Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Senator Lugar Loses by a Landslide; U.S. Feels Eurozone Trembles; Battle Over Voter ID Laws; Voter Laws Compared To Jim Crow; NAACP Reaches Out For Voters; Bank Of America Draws Protest; Working Women Getting Richer; Spy Foils Bomb Plot
Aired May 09, 2012 - 12:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Live from CNN headquarters in Atlanta, it's 12:00 noon, 9:00 a.m. on the West Coast, I'm Suzanne Malveaux.
I want to get you up to speed for this Wednesday, May 9th.
A would-be an al Qaeda suicide bomber turns out to be a mole, working for the Saudis and the CIA. We now know he infiltrated al Qaeda in Yemen, volunteered to blow up a plane headed to the United States. Instead, he handed over the new improved al Qaeda underwear bomb. It is now in the hands of the FBI.
What authorities do not know is who leaked the top secret operation and why. Some lawmakers say future spy operations now could be in jeopardy.
A Russian airplane is missing. It is just gone right now. A plane just like this one, Sukhoi 100, it's Russia's newest civilian passenger jet.
One of the planes took off from the airport in Indonesia today on a demonstration flight. It was supposed to return after just 30 minutes. It did not. There has been no contact with the pilot, 44 people were on board. No official word yet what might have happened.
And same-sex couples in North Carolina facing uncertainty after voters approved a constitutional ban on gay marriages.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let no one define your marriage for you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Opponents say the ban amounts to discrimination. The amendment defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
The head of the group that supported the amendment says, quote, "We are not anti-gay. We are pro-marriage."
Sixty-one percent voted for the amendment, 39 percent voted against it. Protesters today now rallying outside the Bank of America's annual shareholders meeting. in charlotte, North Carolina.
What is happening here? The members of the so-called 99 Percent Power Coalition, they organized this event, and they're protesting Bank of America's foreclosure practices, as well as its investment in coal mining. Police, they are surrounding the bank's headquarters and protesters say that the bank has also hired private security.
A bomb went off in Syria today near a convoy carrying United Nations observers. Now, none of the U.N. team was hurt, but several Syrian security people went to the hospital. The head of the observer mission said that the explosion is an example of what Syrian people suffer on a daily basis.
Thirty-six-year veteran of the U.S. Senate loses by a landslide. That is right. The defeat of Senator Richard Lugar in Indiana, Republican primary, it's not really just about one man losing an election.
It could be a sign of a lot more partisanship and gridlock ahead in Washington. This is at a time when the country is facing, of course, tremendous challenges.
Richard Mourdock, he'd beat Lugar. He had a strong backing from the Tea Party. But in his parting words, Lugar had a warning about the man who defeated him.
And this is what he said. He said, "His embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results to Hoosiers in the Senate. He will find that unless he modifies his approach, he will achieve little as a legislator."
I want to bring in our Dana Bash, who knows all things on the Hill here. A lot of street cred to Dana.
We're talking about six years just ago, right? Nobody even put up anybody against Lugar. Now, six years later, he's out. First of all, how did it happen?
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think big picture, Suzanne. What happened is that Senator Lugar, all of the things he thought were the good qualities, the reasons why he should be re-elected, his seniority, the fact that he brought home the bacon with earmarks to Indiana, the fact that he was willing and eager to work across the aisle on things like the Supreme Court justices voting for the president, and the fact that he has such a history and experience on the international stage and foreign policy -- all of those things which he campaign on that he thought were good things turned out to be the exact reasons that Republican primary voters wanted him out.
They wanted somebody new. They wanted somebody who did not compromise as much with President Obama and the Democrats.
I actually had a chance to talk to the senator yesterday, and I asked about the fact that not only with him gone but other Republicans, what that means for Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: You look across the country -- Republicans like you who have lost in Republican primaries have lost in many respects because they've done too much reaching out across the aisle. Does that concern you?
SEN. DICK LUGAR (R), INDIANA: Well, unfortunately, it concerns me that people don't understand the legislative process. Some people say, well, we do understand it, and by golly, we're going to wait until we have a majority in both Houses, the White House. Whether it's two years, four years, six years, but the country has to keep going in the meanwhile.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: So, Dana, first of all, explain to us. He's just the latest in a string of moderate senators who's not going to be returning. You've got Republican Olympia Snowe, you've got independent Joe Lieberman, you've got Democrats Ben Nelson, Kent Conrad among others.
How does this set up the tone? Does the tone change at all in Washington and specifically in the Senate in terms of whether or not folks are going to be able to get things done?
BASH: There's no question that it will change the tone, a tone as you mentioned that was already changing. I mean, you just ticked off some of them, we've counted about half a dozen centrist senators, Democrats and Republicans. They won't be there next year, and it already is incredibly divisive.
And with somebody like Senator Lugar gone, it just adds to it. There's no question about it.
