Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Autism Study A Fraud; People's Choice Awards Winners; Schools Implementing Four-day School Week; Dr. Conrad Murray Hearing; Tech Geeks Rejoice
Aired January 06, 2011 - 10:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Jeff, Thank you very much. I thought that was Rob Marciano sitting over there. I'm so used to him being there. But thank you, sir. Happy new year to you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Same to you.
LEMON: All right.
It is 10:00 a.m. on the East Coast, 7:00 a.m. on the west. I'm Don Lemon, Kyra's off today. Here's some of the stories that have us talking right now. This morning an investigation is underway into yesterday's shooting death of a teenager near the U.S.-Mexico boarder in Arizona. The FBI says border patrol agents were trying to arrest alleged drug smugglers when one agent allegedly fired on a bystander who was throwing rocks. Mexican authorities says the agent actually open fire when the teen tried to scale the fence.
A 55-year-old American woman is under arrest in Iran, charged with spying. Local media outlet's said she entered from Armenia without a visa and hid spying equipment on her teeth. Iran has held two other Americans on spying charges since 2009.
Elizabeth Edwards has left everything to her children. Her will makes no mention of her estranged husband, former presidential candidate, John Edwards. Months after withdrawing from that race he admitted his infidelity.
For years, doctors, researchers and parents have been searching for clues to the cause of autism. Most in the medical community reject the idea of a link to childhood vaccinations. But one physician, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and his supporters hold fast to that link. Now a "British Medical Journal" says Wakefield falsified data for his research.
In an exclusive interview on CNN's "AC 360," Wakefield shot back at his accusers.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Sir, according to this new report, not only did you do a study that was scientifically and ethically flawed but it was "an elaborate fraud." An award-winning investigative journalist Brian Deer said that you and I quote "altered numerous facts about patients' medical histories to support your claims of identifying a new syndrome" and that you also "sought to exploit the scare among parents for financial gain. How do you respond?
DR. ANDREW WAKEFIELD, AUTHORED AUTISM STUDY: Well, you know, I had to put up with this man's false allegations for many, many years. I've written a book -
COOPER: But this is not just one man. This is published in the "British Medical Journal."
WAKEFIELD: And I have not yet had a chance to read that but I have read his multiple allegations on many occasions. He is a hitman. He has been brought in to take me down because they are very, very concerned about the adverse reactions to vaccines that are occurring in children.
COOPER: Wait a minute. Let me stop you there. You say he is a hitman and he has brought in by they? Who is they? Who is he a hit man for? He is an independent journalist who has won many awards.
WAKEFIELD: Yes and he is, you know, who brought this man in? Who is paying this man? I don't know. But I do know for sure that he is not a journalist like you are.
COOPER: He actually has signed a document guaranteeing that he has no financial interest on any of this or any financial connections to any one who has an interest in this.
WAKEFIELD: That is interesting that he should say that. Because he was supported in his investigation by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, which is funded directly and exclusively by the pharmaceutical industries.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
LEMON: All right. Our senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen is here to talk about Dr. Wakefield's study and the new investigation here. These are serious allegations, tell is what exactly are the allegations?
ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Right. As we just heard this is not an allegation that Dr. Wakefield goofed or just sort of got something wrong. The allegation is that he made stuff up. That he just made things up. The basic premise of his 1998 study was that you had 12 perfectly fine kids. They got a vaccine and within days they developed autism.
But what this investigative journalist says is "whoa, hold on a minute. Some of these kids had signs of autism before they got the vaccine. Some of these kids never got autism and he said when you looked at medical records and another set did develop autism but it was months and months later when it really could have been anything. It probably wasn't the vaccine because it was so far removed from the vaccine. I got tell you in 20 years of medical reporting, rarely if ever do you see accusations that a doctor falsified data and made things up. This is extraordinarily unusual. LEMON: But something is not adding up here and especially since his study on autism with measles, mumps, rubella, the vaccinations there, they were controversial, right?
COHEN: Well, he kind of made them controversial. I mean, he's the guy who started all of this. He's the guy who wrote the study in 1998 questioning the MMR vaccine and it really took off and it became this sort of an internet sensation as it were and parents - well, he panicked parents. I received many phone calls from friends saying "should I get my kids vaccinated? I'm scared they're going to get autism." It really took a hold of parents.
LEMON: That's one of the trending topics. People are always tweeting me about this.
COHEN: Oh, yes.
LEMON: Even if you are not affected by it people want to know. Because one day they're going to have kids and they're going to have to get these vaccines. So listen, bottom line it for us, especially for parents here.
COHEN: You know, I think that you cannot find a respected pediatrician who will say don't vaccinate your kids. I think any respectable pediatrician these days will say vaccinate your kids.
LEMON: And after the study, vaccinations went down and the cases went up of measles and mumps.
COHEN: They did, mostly in the United Kingdom where nearly every kid used to be vaccinated and it went down to like 80 percent. That's a big dip.
HOLMES: Well, good information. Thank you, Elizabeth Cohen.
We're going to be talking a lot about these, we're relying on our medical team here and the results of this, (INAUDIBLE) some investigation. Will it change hearts and minds. We'll ask our guest, Dr. Roy Sanders. He's going to join us. A specialist in autism and father of an autistic son. He's going to join us in about 15 minutes. You don't want to miss that interview.
All right. On to politics now. A new beginning on Capital Hill. This will be the first full day of Republicans controlling the House and the GOP's top man says it is time for both parties to work together.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: My belief has always been we can disagree without being disagreeable. That's why it's critical that this institution operate in a manner that permits a free exchange of ideas and resolves our honest differences through a fair debate and vote.
(END VIDEO CLIP) LEMON: But you know, those words are put to the test beginning today. Republicans will launch their first attempt to slash spending and return to the smaller government envisioned by our founding fathers. In fact, later this hour members we will begin reading the Constitution, members will begin reading the Constitution aloud.
