Web site. Prospective students can click on any number of schools in competition with TCNJ and see just how much money they'll save over four years. In some cases, it's more than $100,000.
LISA ANGELONI, DEAN OF ADMISSIONS, TCNJ: We do say that this is what you're going to get for that dollar.
CHO (on camera): Value.
ANGELONI: That's right, and it's comparable.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm able to sit back and relax, at the end of the day I have extra cash, you know, to go out on the weekend or see a movie or something that, you know, just --
CHO: Have a life.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
CHO (voice-over): Other institutions, like Manchester College in Indiana, are offering three-year bachelor's programs as a way to save on time and tuition. Cost-conscious community colleges are bursting at the seams.
But what about the prestige of an Ivy League education? Doesn't a Harvard degree mean something? JACQUES STEINBERG, NY TIMES EDUCATION REPORTER: We still live in a world where these institutions do open doors. It's not the only way into some of the finest companies and graduate schools in this nation, but it is still a way.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's your college list right there.
CHO (on camera): That's still entree, right? Did you ever think about that?
D. COFFEY: Well, I'm not going to lie. We wrestle with that a lot. And I think that there's a lot of peer pressure to say among his friends and our friends to say, wow, why aren't you letting him go to Boston College? Or, you know, why didn't -- weren't you more aggressive in going to one of the Ivys?
CHO (voice-over): For Liam, first in his class, it's a choice that makes dollars and cents. He's planning to go to medical school and wants to start in the black.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was just looking for a great education, whatever school that may be. And at a better value, that's just more reason to go.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And they're calling it Ivy School on a budget. So it's a great education for less than half the cost.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHO: In fact, some are asking whether college is even necessary these days. Jack Steinberg, the Education reporter at "The New York Times" told us of the 30 fastest growing jobs in this country, guys, only seven require bachelor's degrees. So you do have to wonder, parents and kids are asking that question.
Having said that, three out of four kids who get into Harvard still go. Six out of 10 kids who get into UPenn, still go. So the Ivies are hardly suffering, but as his Liam's dad says, "listen, the money I can save over four years, I'll buy Liam, a car and a house."
So people are asking that question more and more these days, especially when kids are having trouble finding jobs when they graduate.
JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, I'm intrigued, what are these jobs that don't require a bachelor's education?
CHO: I mean, you know, a lot of them are more technically minded, right? So what you're finding is in this economy, many, many kids are going to community colleges and they're going there for two years. Maybe they'll decide later they'll go on for a bachelor degree, right?
CHETRY: Right. There's a lot in the health - in the health care field -
CHO: That's right.
CHETRY: Technical field and also information.
CHO: And another part of this is in this economy, guys, people are losing jobs and people at the lower end are disproportionately losing their jobs, right? So they're going back to school. A degree means more, right? They are going to community college and they're saying, listen, I'm not missing out on a job on $7 an hour. I can go to school. You know.
CHETRY: Something to think about.
CHO: A lot to think about.
CHETRY: Thanks, Alina.
CHO: You bet.
CHETRY: We're crossing the half hour right now.
Time for a look at the top stories. A look at the huge oil spill in the gulf that you won't see anywhere else. Our David Mattingly had a chance to use special under water cameras to gets an incredible view of the damage down below. It's been 35 days since the big well explosion and later this week BP will try the latest move to cap the gusher, that procedure that they're going to be attempting is called a top kill.
ROBERTS: Can a drug that didn't work as an anti-depressant actually make a woman happy enough that she wants to have sex? An FDA panel next month will consider giving its seal of approval to the first, I guess you can call it, Viagra for women. The pill was ineffective for the treatment of depression but the drug did produce an unexpected side effect, which was to boost a woman's libido.
CHETRY: And secretary of state Hillary Clinton calling on North Korea to change its behavior to avoid "the kind of escalation that would be very regrettable." Seoul accusing the north of sinking a South Korean warship.
ROBERTS: South Korean president Lee Myung Bak is telling Pyongyang that there will be a price to pay for that attack, which North Korea continues to deny. The White House also weighing in this morning.
Our senior international correspondent John Vause is live in Seoul, South Korea. He's got the very latest. Good morning, John.
JOHN VAUSE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, John. President Lee Myung Bak decided to address the nation from this country's war memorial. There's a last minute change of venue, a deliberate message being sent not just to the people of South Korea but also to the north that further attacks will not be tolerated.