That is why he released this pretty extraordinary three-page statement. You read from some of it. Just as he was walking off the stage last night warning from his perspective that bipartisan is not a dirty word and that Republicans and Democrats should not be as intransigent.
Not clear if anybody is going to heed that warning, Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: And, Dana, for folks who are watching at home and they're wondering: what does this mean for me?
Are they specific policy that is might change or even things that might be abolished because you don't have any kind of bipartisan cooperation?
BASH: I think the biggest thing that we're looking for and looking towards in the future is what's going to happen with people's Social Security, with people's Medicare -- these big, monstrous programs that are in big financial trouble, particularly Medicare, that you're going to need bipartisanship on. You're going to need people willing to take risk, big political risks in order to get things done and make those programs solvent.
Whether or not that can happen with not only divided government but divisive government, that is something people need to be thinking about big time at home.
MALVEAUX: And the strength of the Tea Party here, it certainly seems to be a real factor in Lugar's defeat.
Are there moderates on both sides who should look at this and say, you know what? We're going to have to modify our agenda here because Tea Party folks, they want limited government, and they are clearly gaining some sort of traction here.
BASH: Well, it's interesting. I think actually in this particular case with Senator Lugar, there's no question the Tea Party came in big time here in Indiana with money, with manpower to help his opponent, Richard Mourdock.
But this really seemed to be more of a referendum on Senator Lugar, his longevity here, the fact he didn't necessarily vote the way they wanted.
You look at other Republicans, for example, Orrin Hatch in Utah, who is tied for Senator Lugar as the longest serving Republican senator, he did tack to the right. He tried to do whatever he could in terms of his votes to fend off the Tea Party challenge, and ultimately, it looks like he will prevail. That is not something that Senator Lugar was willing to do.
MALVEAUX: All right. Dana Bash, thank you -- as always, Dana.
We know President Obama has the Democratic nomination all locked up, right? But an opponent who is locked up gave the president a run for his money. That is in the West Virginia primary.
I want to bring in Paul Steinhauser with the details.
So, Paul, this is something a lot of folks are talking about because it was a little weird, a little surprising what happened in West Virginia yesterday.
PAUL STEINHAUSER, CNN POLITICAL EDITOR: Yes. A meaningless primary because, as you said, the president has it all locked up. Nice line there on him being all locked up. But here's the story out of West --
MALVEAUX: Can't take credit for that one.
STEINHAUSER: It's a good one, regardless.
Here's the story in West Virginia: according to the unofficial results from the secretary of state's office, right now, according to the latest count, a guy called Keith Judd. We have a -photograph of him, he's a prisoner down in Texas serving 210 months, a sentence for extortion, he's got about 40 -- just over 40 percent of the vote in West Virginia right now according to the latest numbers.
And it's just proof that President Obama does not do well electorally in West Virginia.
Let's go back four years ago when he was running for the Democratic nomination. He lost the primary to then-Senator Hillary Clinton by 40 points, and he lost the general election to John McCain.
Here is another example, a meaningless primary, but somebody who is never going to go anywhere in this election grabbing 40 percent of the vote in West Virginia.
MALVEAUX: Really, just kind of u unbelievable there.
Second, though, Paul, the state the Obama camp should be more worried about, that is North Carolina. I remember back in 2008 when he made history, he was the first Democratic presidential candidate to capture the state since 1976. But yesterday's primary, you had about 20 percent voting no preference instead of voting for President Obama.
Should the White House be worried?
STEINHAUSER: Exactly. And a good point there because West Virginia is not a state they're going to try to contest in November. They don't feel like the president can win it.
But North Carolina, of course, that's where the convention is going to be as well, a battleground state they would love to recapture again this year. Twenty percent saying no preference, 80 percent going for the president, and again, another meaningless primary.
I spoke to somebody close to the Obama campaign, the re-election campaign in Chicago. They point out that the president did better in North Carolina. He won 80 percent of the vote, than Mitt Romney did in a meaningless Republican primary, Romney only winning about 2/3, 66 percent of the vote there in North Carolina.
Regardless of the results last night, you're right, Suzanne, President Obama is going to have a tough time taking North Carolina again in November.
MALVEAUX: It's a state we're going to be watching very closely. Thank you, Paul. Good to see you.
STEINHAUSER: Thank you.
MALVEAUX: Here is a run down of some of the stories we're covering:
Stocks down again. We're going to explain why the euro is causing Americans so much pain.
And is there an effort to stop minorities from voting? The NAACP thinks so. Hear why the group is launching a voter drive in Atlanta.
And also, why women are fast becoming the richer sex in America.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POPPY HARLOW, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Who earns more?
UNIDENTFIEID FEMALE: I do.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: By a wide margin.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: All right. Don't forget, you can watch CNN live on our computer wile you're at work. Head to CNN.com/live.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: Today, we're talking about Greece and how the many problems there right now might impact us here in the United States.