We will have it for you live. And speaking of live there she is, our congressional correspondent, Brianna Keilar, on Capitol Hill. So the question, obvious here, I asked you - why are they doing it, Brianna?
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is something that Republicans started. This is their idea that obviously they're in charge of the House of Representatives now and this is how they wanted to kick things off. We know that the Constitution played a very big role that was kind of a talking point, if you will, for Tea Party folks leading up to the midterm elections.
A lot of critics of Democrats said "look, the Constitution, you have gone too far and what you are doing is not governed by this document. You sort of overstepped the bounds." But what's really interesting about this, Don, is that Republicans invited anyone who wants to partake to participate. And it's not just going to be Republicans.
It's going be Democrats who are reading the Constitution in its entirety. This is expected to take at least a couple of hours and we're going to see this all kicked off by Speaker Boehner and then by leader Pelosi, top Democrat in the house, and other democratic leaders and then it will be on a first come, sort of, first serve basis as they go through the entire thing. And it will be the first time, according to the House historian, that the entire Constitution has been read on the House floor.
LEMON: All right. You said they want to bring down spending and cut budgets. Let's talk about these budget cuts. It's not that much money and the big picture overall, right?
KEILAR: You are talking about this measure that they're going to be taking up today and this is going to be this afternoon, maybe early this evening. This is Congress, and again led by Republicans saying we're going to tighten our belt. The plan here, cut spending for congressional offices by five percent.
What does that mean? That's about $75,00 for each office. In total Republicans say this is going to save about $35 million when you also look at cutting committee operating costs by five percent. Republicans have pledged to cut $100 billion in spending so you can see that this is a drop in the bucket. But it's also symbolic and they are saying that this is a good starting point for them. I asked them why five percent and they said this seemed doable and this is really just the beginning. Democrats, Don, and I mentioned this last hour say "Hey, thanks for including in the decision making." They wish they could have had some input or certainly the committees could have had input. We're going to hear a lot more of that kind of criticism. Now that they're not in power now. Now the Republican are.
LEMON: We will be watching and that the reading of the Constitution. Brianna Keilar, thank you.
You know, much of the nations pent the summer mesmerized by the environmental disaster in the gulf and the underwater geyser that spewed millions and millions of gallons of oil.
Now, the government is saying, what went wrong and what needs to be done now? A report from the presidential commission released some of it's broader findings, among them BP, shares the blame with him business partner, Transocean and Halliburton.
Now the government regulators failed to do their part to catch the problems. And here's the most chilling part, the report says there is no reason to believe that it won't happen again. Rather the report says "the root causes are symptomatic and or systemic, I should say, and absent significant reform in both industry practices and government policies might well recur."
Delaware police are retracing the baffling last hours and days of John Wheeler trying to fill in the gaps of what happened to the ex- Pentagon official whose body surfaced at a dump on New Year's eve.
Our Susan Candiotti is following the trail of evidence.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This surveillance video backtracking John Wheeler's movements makes his death even more mysterious. First, where he was two days before his body was found. About 6:00 p.m. last Wednesday -
(on camera): Wheeler made what could be described as a head scratching visit to this pharmacy about a half mile away from where he lives. Now, the pharmacist here confirms to CNN that he has filled prescriptions for Wheeler before but this time wheeler asked him for a ride to Wilmington about ten miles down the street. But when he offered to call a cab for Wheeler he says he left. On that day, he describes Wheeler as looking a bit different.
(voice-over): That same day about 40 minutes later.
Wheeler shows up at a parking garage in Wilmington. An attendant said that Wheeler didn't have a coat on and was only wearing one shoe and insisted he was not drunk.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
IMAN GOLDSBOROUGH, PARKING LOT ATTENDANT: I described him as being odd because he had one shoe on his hand. He didn't have a coat on and it was really cold and there was snow on the country.
(END VIDEO CLIP) CANDIOTTI: He says Wheeler and his parking ticket was in his briefcase and that his briefcase was stolen, strike me that he didn't have a coat on and he didn't' have a shoe on. Then when I asked him where was his parking ticket at my garage, he said he couldn't find it, it was inside his briefcase. So when I asked him where was his briefcase, he said his briefcase was stolen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOLDSBOROUGH: He was smiling. He seemed like a nice guy. The only thing that didn't seem right to me was just he looked like he was kind of lost. He was just looking around like he was in an unfamiliar place.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CANDIOTTI: Apparently Wheeler was lost searching the wrong garage. Wheeler's car was later found at a train station's lot a mile away.
The next day Wheeler is at this downtown Wilmington office residential building but police won't release those pictures. They say he appears confused. People tried to help. He is last seen there at 8:30 at night. At 4:30 Friday morning, eight hours later, police say sanitation workers unknowingly picked up Wheeler's body from a dumpster and brought it to a landfill. It wasn't until nearly six hours later that workers called police after noticing the body jutting out from the garbage truck.
MARK FARRALL, SPOKESMAN, NEWARK DELAWARE POLICE: We need to find the crime scene. We're still attempting to locate the crime scene.
CANDIOTTI: Wheeler was involved in a dispute over a neighbor's plants to develop properties in a historic district. But his attorney says it was strictly a legal matter. In New York, Wheeler's widow allowed police to search their condo there. But today she declined to comment and asked for privacy. Her husband's troubles and timeline remain under a magnifying glass.
Susan Candiotti, CNN, Wilmington, Delaware.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
LEMON: All right. Susan, thank you.
Witnesses give emotional accounts of Michael Jackson's last hour. It is day three of a hearing that will decide whether Dr. Conrad Murray goes to trial for the singer's death. Dr. Murray faces involuntary manslaughter charges if the judge orders the case to trial.