As a result this country's military capabilities will be upgraded. Already trade has been suspended. That will hurt the North Korean economy. Trade between south and north, worth about a billion U.S. dollars. Lee Myung Bak also saying that South Korea will close its sea lanes to all North Korean ships. He wants an apology and he even talked about regime change. And he wants to take North Korea to the U.N. Security Council for some kind of international condemnation. It was a very strong response from President Lee, probably the strongest he could deliver, short of ordering some kind of military strike. John.
ROBERTS: So John, is this a step towards all-out war? They never really did sign a peace agreement there. It's been a cease fire since the Korean War in the mid 1950s. Could this ratchet up tensions to the point that they trip over that line?
VAUSE: Yes, well it certainly is a step towards further conflict and that really is now up to Kim Jong Il. You have to look at what's happening inside North Korea to try and work out what's going to happen next. A lot of analysts are saying that what's happening there, you have an ailing leader, Kim Jong-Il, in poor health. He wants to transfer power to his son.
But to do that he needs the support of the hard line military. And so he's backed into a corner, like he may be right now, the unpredictable nature in all these is that he could lash out. The more immediate concern, analysts say look for the next flash point could be in the Korean Strait with South Korea banning North Korean ships from all of its waters.
The North Korean government could try and test the resolve of the South Koreans by sending a ship there. That's the next point to look for. John.
ROBERTS: John Vause for us this morning in Seoul, South Korea. John, thanks so much.
CHETRY: Well, the next chapter in the red hot Texas text book debate, the latest move by the board of education igniting passions on both sides. We're going to talk to somebody who helped implement those changes and former education secretary who is very against it. 35 minutes past the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
CHETRY: 38 minutes past the hour right now.
It's time to get a check on this morning's weather headlines. Reynolds Wolf is in Atlanta this morning where he's following some pretty severe weather, at least, we saw the pictures from the tornadoes -
REYNOLDS WOLF, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Absolutely.
CHETRY: And it's amazing no one has hurt. They were huge.
WOLF: Well, it was a perfect tornado. When I say that, I mean that it took place out in the open country, far from many communities, which is great. Whenever you see these things form, you want them out in the middle of nowhere. That was certainly the situation, the only good there.
Today, it's not so good as we're beginning to see the Atlantic begin to heat up I know it's hurricane preparedness week. And this season actually gets underway and goes through November 30th but we're already seeing some development out of the Atlantic. Just to keep your bearings. Here's the eastern seaboard. Here's Florida. We're watching this area of rotation, this area of development.
This may become a tropical system in a very short order. And if it becomes a named storm, the storm is going to be named after Alex. You'll notice all the squiggly lines popping up all over the screen. These are your computer models. And all of them in agreement that the storm remains off the eastern seaboard, which is great news but still something to watch especially this time of year.
You know, Kiran was talking a moment ago about some rough weather we had yesterday. We could see again possibly more of that in parts of the central and northern plains, much in the same area where we had the rough weather yesterday. All due to the area of low pressure that frontal boundary extends southwards into the panhandle of Texas.
And on the other side of that, the back half, we could see very breezy conditions, very low humidity too, which is picture perfect for the fires in New Mexico to continue to develop. So that's something to watch out for. Farther to the north, we're not talking about the heat and the fire, we're talking about the possibility of some snowfall, some possibly heavy up to a foot in parts of the Central Rockies, northern Rockies.
The West Coast looks pretty good. The eastern seaboard not bad, until you get into the outer banks of North Carolina and then parts of Georgia. You could see some scattered showers and in parts of New York it should be picture perfect. Temperatures though a little bit on the warm side. Take a look of what we got for you in the map, as we take a look in the next 15 seconds or so. 88 degrees for St. Louis, 85 in Atlanta, 71 in New York, 91 in Tampa, 65 in Denver and 54 in San Francisco. Temperatures along the Eastern half of the country anywhere form 10 to 15 degrees above normal. On the back half, just the opposite, about 15 degrees shy from where we should be this time of the year.
And you are now up to speed with your forecast. Coming up, we're going to take a look at travel weather. (Inaudible) smack at the center of the country, just be advised and be patient. Back to you, guys.
CHETRY: We'll try. We heard hurricane season might come early too.
WOLF: Absolutely.
CHETRY: All right. Thanks, Reynolds.
WOLF: You bet.
CHETRY: We're going to be talking about, of course, the big firestorm of controversy over some of the changes approved by the Texas board of education with their textbooks. They are the orders of millions of textbooks and possibly could trickle to other states as well students there.