Greece has some political problems, including an election that might have to be a do-over. They've got super high unemployment, high taxes, massive debt -- all this combining to create a national economy that's quite unstable. It is unpredictable. Greece might soon have to get out of the 17-nation eurozone.
I want to bring in Michael Holmes to talk about this.
First of all, it's simply a group of countries that all use that common currency.
MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: The euro, yes.
MALVEAUX: The euro here.
If Greece decides to bail, get out of the eurozone, not use it anymore, go back to its original currency, what does it mean for us?
HOLMES: It's complicated whether they can do it, even get out of the eurozone.
MALVEAUX: Sure.
HOLMES: When they formed the European Union, there was no mechanism for a country to leave it. So, they could be what's called an orderly exit with 12 to 18 months. They could have a disorderly exit. Greece would become an economic basket case.
Why do we care about what happens in Greece? Because what happens in Greece could happen in Portugal, it could happen in Spain. Spain is a massive economy within the E.U.
And what happens in Europe does flow onto here. European and U.S. economies are incredibly intertwined. They account for half of the world's GDP, a third of the world's trade.
You know, we talk all the time about how important trade with China is. Trade with Europe is three times what trade with China is, and the U.S. needs those exports to keep its own recovery going. So, it's sort of dominos here.
MALVEAUX: Michael, all the times, the euro is, what, 12 years old or so. A lot of travel back and forth in what we do to Europe.
And every time I go, the dollar, the U.S. dollar, is worth less and less. How do we reverse that?
HOLMES: Well, it's reversing at the moment because of what's going on in Europe. The euro is actually going down at the moment. So, if you were traveling down, you would get a little better value for your dollar when you go to the Europe right at the moment.
But, yes, it is true. I bet it's like any currency. You go to Australia, now the Australian dollar is worth a little more than the U.S. dollar depending on the day. That's just the way it is.
MALVEAUX: And for folks who don't travel, how does the euro affect them?
HOLMES: Well, it will affect them in what they buy because of the trade that I'm talking about. When with buy stuff from Europe, and we buy a lot of stuff from Europe, you know, if the euro is stronger, it will cost a little bit more here. So, it's going to hurt sitting at home when they go the store, and they buy anything that comes from Europe. If the euro is up, it's going to cost them more money.
It is incredibly intertwined. The U.S. economy, U.S. recovery is largely dependent on Europe not going down the drain, which it's not going to do but you have serious troubles in Greece. Serious troubles in Spain.
Watch Spain. I mean, we talk a lot about Greece because of the political problems that are going on there. Keep an eye on Spain -- much bigger economy.
MALVEAUX: Is there a possibility that this whole thing could implode and these countries go back to using their local currency?
HOLMES: Right.
MALVEAUX: The franc and the mark and the lira and all of that?
HOLMES: I don't think so. I think it's way too intertwined at the moment. And it is a strong union when it comes down to it.
I mean, you just go -- you got nations there that are suffering, the way other nations around the world are with the economic crisis. But individual nations who did way too much reckless spending.
I mean, Greece -- Greece had the most generous pension payments. You could retire at 50. I mean, it was the giveaways.
MALVEAUX: Nice.
HOLMES: Nice, but came time to pay the bills, they can't do it.
If Greece left tin a disorderly fashion, overnight everything would be worse 80 percent less. It would be an economic basket case.
MALVEAUX: We're paying close --
HOLMES: It does matter to us.
MALVEAUX: Absolutely.
HOLMES: And it matters also to Barack Obama. It becomes part of the election year thing, too, because if what happens in Europe does slow down the recovery here and the U.S. economy starts to falter a little bit because it's Europe's fault, he'll get blamed.
MALVEAUX: Yes. And he's trying desperately during this election season to essentially say, look, you know, I'm the guy to stick with because we are doing better.
HOLMES: Exactly, we're doing matter.
MALVEAUX: Right.
HOLMES: Well, that can get impacted if this goes worse.
MALVEAUX: All right. Michael, thank you. Good to see you.
HOLMES: Good to see you.
MALVEAUX: Hear why the NAACP thinks that new voter ID laws are suppressing the minority vote. I'm going to talk with the head who is hosting a huge voter drive in Atlanta today.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: All right. So when I was a White House correspondent, there was some strange mementos that could go missing from Air Force One, when we were with the president.
Apparently, my colleague Piers Morgan, he's got sticky fingers, too. Here he is last night on Conan O'Brien. Today's punch line.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CONAN O'BRIEN, COMEDIAN: You collect toilet paper do you not?
PIERS MORGAN, CNN HOST: Only particular toilet paper.
O'BRIEN: Oh, that's normal.
MORGAN: I have her majesty the queen's toilet paper. I went to Buckingham Palace for Prince Charles's 50th birthday and I thought, you know, I went, when in Rome --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When in Rome, steal the toilet paper?