Los Angeles County Paramedic Richard (INAUDIBLE) testified that when he arrived he asked "Dr. Murray how long the patient was down?" He says the doctor told him it had just happened and (INAUDIBLE) said it didn't up. He said Jackson appeared to be dead when he said I "picked him up." His legs were quite cool. I will get more on the testimony on that hearing for Dr. Conrad Murray later this hour from "In Session" correspondent, Beth Karas (ph).
Well, you know, the people have spoken. Next the winners and the losers at the Peoples' Choice Awards and the rest of the days entertainment news. That's coming up here on CNN.
And a new school calendar. The four-day week. More than 100 districts have already made the switch. It cuts cost but here's what critics are saying - they're worrying that it may also be cutting corners in your kids' education. We're talking about it in about 15 minutes.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: And the people choose "Twilight," the teen vampire saga, won big at last night's People's Choice Awards. "Showbiz Tonight's" A.J. Hammer live in New York with all the highs and lows of the season's first Hollywood awards show. OK. I did not see "Twilight" but I did see the People's Choice Awards.
A.J. HAMMER, "SHOWBIZ TONIGHT" HOST: What?
LEMON: No, I didn't see it. They aren't very happy about it.
HAMMER: Yes, Don, let this be a lesson to you. Do not underestimate the power of vampires. OK. "Twilight" fans obviously are really, really passionate about their stars and the People's Choice Awards are after all the people's choice. "Twilight's" Kristen Stewart was named favorite movie actress. She beat out Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Aniston. That's a pretty big deal.
And the most recent film in the series "Eclipse," which Don Lemon is going to see tonight, picked up four awards including favorite movie and beat out nominees including the "Social Network" and "Inception" but it wasn't the total shut out, "Twilight's" male leads Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner lost out to Johnny Depp for favorite movie actor. Don, I'm thinking that team Edward and team Jacob kind of cancel each other out there.
LEMON: Maybe so. I'm not sure who they are. But listen, as you said, vampires and zombies, you cannot underestimate them. Let's move on though. I understand that you got some behind the scenes info on the latest controversy in reality TV? What can you tell us about "The Bachelor" getting slapped. Should she be charged?
HAMMER: No, I don't think she should be charged. It was a little playful.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: A.J., A.J., if a man had done that to a woman it would be different. HAMMER: Well, certainly there would be a double standard. I absolutely agree with you, Don, but it did speak with the host of "The Bachelor" Chris Harrelson because I wanted to find out what really happened. Now, this controversy started when the current bachelor, Brad Womack, got smacked in the face by Chantel O'Brien, who is one of the women on the show.
Now Wolmack is a repeat bachelor. He became infamous because he turned down two women at the conclusion of his first season on the show. Chantel was apparently still upset with him on behalf of women everywhere for what he did.
And some reports were saying the slap was staged. Harrison the host of the bachelor denies that. Watch what he told me.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HAMMER (on camera): Look, you've seen the reports as well that the whole slap thing was set up and the producers knew it was going to happen and the whole thing was kind of rehearsed. What about that even if Brad himself didn't necessarily know that? Was she put up to that?
Yes, not only that, I also heard that we took three or four takes where Brad just sat there and got slapped all night. No, he had no idea what she was going to do.
HAMMER: Got that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But was it set up that she was going to do that. She probably knew she was going to do it before she got out of the limo and that's the thing, too. They realized this is their big first impression. So people come up with how do I stand out from the crowd. What do I do? You look at Kelty (ph), another girl that came out and kicked her leg up above her head because she's a Rockette and well, this is what Chantel decided to do to get Brad's attention.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HAMMER: Yes, it got everybody's attention. There are also rumors that Chantel, the slapper here, is actually engaged to Womack now. (INAUDIBLE) understandably, Don, wouldn't talk about that pressed him as I did so we will have to wait and see who the bachelor picks in the end.
LEMON: That's going to be your tag line. Chantel, the slapper. All right. A.J. Hammer, thank you very much, sir.
If you want information on everything breaking in the entertainment world, A.J. Hammer has got it this evening on "Showbiz Tonight," 5:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. Eastern, of course, on HLN.
A new investigation disputes the findings of autisms link. Coming up, an expert on autism answers your questions about the disorder.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: We're going return now to this morning's big story and it's on autism. A British Medical Journal has concluded that a doctor falsified data for a study linking autism to vaccines. Now, the publishing of the BMJ investigation comes nearly a year after another journal, the "Lancet" retracted Dr. Andrew Wakefield's study. So let's go deeper on this story.
Dr. Roy Sanders from the Marcus Autism Center in Atlanta, he joins us here and he is the author of "How to Talk to Parents About Autism." And in addition, you see here our senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen here. So you have a son who has autism as well as you are the head of the center here.
DR. ROY SANDERS, MARCUS AUTISM CENTER: Right.
LEMON: I want to read some questions and some comments to you and then we're going to talk about it. We asked viewers to send us their comments on our blog here. And one said "this is old news and that man belongs in jail. I wonder how many children have died because they weren't vaccinated?"
So Roy, Elizabeth, your responses to this? You first, Roy.
SANDERS: It is old news. I mean, this is something that's been going on for a long time at this point and we know that there is not a substantial body of evidence that shows credible correlation between the vaccines and the disease process. And I think it has damaged our system in terms of having fewer parents willing to give kids vaccines and that puts more kids at risk.
LEMON: So if you say it's old news, why this? Is it because this medical journal came out? That's why the uproar, why haven't -
COHEN: It's the fraud part of it.
LEMON: And finally someone says here it is.
COHEN: Doctors have known for years that this was wrong. That Dr. Wakefield was wrong. That his data was incorrect. What is new today is that it was - there was actual fraud involved that he made things up according to this new report. It wasn't just bad science (INAUDIBLE).