We're going to be speaking to the board member who supports these changes and also former education secretary Rod Paige, who calls them ignorant. We'll be right back. 41 minutes past the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHETRY: Welcome back to the most news in the morning. It's 43 minutes past the hour right now. And the Texas textbook war continues. A very controversial move. The State Board of Education dominated by conservative Republican Christians overhauled its existing social studies and history curriculum.
Educators and political activists across the country are furious about the changes. Joining us now, Texas State Board of Education member Dr. Don McLeroy and also Ron Paige, secretary of education from 2001 to 2005. Thanks to both of you for being with us this morning.
Just to give us a little bit more clarity about this debate right now. Secretary Paige, you feel very strongly because you wrote an op- ed last week calling the changes, saying that they "institutionalize ignorance." Those are some pretty strong words, why are you so concerned about these changes that the Texas board of education has made to some of the textbooks?
ROD PAIGE, FMR. SECRETARY OF EDUCATION: In the first place, we need to deal with the core issue. The core issue is political ideology filtering down in what we teach our children. And our children deserve an authentic expression of history, not somebody's political ideas.
CHETRY: Dr. McLeroy.
PAIGE: And by the way -
CHETRY: Go ahead.
PAIGE: This didn't just begin with this current board of education in Texas, this goes all the way back to 1999. This current board feels itself adjusting the mistakes that were made 10 years ago.
CHETRY: And you take most exception to what you say is a diminishing of the civil rights struggle as well as - as being a major factor in the - in the inner history of our nation, you believe that they are trying to minimize that and play up some of the other things that have a negative connotation, at least what - what most of us learned, for example, Senator John McCarthy and McCarthyism.
PAIGE: Yes, absolutely, especially civil rights struggle and slavery. In fact, they try to get around and use the term slavery, the slavery, and instead use the term the Atlantic triangular trade. And this is an example of just not expressing history as it actually happened.
CHETRY: But I want to get Dr. McElroy's point of view on this. Why did you think that these changes, even the majority of the board in Texas, think that these changes were necessary? And how do you respond to some of the criticism that you guys are politicizing history?
MCELROY: Well, first of all, we are I think bringing balance to history. Secretary Paige has testified to us the other day and he said, you know, let's get that pendulums down the middle. Let's make sure we're not (INAUDIBLE) -
PAIGE: Yes.
MCELROY: ... people over the left, people over the right. Well, I think that's what we've done. We've got the pendulum, I think, steadied that we are presenting an accurate - accurate view of history.
Second thing to the specifics of the Atlantic slave trade, the word slavery is now inserted twice in that statement. They're very accurate in the civil rights movement. We talked about the key organizations, the key individuals, the key legislation, the key approaches to the civil rights. There's plenty of good coverage in the civil rights movement.
As far as the McCarthyism, McCarthyism has been in there. It's always been in there and the - the amendment that we finally passed was made up one of the, quote, "moderate" board members that passed the -
CHETRY: That requires a more at least -
MCELROY: -- all we did was (INAUDIBLE).
CHETRY: -- tell me it - that requires a more positive portrayal of Senator Joseph McCarthy and his claims about the U.S. being in -
MCELROY: What is inaccurate?
CHETRY: That's not accurate? He's not portrayed in a more positive light?
MCELROY: No. It's not even mentioned but McCarthyism is. No, no. It's just been on the papers where they show there were Soviet infiltration of our government.
CHETRY: OK. And another question I have about that was the Atlantic triangular trade is what - it was supposed to be changed to and that was then rescinded. And as you said, slave trade was put back in. Was that because of the outcry of trying to remove the term slavery? MCELROY: I think it's - and also education, people understanding why that amendment has been made and it was inaccurate and it was better to place it the other way.
The good news about the Texas process as compared to national standards is it's an open process. We've had - out of, you know, hours and hours of public testimony we've had things that have been able to be corrected. So, I'm - I'm proud to put my name on the standards and I don't see that they, really, reflect a big ideological switch.
CHETRY: Secretary Paige, what are your biggest concerns about these changes? I mean, the Texas superintendent - the Texas school board says they are able to have an open debate about this, that each year they're required to make changes to the - to the standards of these textbooks and may make changes and update them and they believe that they were actually just making history more accurate in their point of view.
PAIGE: That's right. And I think it's unfair to just lay the full responsibility on this current board of education. You've got to look at it in terms of what happened in 1999, when the previous standards were adopted.