MORGAN: Yes.
O'BRIEN: That's not the saying.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: That's all right. That's all right. We'll give Piers is break here.
So, you don't hear much from Ron Paul but he's still very much in the presidential race. Earlier on CNN, our Carol Costello asked him why.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. RON PAUL (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: We lost our sound there. Essentially he was talking a little bit about how he wanted to influence the conversation for the Republican convention, how he wants to bring libertarian issues to the forefront, even if he is not the main guy.
I want to bring in our political panel: Republican analyst Lenny McAllister and Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman.
So, let's talk a little bit about Ron Paul, first of all. Do we think, Lenny, that he really by carrying forward some delegates in the convention, that he's going to be able to change the discussion or the agenda?
LENNY MCALLISTER, REPUBLICAN ANALYST: He will be able to change the discussion, Suzanne, and it's not necessarily because he'll have these delegates. It's because he's been running out there as a presidential candidate for several cycles now, and he has a genuine following that hasn't gone anywhere. He has a following that is very much Tea Party.
They were Tea Party before there was an actual Tea Party over these last three years. They will have a say-so.
Now, the question is how much of a say-so, but people will listen to them. People will follow what they're saying, and they're going to have a plank in this platform somewhere. It's just a matter of how big of a plank and how big after voice Ron Paul is going to have moving into the summer.
Will he of much of one after the summer? Possibly not, but he will continue to have one within that strong --
ROBERT ZIMMERMAN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: You know, Lenny --
MCALLISTER: -- but small group he has of supporters.
MALVEAUX: Go ahead, Robert.
Do you think it's pretty smart politically he's staying in the conversation? Perhaps to get a speaking role out of all this?
ZIMMERMAN: Look, from perspective, I'd pay for his air time.
I think it's important to remember, just because he's a straight talker, it doesn't mean he's making any sense. His articulated positions are so extreme and irresponsible and ignorant. For example, his giving Iran a pass at having nuclear weapons and his other positions on the economy domestically, that ultimately he really not only hurts his own credibility but given too big an audience, he can really pull the Republican Party off message and hurt the credibility that the Republican Party is trying to build.
MALVEAUX: Lenny, do you think that's true? Do you think he's pulling them away from the main focus?
MCALLISTER: No, because if you look at the issues in regards to the national debt, the Ron Paul supporters were talking about this years ago before the Republicans or the Democrats were talking about this in the mainstream. They were the ones that initially brought this up into the conversation. They took hold of a lot of segments of the Tea Party element in 2009 and got this in a conversation, to the point we were discussing this full bore in 2011.
This is something that the president and Governor Romney both have to answer to. You have to thank the Ron Paul supporters for a lot of this when it comes into the national conversation. They could be something that could save the country as a result.
ZIMMERMAN: Lenny, the reality is it's all well and good to talk about the national debt, but their solution is to dismantle the federal government, and that's where they're going to have a problem. When they start talking about dismantling the Environmental Protection Agency, or consumer protection, or programs that benefit students or small businesses, that's where they have a real risk.
But the reality is you may be right, he might fit into the Republican Party agenda because ultimately that convention is going to be like an anger management therapy, with all the competing temperaments.
MCALLISTER: Here we go with that again, Robert.
MALVEAUX: Let me -- let me turn to Senator John McCain here. He is now criticizing President Obama saying that he has been bragging about killing Osama bin Laden. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: Well, I think one of the things, and I hope this isn't viewed in the wrong way, but, you know, heroes don't brag. Heroes don't brag. And his continuous bragging about taking out bin Laden, you know, most of the guys I know would say, let somebody else talk about that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Lenny, do you think that's fair? I mean, President Obama was before that -- not Obama, sorry, President Bush was before that "mission accomplished" sign prematurely before the end of the Iraq war and essentially everybody wants to talk about -- highlight their accomplishments.
MCALLISTER: Yes, and to be fair, if you look at the McCain/Bush dynamic over the last ten years, I would have to imagine that Senator McCain wasn't too thrilled about "mission accomplished" either. I think there's something to be said about this, but at the same time when you're running for the post of commander-in-chief, there are instances you have to show you're an effective commander-in-chief.
I personally have no problem with President Obama taking credit and showing that this is something he did a as commander-in-chief. The problem is moving forward.
It is one accomplishment. We have to look at the record over four years. We have to look at how he's dealt with Iran. We have to look at how he's been able to continue our relationship with Israel and how we move forward there -- in addition to the national economy there.
If Republicans focus too much on foreign affairs, they're going to have a harder argument to make. They need President Obama from a political standpoint to not talk so much about foreign affairs and get back to the economy. That's where Obama's weakness is and that's where Governor Romney needs to attack as president on if he wants to get elected in November.