SANDERS: It wasn't just bad science. It wasn't a mistake. (INAUDIBLE) Their accusation at this point is that he actually committed fraud and was trying to pull one over on people.
COHEN: Right. A deliberate hoax.
LEMON: Did you believe there was ever a belief - well, it's not really belief did you ever think that there was a link between the vaccinations?
SANDERS: Well, for a long time we haven't known and we still don't know what the cause is for autism. And there's probably different causes for autisms, what we're trying to find out is what are some of those causes and so you have to look at the science over time so you follow where the science lead (INAUDIBLE) to immunizations, then we would have followed down the path. But it hasn't.
LEMON: And for a while, this one study has sort of been the gold standard that says it is - it's not that it's necessarily out. It's that this study that this doctor did.
COHEN: Let me say something here. This was never the gold standard for doctors. Doctors knew from the very beginning back in '98, (INAUDIBLE) respectable experts - because it just took on its own life. This story had a life of its own. A friend of mine said this morning it made us already psycho parents more psycho. It took on a life of it's own on the internet and parents believed it. I got calls on a regular basis.
LEMON: And big names when their kids had autism and they got behind it and they started repeating the same thing. So what happens now. What's next with this?
SANDERS: We keep trying to convince parents that the most important thing they can do to protect their children in general is to have them immunized so that children can be safe from the diseases that kill us.
I am old enough to have been in medical school and in residency when children died of some of these diseases that we immunize against. If parents don't get their kids immunized, they're actually putting their children at a much higher risk that by not immunizing. So we need to kind of get the word out that parents need to immunize their children so that the children can be safe.
LEMON: I'm looking over, doctor, some of the responses that we got from viewers. It's not on here but I just read it as I was walking over on Twitter. Someone said Don, why are there more boys who are diagnosed with autism than girls? Is that necessarily true?
SANDERS: It is true. We don't know what the reason is for that. That has been consistent even with the increase in the number of kids that are being diagnosed, over the past 20 years, there is still that ratio of 4-1 pretty much holds true.
PHILLIPS: It's interesting that you bring that up because it's something that doctors brought up to parents who believed Wakefield. They said four to one ratio. Boys and girls get vaccinated. Why in the world are we seeing more boys.
If it's the vaccine it should be 50/50, right? That's another piece of evidence that pediatricians kept saying over and over again, the vaccine is not yet.
We're also on the verge of some really new research at this point that looks at how the brain develops itself and probably the process that is involved in autism begins much earlier than the 15 to 18 months. But it's just - it didn't show up (INAUDIBLE)
LEMON: and if anything, this opens the dialogue and expands people's minds and thinking about the vaccine and what actually causes autism and it gets us to talk about it which brings focus.
SANDERS: Right.
LEMON: Thank you doctor.
SANDERS: You're welcome.
COHEN: Thank you, Elizabeth.
All right. If you catch students out of school on a Monday or a Friday they may not be playing hooky. Here's why, more school districts are ditching a day of class to cover budget gaps. The unanswered question here, does it hurt your child's education? We're weighing the pros and the cons, coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: All right. Let's check the markets right now. The stock market's opening bell rang just about an hour ago and we see the Dow plus five and also the NASDAQ right now plus six. We'll continue to check throughout the day.
It is about 10:30 Eastern Time, 7:30 out West. Today we're talking about another flock of dead birds not in the U.S. but Sweden. Tests on five birds show they died of sudden hard external blows, not disease.
That's similar to early tests on the ones found in Arkansas. Kentucky and Louisiana have seen mysterious bird deaths as well.
About 1400 more U.S. Marines might be headed to Afghanistan. That's what the "Wall Street Journal" is reporting today. The paper says the new boots could be on the ground within the next 10 days or so in the Kandahar area.
And Starbucks is tweaking its logo. The new look is on the right of your screen, the old one on the left. Starting in March, you'll just see the lady in green without the company name and it looks like the hot beverage warning is gone, too.
Important story now concerning your kids' education. More school districts are ditching a day of classes, moving to a four-day week to help bridge bucket gaps. Sure shorter week cost -- cut costs but critics worry it could also cut the quality of students' education.
Right now 20 states -- the ones in blue -- have districts on a four-day schedule. That's over 120 school systems nationwide. Most of the time these programs are in small rural districts. But the trend is growing.
So here's the million-dollar question that we're posing to CNN education contributor, Steve Perry. Is this a way to fix our schools during a budget crunch? Or, or, Steve, does a shorter week hurt students?
He's joining us live from Hartford, Connecticut, right now. And also joining us via Skype is Susan Clark. She's a superintendent of Georgia's Peach County school system. It recently switched over to the shorter week.
So, Steve, I want to start with you and sort of piggy-back off that question that I asked you earlier.
The Education Department in Colorado says the jury is still out, Steve, on the question of student performance under a four-day week. Idaho says its evidence is inconclusive. So what have you seen?
STEVE PERRY, CNN EDUCATION CONTRIBUTOR: What I have seen is that the United States of America is already losing with a five-day school week. In fact, when we look at our performance internationally we're seeing that we as a country are falling near the bottom of industrialized nations.
So taking another day out of the school week definitely does not improve the probability of our children being successful. The research is very clear. It may not be clear about the four-day work week, but what it is clear about is something like summer learning loss.
The more time that we take off the less time we have for instruction. Children need more time for instruction not less time for instructions.
LEMON: OK.
PERRY: Not just instructions for instructions' sake. It's better instruction.
LEMON: All right. Susan, how about you?
SUSAN CLARK, SUPERINTENDENT, PEACH COUNTY SCHOOLS: Well, first of all the only evidence that I have is what's happened here. And the four-day week has certainly not been detrimental to our students but that's largely because we reorganized our time.