In fact, a lot of the members of the current board were elected based on what happened in 1999, and they have actually made some corrections. But what we have now is a collage of different ideas coming from laypersons who are not experts in history nor education. And what we want is an authentic articulation of what actually happened by creditable historians and expert educators.
CHETRY: And what about that criticism? How do you respond to that, Dr. McElroy? I know that in other interviews you've said, you're right, I'm not a professional historian. I'm a dentist by - by, you know, trade. But you said it's important that - that you guys on the board because you've been elected have a say on this. But do you worry sometimes that - that perhaps the most accurate portrayal is best left to people who study this for a living?
MCELROY: Well, I do think we have a very accurate portrayal. But frankly it was in 1995, the U.S. - January of 1995, the U.S. Senate condemned national history standards by the, quote, "experts" with a vote of 99 to one. So this controversy with experts in history is not new.
I think we've really done a really good job. We've gotten so much input that we really have got strong standards.
I think one of the - one standard that I'm most proud of and one that I'm really glad to see is actually - and so actually (ph) compare and contrast the language of the first amendment, religious protections, the establishment and free exercise clause, with the phrase separation of church and state.
The second thing that I really am proud of our new standards is they've given emphasis on the founders, the founding documents on the principles on which America was great, and then that follows and led to what we would referred to in the new standard called American exceptionalism.
We have a standard that has the students evaluate the mottos of "In God We Trust", "E Pluribus Unum," "Out of Many, One". I believe we - our students deserve to know the original course on which this country was founded that led to such an exceptional country that we live in and they would be taught that. That's why I'm so excited and proud to put my name on the standards.
CHETRY: And Secretary Paige, why do you believe, though, as you said, that this puts Texas students at a competitive disadvantage once they move on to higher education or a job market?
PAIGE: Right. I wouldn't argue that there aren't some good things in the current standards. That's not the point at all. The point is, we've allowed our educational system to become captive to political thinking, both this particular current board and the one in 1999 that this board is responding to.
So it's the concept of we are letting politics take over our education. And it doesn't matter which spectrum and where that spectrum falls, to the right or left. We want - want it to be free as possible, our political ideologies, depending on who got elected to the state board at that particular time.
CHETRY: All right.
PAIGE: That's the point. That's the main point.
CHETRY: Secretary Rod Paige and Dr. Don McElroy from the Texas Board of Education, I want to thank both of you for being with us this morning.
MCELROY: Well, thank you.
PAIGE: Thank you.
ROBERTS: Well, some of the biggest names in sports have dealt with it - concussions. They're serious. They can end a player's career and have effects that last a lifetime. We're talking about the push for better laws in professional sports regarding brain injury.
It's 51 and a half minutes after the hour.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERT: Fifty-three and a half minutes after the hour.
Football and brain injuries. That's the focus of a House judiciary hearing today, and sitting front and center, California Congresswoman Linda Sanchez. She's been blowing the whistle on the health risks of concussions and trying to get the rules changed. She's with us this morning.
And also joining us, former NFL player, Nolan Harrison. He's testifying as well today after playing for ten seasons suffering several concussions.
Good to see both of you.
This is an important issue, obviously, that we've been following a lot, you know, each and every little development, and we talked to you about it last fall when the House hearings were taking place.
Nolan, let me start with you, though. Your playing career, how many times did you suffer a concussion and - and each and every time that that happened, were you under pressure to get back out there on the field?
NOLAN HARRISON, RETIRED NFL PLAYER: There's always pressure to get back out on the field. I suffered a couple of major concussions, the last one being against the Eagles. Herschel Walker kneed me in the side of the head as I was trying to tackle him. If you know about Herschel, you go low on him, but sometimes you do get the worst end of the stick and I don't remember anything after the game.
But there was no push to keep me out afterwards. I practiced the rest of the week, the next week, and played.
But I still, to this day, don't have any recollection of what happened after that hit.
ROBERTS: You know, sort of the ethos in - in any professional sport is you play hurt but you're not supposed to play injured. But where is that line, and who determines that?
HARRISON: Well, I think the pressure, whether it's from the locker room, from peers. You know, from '91 to 2001, when I played, you know, you're supposed to be the human juggernaut. You're supposed to play and you have to do that to keep your job and - and to keep things going. It's - it was the culture.
ROBERTS: Congresswoman Sanchez, as the result of the hearing last year, the NFL has made some changes, such as to have a doctor on the sidelines of every game to examine one of the players if they have a concussion.