MALVEAUX: Robert, I want to bring in the issue of Rick Santorum here. He was on Jay Leno, explaining why it was in the 13th paragraph of this endorsement of Mitt Romney, kind of buried the lead there, that he was eventually going to support him.
Here is how he explained it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RICK SANTORUM (R), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I have some concerns and I voiced some of the things I thought were important for us if we were going to be successful in this general election, that he would, you know, take the cudgel and run with it. And I felt comfortable after that meeting. And over the weekend, I worked on it, and we decided to put it out late at night so it would be the first thing people would see in the morning.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Robert, do you buy it?
ZIMMERMAN: If he was so concerned about getting it out there as the first thing, remember, he put the endorsement in the 13th paragraph. Let's be real.
If Senator Santorum could have used a carrier pigeon or if the telegram existed, he would have tried that tactic. This was the most haunting, halting type of endorsement I think I have ever seen from a serious presidential contender who didn't get the nomination.
It was obviously very -- he was very conflicted about it and gave it with great hesitation.
MALVEAUX: Does it make a difference, Lenny, that he was conflicted or he hesitated. I mean, ultimately, he got it.
MCALLISTER: It makes a difference in May. What the message is moving forward though is Governor Romney, you need to get fervent support from the conservative base, not just de facto support from the conservative base. And in order to do that, these are the things that you need to do.
In that regard, it was a good move by Senator Santorum to make sure that there were certain things that were spelled out to basically give a road map to Governor Romney to say, listen, in the months that you'll need to fire up the conservative base to not just vote for you, but to get other people to vote for you, to convince independents, you need to do these things and speak to these issues in order to get us fired up to get you elected in November.
In that regard, it's a good move. It may seem swishy now, but we're not worried about how it looks in May. We're worried about the results in November.
MALVEAUX: And you guys -- go ahead, go ahead.
ZIMMERMAN: Suzanne, I'd just say, Lenny's comments and Rick Santorum's e-mail goes back to my original point. That Republican convention is going to be an anger management therapy session for the right wing.
MCALLISTER: No, it's not. No, it's not. They're angry at President Obama for what he's been doing over the last four years, and they're going to take that anger out at the ballot box in November. That's the only --
(CROSSTALK)
ZIMMERMAN: I think they're angry at each other.
MALVEAUX: Do you think they'll be swearing sweater vests? There was a moment there on "Leno" where Santorum give him the signature sweater vest. Do you think it's going to be a trained here guys?
ZIMMERMAN: Oh, absolutely. Not only would they be sweater vest, Newt Gingrich is getting the child labor to create the sweater vests.
MALVEAUX: Oh, gee. Lenny, do you want to come back?
ZIMMERMAN: That was Newt's idea, not mine.
MALVEAUX: Oh, boy!
MCALLISTER: You know what? I'm not going to get into that. President Obama has enough issues to worry about in regards to flip- flopping and backing away from things and staying away from North Carolina. As long as they're not wearing sweater vests in the middle of the summer in North Carolina and Florida, I think everybody will be OK.
MALVEAUX: All right. Rough crowd there. Rough crowd.
All right. Lenny, Robert, good to see you both. Thank you.
ZIMMERMAN: Good to be with you.
MALVEAUX: Sure.
MCALLISTER: God bless.
MALVEAUX: Hear why the head of the NAACP thinks new voter ID laws are suppressing the minority vote. We're going to talk about him about why he's hosting a voter drive in Atlanta today.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: Battle over new voter ID laws is spreading across the country ahead of the presidential election. In state after state Republican legislative majorities and governors are passing laws calling for stricter ID requirements at the polls.
Civil liberties groups accused them of targeting minorities, the elderly as well as the poor. Well, here's the lay of the land. Right now, 31 states require voters to show some form of ID before casting a ballot. It's about have acquire photo IDs.
The states you see in orange, they have strict photo ID laws meaning that if a registered voter cannot provide a government-issued photo identification card, that person cannot vote on Election Day.
Instead, the voter can cast a provisional ballot that would be counted only if the voters can produce a photo ID within days. Now supporters say the new laws protect the integrity of the election process by eliminating voter fraud.
Plus they also argue that showing photo ID is an acceptable part of everyday life. I'm joined by NAACP President and Chairman Ben Jealous.
Ben, thank you for joining us here. You're kicking off this voter registration drive here in Atlanta, but it's a nationwide campaign.
You have compared these new voters ID laws to Jim Crow, and there's some people who say, wait a minute that sounds a bit extreme, that this is a scare tactic. Why do you make that kind of comparison?
BENJAMIN JEALOUS, PRESIDENT AND CEO, NAACP: Sure. First of all, let's start with the fact that we're actually still dealing with Jim Crow voter suppression laws. (Inaudible) still exist in several states.
Just put back on the books in Florida pushing 500,000 voters off the roll, 250,000 blacks off the roll. They were put in place as a wave after the civil war for the express purpose of suppressing the black vote.