We didn't cut any instructional time. We still meet all the instructional requirements required by the state of Georgia. So I don't think the issue is the four-day week good or bad, I think the issue is, are you able to maintain the amount of instructional time that you need and more importantly, are you improving the quality of instruction that's going on when you have children?
LEMON: OK, Susan --
CLARK: I mean you can have children for five days with a bad teacher and you're not going to get any better results.
LEMON: So, Susan, I guess the question here, is it quantity or quality versus what? So listen, do your -- do kids still go to the same number of hours or do they go four days and go more hours?
CLARK: They go four hours and they go more hours.
LEMON: OK. Do their attention span --
CLARK: And then the other thing is --
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Do their attention span hold on?
CLARK: -- that we've become smarter in how we use the time.
LEMON: Well, do their attention spans hold up, Susan?
CLARK: Yes, but that's because we've changed our instructional approaches radically. We've moved from very traditional teaching to project based learning at our high school. We have also moved from drill and kill in our elementary school to engaging students in authentic tasks. So it's really about the quality of instruction.
LEMON: OK.
CLARK: But we haven't reduced our instructional time at all.
LEMON: OK. OK. Let me let Steve get in here.
Steve, what do you have to say?
PERRY: First of all the reason why the decision is being made to go a four-day school week is not because it's believed that it will improve education, it's simply to make sure that the current number of teachers stay employed in that school district and that they maintain their salary somewhere near where they were before.
This is not about education policy. This is about maintaining adult environments. Further, I'd ask the question to Dr. Clark, are you also having a four-day practice week for football? Are you cutting out the number of days of practice?
I would be willing to bet that, in fact, all of us would be more likely to believe that improving education does not occur by cutting the amount of instruction but in fact by improving the amount of instruction that's occurring in the school.
LEMON: OK. All right. Susan, I saw you shaking your head there. What did you want to say?
CLARK: What I want to say is we shut our entire school district down on Mondays, period. Football, baseball, band, the central office, everybody. We shut ourselves down because we had -- we had to replace, replace, now, $795,000 in state funds in a week. A week before our teachers were going to report last year.
LEMON: Well, Susan, here's -- how much money --
CLARK: So we --
LEMON: How much money is your system saving? And will you go back to a five day week if the budget situation improves?
CLARK: Well, first of all, we saved the exact amount of money. In fact we saved more money than we projected because our teacher absenteeism rate was greatly reduced. So we ended up saving the -- not saving, replacing the $795,000 that we were cut.
We decided to go to the four-day week again this year because we've been told to expect another 10 percent cut. And so what we're trying to do is maintain the quality of education that we were able to offer our students before all these budget cuts came and still continue to move forward. We've not been released from accountability because our budgets have been cut.
LEMON: OK. I want Steve to get in on this.
And Steve, it's tough for me. I'm not a parent. But -- can you really put a price on kids and their education? It sounds like it's money here versus education. And it also sounds like Susan is saying we need to change the approach in the way we educate kids, and it's not just about the number of hours. But can you put a price on that?
PERRY: I don't know that you can -- you have to. Realistically you have to put a price on it because we do pay people. The reason -- and my heart goes out to Dr. Clark. Because the challenge that she has is not one that she wants. What I believe she wants is to be able to provide children with the access to a quality education in the best and possibly even traditional settings.
Here we have parents who have to now find some solution in their own home for an 8-year-old who doesn't have school on Monday.
LEMON: Well, see, that's what I was going to say. Is this cost being passed on to parents because they have to find day care, child care for their kids on a day that they don't usually -- they'll probably be at work? Hopefully if they have a job in this environment.
PERRY: I would imagine. I can't imagine what I would do with my two sons, 5 and 8 years old, if they weren't in school when my wife and I are in fact at work. We expect during at least the school year that the kids are going to be in school.
We don't realize as a result of the way in which our school calendars already exist we have so many days off. In fact we seem rarely to go three days -- I mean three weeks without having a day off. So we're already asking parents to find some way --
LEMON: OK.
PERRY: -- to do something with their children and now -- unfortunately throughout the country more and more people are being asked to do more.
LEMON: Hey, Steve.
PERRY: We have to -- we have to go to our teachers and administrators and say to them simply, folks, we need you to come in to help us out.
LEMON: Dr. Clark, I'm going let you get in on this. But Steve, just real quickly here.
CLARK: So what we really --
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: What do you suggest? Hang on. Hang on. I will let you get in, Dr. Clark.
CLARK: -- that everyone is bearing --
LEMON: Steve --
CLARK: Everyone is bearing the responsibility for these budget cuts. The school districts, the parents, the community. School systems have been able to provide parents with the luxury, and let me emphasize that. It's been a luxury to provide parents with child care.
LEMON: Yes.
CLARK: But if you get right down to the hard cold facts, the mission of public schools is not to provide child care.
PERRY: But I'm not talking about child care. I'm talking about education.
(CROSSTALK)
LEMON: Hang on a second. Hang on a second, Steve and Doctor. I know that on Skype, you can -- it's hard -- she can't hear me when she's talking. So I'm going give you the last word, Doctor, so hang on. You're going to get the last word here .
But, Steve, what's the solution here? What are you saying? Should kids still go five days? Should they go more than five days? Are you suggesting increasing the amount of days that kids go to school rather than decreasing them?
PERRY: There are a number of solutions. One, one of the solutions that we have is that we can say to the teachers, to the custodians, to the principals and all the employees of the public schools, that listen, folks, it's time to take some pay cuts because e else has to. We need too as well.
That's first. Second, we can find innovative solutions maybe online learning and the like that can still provide additional academic support while the children are at home. But this is not about child care. My kids, your kids, all of our kids are in school to learn. That's what we're paying for. We expect them to be in school. And it's already that they have 187 day school year so now you're taking another 30 days off that school year and expecting them to keep up with countries on which they have over 210 days.