Roger Goodell said, quote, "The NFL is taking a much more aggressive approach in recent years in identifying and treating concussions among our own players. We've implemented an awareness campaign to make certain that everyone in the league, including payers and coaches, is better equipped to identify concussion symptoms." He's the commissioner of the NFL.
Are you satisfied with everything they've done?
REP. LINDA SANCHEZ (D), CALIFORNIA: Well, they kind of came to this stance a little bit late. For years, they've denied any kind of link between repeated trauma to the head and brain damage. And, finally, as a result, I think, of the Congressional hearings, they had to step up and admit the link, although that's - they still want to fund studies to be absolutely sure. But the majority of independent research shows that that's the case. They have made in the last seven months, since - since the first real hearing to - to spotlight the issue - have made some tremendous strides, but there's still a lot more that needs to be done. And as far as I'm concerned, that's why we continue to have these hearings to check the progress on the NFL.
ROBERTS: Are you satisfied, Nolan? Is there more, as the congresswoman says, to be done?
HARRISON: There is a lot more to be done. We still don't have, in my opinion, or I haven't seen in writing any team that has a specific arbitrary or independent neurologist that's there to judge these guys. There's still no parameters in place on the sidelines that you can say, OK, this guy has had this type of a hit. We're going to keep him out for a certain amount of time.
If you don't take that out of the coach's hands, the trainer's hands, the doctor's hands, who are paid by the teams -
ROBERTS: So even though they have doctors, you say they're still not independent?
HARRISON: No, they're not. They're not. And there needs to be an independent person to look out for these players because the culture still exists to where we have to go back out and finish the game.
ROBERTS: So - so how do you achieve independence? Obviously somebody has got to pay the doctor's salary.
SANCHEZ: Right. Well, they announced that they were going to have independent doctors evaluate, but - but that's the question is how independent are these doctors, really? And, you know, are players -
ROBERTS: You know, unless the government were to pay for them, who - who else might -
SANCHEZ: I don't think taxpayers would really be crazy about that idea.
ROBERTS: So can you ever really have an independent neurologist on the sidelines of a football game?
SANCHEZ: Well, possibly you could if the player's association and the - and the NFL were to negotiate something like that. Or maybe it's jointly paid by -- by the two. That could be one potential scenario.
But the question of independence has been a problem that's plagued the NFL for quite some time.
ROBERTS: And something we're going to hear about today at the hearing, again, Roger Goodell sent a letter to 44 governors, urging them to - to adopt Lystedt's Law, which is named after Zackery Lystedt. He was a middle school student in Washington State who had a really bad concussion in a middle school football game, played after that.
So he's saying, you know, please adopt this law. Its' a great thing for young players to be looked after.
It's one thing to say, OK, fine let's do it when kids are young, but what about the pros? Isn't this all about the pros and this adds a little bit of a - of a deflection to have them say, oh, look. We're - we're all for making sure that these young players, very important as well, get appropriate medical treatment, but if you're not doing it yourself, are you really following through to the end of the chain?
SANCHEZ: Well, the important thing to remember here is the NFL is a moneymaker and people profit at the expense, unfortunately, of players, and what we've seen with the NFL is young kids in sports at all levels emulate their favorite players. And if the NFL isn't doing things correctly, it's - you have very little chance that it will trickle down, you know, to youth sports like it should.
So the NFL really needs to - to take the lead and really highlight safety.
ROBERTS: And one last quick point, if we could, Nolan. There's been an undefined link between concussion and dementia. We've seen what's happened to some NFL players over the years.
What do you think about that? Have you noticed that your - your cognitive functioning has decreased at all as a result of the concussions you suffered?
HARRISON: I'm OK with mine, but I have, you know, teammates and - and old friends that have gone through the situations and they are suffering. They're not the same men that they were when we played. And I think that's a problem and I think as time goes on, it's going to be a more significant problem.
That's why things like the legacy fund that we've talked about are really, really important, because the cost to take care of these guys to make sure that they're going to have the kind of lifestyle they need and the treatment that they have is going to go up and that needs to be addressed. The NFL hasn't done it.
ROBERTS: No, again, this is a very important issue for us. We'll keep on following it closely. Great to see you this morning. Thanks for coming in.
SANCHEZ: Thanks, John.
ROBERTS: We'll be watching the hearing today.
HARRISON: Thank you.
ROBERTS: Top stories coming your way right after the break. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