So we are still dealing with Jim Crow voting laws right now, but these voter ID laws are like Jim Crow because it put the first financial barriers between somebody and casting their vote that we've seen since we got rid of the poll tax.
MALVEAUX: How so when you say financial barriers?
JEALOUS: Somebody has to pay to get their ID or they have to pay to get their documents to get the ID. The state says the ID is free, but you have to go get your birth certificate and you have to pay for that.
We have a doctor in rural South Carolina, Dr. Williams, has belonged to the association, her family, for two or three generations. She spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of her own hours hiring lawyers, working with her patients in her medical practice to help them get IDs.
Why, because these are rural folks born to midwives, too poor to own a car. Their midwife didn't make sure they got a birth certificate when they were born decades ago. They've been too poor to get a car so they don't have a current driver's license and they're literally getting them documentation just so they can vote.
MALVEAUX: Help me understand this because documentation and photo ID, it's a normal regular part of life living here in the United States. Isn't there assistance for folks so they can comply with these laws and they can actually vote? I mean, groups like the NAACP can help people actually get that kind of money, the funds, to produce an ID?
JEALOUS: Just think about that, right? We're back to the NAACP having to help people get the money to vote again. It's insane. We're a free country. In every western democracy voting is free.
In fact, in places like the U.K. it follows you where you go like selective service does here. We can actually expand the vote and secure it at the same time, but that's not what they're trying to do.
This problem they say we have of people impersonating voters, the Republican lawyers association did the most extensive survey. They found 350 cases out of tens of millions -- hundreds of millions of votes cast over 15 years, maybe 20 cases a year.
Most states we're putting on place actually haven't had a problem in the past several cycles. You have to ask yourself why are you making it harder for millions and millions of people to vote to stop maybe 25 cases in the entire country in an entire year?
The question is the impact and the impact is that we know that for instance three-quarters of young black men in some cities in the Midwest don't currently have an up to date valid ID. We're saying to folks go out and get your ID. We also know it's going to be much harder for them to vote.
MALVEAUX: People inside the Obama administration are very concerned they don't have the same kind of enthusiasm moving forward when it comes to black and Latino voters. Is this a campaign, an effort to get people to vote, or is it a campaign essentially to vote for Obama? Is this a re-election campaign?
JEALOUS: We don't work for this candidate or that candidate. We work for people to make sure that they can vote. We were out here fighting voter suppression when it was Democrats doing it. Now we're fighting voter suppression when in most cases it's Republicans doing it.
You have folks out there who clearly have a very partisan goal on the other side. They have targeted so-called battleground states like Florida, like Georgia, like North Carolina, like Pennsylvania, trying to push these through.
We saw Governor Scott Walker first push through voter ID and then turn around and saying they're going to shut down licensing stations in ten of the poorest areas of the state. All trying to get that done before the vote for recall and then we see this big push.
This has happened before this presidential. The NAACP is 100 years. What we have seen in the 100 years is whenever we have a massive expansion of the vote for black people in this country. It's followed by a backlash.
It happened 50 years before we started right after the civil war. It happened 50 years ago during the civil rights movement, and now it's happened again following the breaking of the color barrier at the White House by the largest most diverse presidential election ever.
MALVEAUX: So ou're saying there's a backlash at this moment. Effectively --
JEALOUS: I'm saying we're fighting people who are partisan, but we're not partisan.
MALVEAUX: Before November what can you actually do? You know the Justice Department is obviously taking on some of these voter ID laws. But before November, is it better, is it more effective to simply try to help people get their IDs or are you trying to change the law? JEALOUS: Before November, we are fighting attempts to change the law wherever it happens. Before November, we're pushing DOJ to invalidate unconstitutional laws and laws that violate the voting rights act across the country.
Most importantly, before November we're signing up as many people as possible to vote and getting them to commit to turn out and vote because the reality is that, look, 40 percent, 50 percent of this country in a given year who are signed up to vote may not vote. So that we know that we can overcome these hurdles if we push more people to get signed up to vote. We push more people to turn out and vote.
MALVEAUX: All right, Ben Jealous of the NAACP, good to see you as always.
JEALOUS: Always good to see you.
MALVEAUX: Thanks, Ben.
Taking to the streets to take on big banks. We're going to find out what's going on at the Bank of America that's got all of those protesters fired up.
Also, don't forget, you can watch CNN live on your computer while you're at work. Head to cnn.com/live.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: We've all heard about "Occupy Wall Street." What about occupy the Bank of America? There are protesters outside the bank's headquarters in Charlotte, North Korea. That's happening right now.
Alison Kosik is at the New York Stock Exchange to talk a little bit about why are they demonstrating against the bank?