LEMON: OK, Steve. I'm going to have to let -- Doctor, last word, really. You have five seconds here. What do you have to say?
CLARK: The only thing I can say is that my students' performances has increased in almost every area even though we've had to do this very difficult thing.
LEMON: All right.
CLARK: We're all about doing what's best for the children and we've been placed in an untenable position and we're trying to make the best of it.
LEMON: All right, Susan Clark --
CLARK: So whether people agree with us or not it's working for us.
LEMON: Susan Clark and Steve Perry, thank you both very much. Great conversation. We'll continue it here on CNN. We promise. Great conversation.
CLARK: Thank you.
LEMON: All right. What role did Conrad Murray play in the death of Michael Jackson? New details are emerging in a California courtroom about the final minutes of Jackson's life.
Also this. Gadgets so new you don't even -- you don't even want them yet. But you will. We're taking you to Las Vegas for a look inside the Annual Consumer Electronics show and the wave of the future. Don't go anywhere.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: All right. Today is day three of a hearing in Los Angeles that will decide whether Dr. Conrad Murray goes to trial to face involuntary manslaughter charges in the death of Michael Jackson.
Yesterday a member of Jackson's security team -- his name is Alberto Alvarez -- described the scene as Jackson's children, Prince and Paris, watch from a doorway while Dr. Murray tried to revive their father.
Now according to Alvarez, Murray said, get them out, get them out. Don't let them see their father like this. Alvarez then testified that Dr. Murray asked him to help gather up medicine from around Michael Jackson's bedroom.
Well, Beth Karas from truTV is -- truTV's "In Session", I should say, she has been following this -- the Murray hearing in Los Angeles. And she joins us now.
Beth, thank you for joining us. How harmful has testimony in this hearing been for Dr. Murray?
BETH KARAS, IN SESSION CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Don. Well, six witnesses have testified in two days and let me tell you if a jury believes these witnesses it is very harmful.
Because the picture that has been painted thus far shows that Dr. Murray was more concerned with covering up his tracks and hiding some of the evidence of that drug Propofol he should not have been giving Michael Jackson, a surgical anesthetic, than he was in Michael Jackson's care because he was scooping up these bottles and the IV bag, putting them in a bag together with Alvarez, as you just mentioned, before calling 911.
And then when the paramedics got there, he didn't tell them all of the drugs he gave Michael Jackson. He only said he gave him one sedative once during the night.
LEMON: So, listen, the issue of Dr. Murray's ability to perform CPR has come up as well here. And it came up even in the beginning when right as -- when Michael Jackson died. Why he did it on a bed instead of the floor. So that has come up.
KARAS: Right. And we don't know if this is because he didn't know how to do CPR. He was doing it with one hand on the bed and he said to Alvarez, does anybody know how to CPR. Another employee of Jackson was there at the time and they both looked at each other, like, this guy is a cardiologist. He's asking us?
Well, maybe that he was so panicked he forgot how to do this basic procedure, but he did get assistance from Alvarez.
LEMON: All right. Beth Karas is following it out there in Los Angeles. We appreciate you. She is from our -- truTV "In Session" team.
Thanks again.
Well, today members of Congress are reading the U.S. Constitution aloud on the House floor. And we thought it might be fun to explore some facts that are related to the Constitution.
So when the Constitution was signed, what was the population of the United States? Your choices are 800,000, 2.4 million, 4 million, or 6.5 million? We'll have the answer just ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: All right. A live shot of the Capitol there in Washington.
A new beginning on Capitol Hill today in what could be an historic first on the floor of the House. Just minutes ago, Republicans began reading aloud the U.S. Constitution. They say it's more than symbolism, it's the blueprint of how they plan to handle the people's business.
They're just getting started. The actual reading is going to happen. They're just moments away from it.
There she is, Brianna Keilar, on Capitol Hill to explain it all.
Brianna, they're just starting the process. They haven't started reading yet so what gives here?
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, they haven't started the process but they are going to begin and it's not just going to be Republicans, although this was the idea of Republicans, Don.
Democrats are going to join in, Leader Pelosi herself, Steny Hoyer, the number-two Democrat, and then it's going on a first come- first serve basis in terms of reading through parts of the Constitution.
So Boehner, Pelosi, then it's going to be Eric Cantor, the number two Republican, and then it's going to be Steny Hoyer.
But, you know, you made the point Republicans are saying this is the -- the blueprint for governing and Democrats also saying and speaker -- before she was -- before she left as speaker, Pelosi references the Constitution as well.
So this is going to be an interesting process. It's going to take a couple of hours at least -- Don.
LEMON: All right. Brianna Keilar, we'll be watching. Thank you. From Capitol Hill today.
And before the break we asked you when the Constitution was signed, what was the population of the United States? Here are your choices, 800,000, 2.4 million, 4 million or 6.5 million.
All right. Drum roll. When the Constitution was signed, September 17th, 1787, the population of the U.S. was 4 million people.
Wannabe iPad killers taking aim at the top dog. Tablets are the big story at this year's Consumer Electronics Show. And we're getting a sneak peek from the convention floor.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: Tech geeks have taken over Las Vegas for the 2011 Consumer Electronics Show. Every year the monster convention gives us a glimpse into the future of gadgetry and this year's early star? The tablet, of course.
I have one right here. So Dan Simon is on the convention floor with an early look at some of the wannabe iPad killers.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Tablets, tablets, and more tablets. It is the theme of this year's Consumer Electronics Show. Fifty new tablets being unveiled, all of them chasing the iPad.
PAUL REYNOLDS, CONSUMER REPORTS: This year it looks like there are a lot of major manufacturers that have tablets really targeted at that iPad market that are adding some features even that the iPad doesn't have. So it's looking like by the end of 2011, we'll have a lot more tablets, viable ones, for consumers to choose from.