ALISON KOSIK, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Well, they have a few gripes with Bank of America as you said. You know, we are talking about that 99 percent. They're back in a big way and taking aim at Bank of America right outside the Charlotte headquarters protesting.
This group is called 99 percent power coalition, and this is happening right when B of A is actually holding their shareholder meeting. One protester, Suzanne, calls B of A the worst of the worst.
And they have some demands here. They want Bank of America to cut principle payments on mortgages that are underwater. They're also calling for a moratorium on foreclosures and they're asking that the CEO's pay package worth up to $7 million. They want that pay package voted down -- Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: So Alison, you have these demands, you have protesters outside of the building. Do we think that there is going to be any kind of impact here? Are they going to affect CEO pay vote after all?
KOSIK: Well, as far as the CEO's pay, yes, good luck with getting shareholders to vote that down. You know, shareholders are probably going to OK that big pay package for CEO Brian Moynihan.
Because the way they see it, they see that $7 million as actually one of the lowest pay packages among bank CEOs even though 7 million bucks seems like a lot to you and me.
Also Moynihan actually took a $3 million pay cut. He made $10 million the year before, but one analyst says Moynihan actually ranks as one of the worst big bank CEOs because you look at how Bank of America's stock performance has been.
Shares are down more than 40 percent under his leadership, and this is even after the recession, but to be fair, other CEOs, they're having a hard time, too, in the face of tougher regulation, lots of problems in the mortgage market. Many people don't shed any tears over that situation -- Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: Millions of dollars there that those guys make. And we're looking at the stock market here, Alison, triple digit loss again. What's going on?
KOSIK: It looks like it could be day six down for stocks. You know what? Investors, Suzanne, they're nervous about this political situation that continues to brew in Greece. Greece right now is still trying to form its new government.
There are lots of questions as to when that new government is in place. Will it throw that entire bailout agreement -- will it be thrown out? It throws it into question. Will it be renegotiated?
So a lot of uncertainty. That doesn't breed much confidence into buying into the market. Also not a lot of economic news coming out of here in the U.S. so the focus sitting squarely on Greece's issues and we are watching the Dow fall 105 points -- Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: All right, Alison, thank you very much.
Well, women are fast becoming the richer sex in the country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ERIN WETTY, ATTORNEY: Bye.
DAVID WETTY, STAY-AT-HOME DAD: Bye.
E. WETTY: I'll see you tonight.
D. WETTY: Yes. Yes.
E. WETTY: I'm out the door by 7:45. And on my way to work. And then that's when Dave takes over full time.
D. WETTY: You're tired and hungry and you (INAUDIBLE).
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MALVEAUX: Awe. Find out why mom's the breadwinner and dad's at home with the kids.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: Working women are becoming richer. So much so that almost four out of 10 wives earn more than their husbands. Now, this is a growing trend and it's fueled in part by the recession. Poppy Harlow talked to two couples where the wives were the breadwinners, the husbands, stay-at-home dads.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
POPPY HARLOW, CNNMONEY.COM: Who earns more?
ERIN WETTY, ATTORNEY: I do.
DAVID WETTY, STAY-AT-HOME DAD: By a wide margin.
HARLOW (voice-over): Welcome to life with the Wettys and the Landrys.
D. WETTY: (INAUDIBLE).
E. WETTY: Bye.
D. WETTY: Bye.
E. WETTY: I'll see you tonight.
D. WETTY: Yes. Yes.
E. WETTY: I'm out the door by 7:45 and on my way to work and then that's when Dave takes over full time.
D. WETTY: You're tired and hungry and you (INAUDIBLE).
HARLOW: Professional stay-at-home dads and their working wives bringing home the bacon.
D. WETTY: We have a little star tower. He loves it.
BRETT LANDRY, STAY-AT-HOME DAD: He has his little cars, his Hot Wheels.
HARLOW (on camera): Did this take mental adjustment and deriving your worth from something other than your job?
B. LANDRY: Yes. There would be days when I would be at the supermarket amongst all the other moms shopping and I'm thinking, hmm, I'm home, they're home. I should be working but I'm with my kid. What do they think of me?
HARLOW (voice-over): Nearly 40 percent of married working women in the U.S. now out earn their husbands. A trend that's been steadily increasing since the late 1980s. That despite the fact that women working full time still earn a median wage lower than men. LIZA MUNDY, AUTHOR, "THE RICHER SEX": Women are on track to become majority breadwinners in families where women work. And most women do work. If we keep going at the same rate, by 2030, a majority of working wives will out earn their husbands.
HARLOW: Liza Mundy is the author of "The Richer Sex."
MUNDY: Long term structural changes in the economy are favoring women.
HARLOW: The pill, education, and the man-session.
B. LANDRY: The recession happened. My job started to become harder and harder. And she was making more.
HARLOW: Today, 57 percent of college students are women. And more women are getting master's degrees and Ph.D.s than men, which is translating into higher paying jobs.