SIMON: Next, 3D television. Consumers have not gotten excited yet but that might change with the newer, more comfortable glasses. And no glasses? That technology has arrived as well.
(On camera): I think science says it all. No more goofy looking glasses to watch 3D. That may just be enough to get people excited about this new technology.
(Voice-over): We got to see glasses free TV firsthand courtesy of Elacity (ph).
(On camera): If you were hear you would really see these images in 3D. And they think that this technology would be common place within the next few years.
(Voice-over): CES always has a chair of corky stuff. This is the Coz-E, a snuggie with a heating bad. And the family of Bob Marley coming out with a unique line of audio accessory.
ROHAN MARLEY, HOUSE OF MARLEY: Today we launched in the House of Marley, have a collection of electronic products which is headphones, docking stations. Things that relate to music. It lets you (INAUDIBLE), you know? Eco-friendly and environmentally friendly. You know?
SIMON (on camera): How do you think your dad would feel about these products?
MARLEY: Well, he would love it because he would be able to play his own music and his own stuff. You know? See, you'd love it, you'd love this.
SIMON (voice-over): But perhaps the most unique thing we have seen may help you live a little longer, and so device from a company called Y Things that uses your iPhone to take your blood pressure.
(On camera): Snap the device into the iPhone. Obviously you load the app. Just click the start button. And there you go. Your blood pressure right on your iPhone and then will e-mail the result right to your doctor.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SIMON: And the show officially opens in two hours. More than two million square feet of gadgetry, if you can believe it. They're expecting more than 140,000 people from around the world. That's more than in previous years. Of course not all the products here will make it to market. We'll see which ones get the most buzz.
LEMON: All right.
SIMON: This one getting a little bit of buzz. This is a --
LEMON: All right. Dan Simon. Dan, thank you. Hey, we have a bit of breaking news. Sorry to cut you off. We want to go now to the House floor in Washington, D.C.. We told you about members of the House is going to be reading the Constitution.
They're asking questions about, are we really going do this? Let's listen in.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If I may inquire of the gentleman -- if I may inquire before we start this process, of the gentleman, if he would explain to us so that we will all be on the same page.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman is not recognized for that purpose.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If I may ask the gentleman unanimous consent. If I may ask the gentleman to yield for this question.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I asked unanimous consent to ask the gentlemen yield for his question.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman from Virginia is not recognized for debate. This is not a debate.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I will wait until Mr. Goodlatte, is recognized and I'll ask him to yield so we can have clarity to this.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for the reading of the Constitution, not for debate.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If I may ask -- if I may ask unanimous consent to ask Mr. Goodlatte to yield for just a question so we all understand the reading of this.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Does the gentleman from Washington have a parliamentary inquiry?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, my parliamentary inquiry is, may I ask the gentleman to yield for 30 seconds to ask a question of the derivation of this language that we will all be reading in good faith and good spirits today?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That is not in order at this point . The gentleman from Virginia.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Speaker, as a part of the opening remarks, I will explain and I hope answer the question of the gentleman from Washington. This morning for the first time in the history of the House of Representatives, we would read aloud the full text of the Constitution of the United States. We hope this will inspire many more Americans to read the Constitution.
The text we are reading today reflects the changes to the document made by the 27 amendments to it. Those portions superseded by amendment will not be read. In order to insure fairness for all those interested in participating, we have asked members to line up on a first come, first serve basis.
I will recognize members based on this guidance. In order to insure relative parity and fairness, I may recognize members out of order to ensure bipartisanship and balance. Two members, one from each party, will be recognized out of order. Each member will approach the podium and read the passage laid out for him or her.
The speaker and two members of the leadership of each party will begin the reading and then I will recognize members in order. I thank the members of both parties in advance for their participation in this historic event. And I think --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For what purpose does the gentleman from California raise?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A point of parliamentary procedure. Now that the --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman may inquire.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now that the process has started, with the gentleman from Washington's original question about parliamentary procedure. Would that -- would his question be in order at this time?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In light of the gentleman's modicum of debate, that would be appropriate.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.
REP. JAY INSLEE (D), WASHINGTON: If I may -- if I may make unanimous consent to ask Mr. Goodlatte a question so that we all do understand the nature of the language that we will be reading today, I think it 'd be very helpful to us on a bipartisan base. So I would like to ask Mr. Goodlatte, if he could --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Without objection, the gentleman from Virginia may yield for that purpose.
INSLEE: Thank you.
Mr. Goodlatte, could you explain to us the decision-making process about which language to read today? And the reason I ask is, through American history, we had a series of amendments that were intended to change the original document. But the amendments do not make specific deletions to specific language in the original document. And it's been up to us to ascertain the intent of the amendments to figure out which language is operative or not.
But the language has not specifically been deleted by the amendments, so it could be subject to some interpretation of which language really has been removed and which has not. And so I think it would be helpful to the members if you explain to us how the determinations of what to read has been made or not made, so that we will all be on the same page as to congressional intent.
REP. ROBERT GOODLATTE (R), VIRGINIA: I thank the gentleman for his question.
We have consulted with the Congressional Research Service, of the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress actually maintains a copy of the Constitution which includes those sections that have been superceded by amendment. So we are not reading those sections that have been superceded by amendment, and we have arrived at that determination based upon our consultation with the Congressional Research Service.
INSLEE: And would the gentleman accept the premise that since we have not been able to review the exact language we will be reading today, that this is not -- this is not -- thank you, gentlemen.
But, Mr. Goodlatte -- I'll wait for a moment, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The House will be in order.
INSLEE: We do want to have a good bipartisan success here today. And this is a special moment for us all.
So I guess the question is, I take it since we have not had discussion about which language to read or not, that this is not intended to create any statement of congressional intent about the language, but rather to do our best to have a moment of comity to read the language as best as we can ascertain it.
Is that correct?
GOODLATTE: I think the gentleman has stated that very well.
INSLEE: Thank you. And I very much appreciate your leadership and bringing this to our attention today. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman from Virginia.
What purpose does the gentleman from Illinois rise?
REP. JESSE JACKSON JR. (D), ILLINOIS: I would like to ask Mr. Goodlatte a parliamentary inquiry.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman may inquire.
JACKSON: Thank you.
Let me, first of all, thank -- UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is the gentleman asking unanimous consent?
JACKSON: Mr. Speaker, if I may ask unanimous consent --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Does the gentleman from Virginia yield for that purpose?
GOODLATTE: I yield.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman yields.
JACKSON: I thank the gentleman for his kindness.
Let me first begin by saying that I think every member of this body is approaching the reading of their Constitution with the most sacred possible spirit in what is clearly an unprecedented moment in the history of the Congress of the United States. And I don't take it very lightly when my colleague or when others, before we begin the reading of our sacred document, are raising questions about what we will specifically be reading, what specifically will be dedacted based upon amendments, or based upon the recommendations of Libraries of Congress.
But I want to be clear, Mr. Speaker and Mr. Goodlatte -- I recognize that this is a request -- that in reading those dedacted -- this is very emotional for me. It's very emotional for, I know, a number of members given the struggle. And I'm not trying to take a shot at the process. And Mr. Goodlatte knows me and he knows the spirit with which I am approaching this.
Given the struggle of African-Americans, given the struggle of women, given the struggle of others to create a more perfect document -- while not perfect, a more perfect document to hear that those elements of the Constitution that have been dedacted by amendment are no less serious, no less part of our ongoing struggle to improve the country and to make the country better, and are sense in our struggle in whom we are at the Congress of the United States, at this point in American history, and our desire to continue to improve the Constitution, many of us don't want that to be lost upon the reading of our sacred document.
And so with that said, I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I just wanted to indicate that this is done with sincerity. It is not to take a shot at the idea of reading the Constitution. But certainly when we were informed, for example, that the three-fifths clause would not be mentioned, and that other elements of the Constitution which justify why some of us fight for programs in the Congress will not be written in the dedacted version, it is of consequence to who we are.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
GOODLATTE: I thank the gentleman for his comments, and I take them very much to heart, as has our leadership. In fact, in recognition of the gentleman's concern, I mentioned in my comments that only two members would be recognized out of order to read sections. One is the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who will read the first article of section three, dealing with the judiciary. The other is the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Lewis, who many regard as the foremost advocate for civil rights in the Congress. He will read the 13th Amendment.
And in that regard, we hope to address the concern that you raised.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will the gentleman yield for just one moment?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Does the gentleman ask unanimous consent?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I ask unanimous consent.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will the gentleman yield for that purpose, without objection?
GOODLATTE: I yield.
Out of the same deference and respect for this document that we revere, I think it's important that we use the language of the Constitution itself. They are not deletions, they are amendments.
And in that respect, we go by the amended document, not by the deleted document. There are too many that fought and died for those amendments to call them deletions.
With that, I yield back.
GOODLATTE: It is an amended document, but we are going to read the document as amended.
I thank the members of both parties in advance for their participation in this historic event. I thank the leadership and members for providing for this reading in the rules of the House.
It is now my distinct honor to yield to the Speaker of the House to begin the reading.
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the minority leader, the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Pelosi.
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: Article 1, Section 1: "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the majority leader, the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Cantor. REP. ERIC CANTOR (R-VA), MAJORITY LEADER: Article 1, Section 2: "The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature. No person shall be a representative who shall not have attained to the age of 25 years and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of the state in which he shall be chosen. The actual enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of 10 years in such manner as they shall by law direct."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the minority whip, the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer.
REP. STENY HOYER (D-MD), MINORITY WHIP: Article 1, continuation of Section 2: "The number of representatives shall not exceed one for every 30,000, but each state shall have at least one representative. And until such enumeration shall be made, the state of New Hampshire shall been entitled to choose three; Massachusetts, eight;, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, one; Connecticut, five; New York, six; New Jersey, four; Pennsylvania, eight; Delaware, one; Maryland, six;, Virginia, 10; North Carolina, five; South Carolina, five; and Georgia, three."
"When vacancies happen in the representation from any state, the executive authority thereof shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies. The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other officers, and shall have the sole power of impeachment."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the gentleman from California, the majority whip, Mr. McCarthy.
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA), CALIFORNIA: Article 1, Section 3: "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two senators from each state for six years, and each senator shall have one vote. Immediately after, they shall be assembled in consequence of the first election. They shall be divided as equally as may be into three classes."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Rothman.
I would ask members to read the page right in front of them and not continue.
REP. STEVE ROTHMAN (D), NEW JERSEY: "The seats of the senators of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year; of the second class, at the expiration of the fourth year; and of the third class, at the expiration of the sixth year, so that one third may be chosen every second year."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Conaway.
REP. MIKE CONAWAY (R), TEXAS: "No person shall be a senator who shall not have attained to the age of 30s and have been nine years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state for which he shall be chosen."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Scott.
REP. DAVID SCOTT (D), GEORGIA: "The vice president of the United States, but shall not have no vote unless they be equally divided. The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a president pro tempore in the absence of the vice president, or when he shall exercise the office of president of the United States."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Walberg.
REP. TIMOTHY WALBERG (R), MICHIGAN: "The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. In setting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the president of the United States is tried, the chief justice shall preside, and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present."
GOODLATTE: I now yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr.
REP. MARK CRITZ (D), PENNSYLVANIA: "Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States. But the party convicted shall, nevertheless, be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment, according to law."
(END OF COVERAGE)