HARLOW (on camera): Do you guys think we're seeing a societal shift here? Something pretty dramatic?
B. LANDRY: I think so. It's just, you know, the recession put a lot of people out of work and it gave women the opportunity to say, look, I've gone to college. I've -- you know, I have the -- I can do this. I'm going to prove myself. And men now have to prove to themselves, to the world, that they can -- anyone can stay at home with their kids.
D. WETTY: I think the recession also taught people that your job doesn't define you. And if you do, it will crush you.
HARLOW: Does this mean the downfall of men?
MUNDY: It by no means is the downfall of men. I think it's a real liberation for men in terms of not being trapped by that job that you hate, that you feel like you had to take just to support a wife and children.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MALVEAUX: OK, Poppy, I know that these wives even talked about giving their husbands paid vacation days. Is that true?
HARLOW: It's absolutely true. Stephanie Landry and her husband Brett do that. She works in technology for AT&T and she gives him paid vacation weeks off. And she told me, the more he works at home, being with the kid, the more years, the more vacation he's going to accrue.
And then the other couple sitting with them, the Wettys, heard that and they thought, oh, that's a great idea. So I wouldn't be surprised, Suzanne, if they started doing that, too.
But on a more serious note, when you look at the numbers here, this really interesting study just came out from Pew. And what it showed is that 66 percent of young women age 18 to 34 now are ranking career high on their list of life priorities.
MALVEAUX: Wow.
HARLOW: And 59 percent of men are. And that's a huge reversal from the '90s when men were way move women in that. Now women more are ranking career higher. So things are changing. It's a new world.
MALVEAUX: Wow. Dynamic changes. Absolutely. A little bit more equality it looks like, hopefully.
HARLOW: Yes.
MALVEAUX: How does this impact some of the families that you talked to?
HARLOW: That's the question. These were incredibly well-adjusted families. The husbands are very happy doing this. The wives are very happy doing what they're doing. I pressed then a lot and I said, come on, is it difficult to explain to relatives or more traditional parents? One of the couples did say, you know, it was a little bit to explain to my father, who was surprised by this. But, no, they're both photographers, so they both do work, they just don't work, you know, every day. They work weddings and that sort of thing. But they seem, and I spent the whole day with them, very, very well adjusted to this.
At the same time, Suzanne, as an experiment, when I was at the airport flying back from Atlanta, I talked to different people and asked them what they thought. Would they be OK as a husband staying at home. And most of the answers that I got was, you know, I would like to say I am, but I'm not really there yet.
MALVEAUX: Not so much. OK.
HARLOW: So I think that these are -- these are unique couples.
MALVEAUX: Yes, still evolving there. Still changing.
All right, Poppy, great story. Good to see you.
HARLOW: Thank you.
MALVEAUX: Well, this is something you'd expect to see in a James Bond movie except for the spy story we're about to tell you is very real. The man who pulled it off may have saved American lives.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MALVEAUX: We talked about a spy bombshell. We now know that it was a mole who infiltrated al Qaeda, walked off with a sophisticated new bomb built by the terror group in Yemen. Many U.S. lawmakers, they're angry now that this information was leaked. Barbara Starr, she's following this from the Pentagon.
And I understand that you've got some new information about this.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: We do, indeed, Suzanne.
CNN has just learned that the U.S. intelligence community has now begun its own review of all of this, trying to determine if there was unauthorized disclosure of classified information about this entire situation. James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, oversees thousands of people, millions of dollars in work, and he is now ordering a review across all 16 intelligence agencies trying to figure out if his people had any role in this getting out.
This review, however, quite interestingly, will not include Congress, the White House, or the national security staff because they're not part of the intelligence community. But it's just another step here in how concerned the administration is about this information getting out, Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: Yes, how damaging do they think this leak was?
STARR: Well, the question remains to be answered. But look at it this way. What we do know now, is as you just said, this is a mole that was put in place apparently by all accounts by Saudi intelligence right into the heart of one of the most dangerous elements in the al Qaeda organization. And he managed to get the information that was needed and walk off with that sophisticated device, which is now being analyzed by the FBI.
The Saudis perhaps themselves are making it very clear that he was under their control at all times. That the device posed no threat to U.S. aviation. But this now sheds light into Saudi intelligence operations, which are so sensitive, U.S. intelligence operations, and what the U.S. does and does not know about al Qaeda in Yemen.
These should be some of the most closely held secrets of everyone in the intelligence community. And it's all out there right now. So it remains to be seen whether folks determine that permanent damage has been done or perhaps, just perhaps, there are people out there that were happy to get the information out and let al Qaeda know that the Saudis and the U.S. know what they're up to.
Suzanne.
MALVEAUX: OK, Barbara Starr out of the Pentagon. Thank you, Barbara. Appreciate it.
We're going to take a quick break. We'll have much more.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
