Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Justices Weigh Federal Marriage Law; Same-Sex Marriage Benefits at Issue; Viagra Turns 15 Today; Number of Cancer Survivors Increasing; Airlines Discussing Rules on Electronics; Financial Questions Answered

Aired March 27, 2013 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Day two of arguments over same-sex marriage Day. The Supreme Court weighing in on a federal law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman prevents same sex partners from receiving federal benefits. It is -- we're going to bring you the very latest from the court straight ahead.

And this, as new laws in North Dakota ban most abortions and take aim at Roe V. Wade. How the state's move could lead to the Supreme Court.

And it's been 15 years since the little blue pill began helping men have a better sex life. But where's the pill for the ladies?

This is CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Suzanne Malveaux. The Supreme Court wrapping up second day of hearings in an epic culture war over same sex marriage. Today, the focus was over a federal law that defines benefits to same-sex -- denies, rather, benefits to same-sex couples. The law is known as the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA. It applies to federal taxes, Social Security, pensions, other benefits, you name it.

Now, this case involves Edith Windsor, who was forced to pay a larger portion in estate taxes after her partner died because the federal government did not recognize their marriage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EDITH WINDSOR: Turns out marriage is different. OK. And I've asked a number of long-range couples -- gay couples who they got married, and I've asked them, was it different the next morning? And the answer is always yes. It's a huge difference. And -- OK, when our marriage appeared in the "New York Times," (INAUDIBLE), we heard from literally hundreds of people, I mean little playmates and schoolmates and colleagues and friends and relatives all congratulating us and sending love because we were married. So, it's a magic word for anybody who doesn't understand why we want it and why we need it, OK, it's -- it is magic.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Jeffrey Toobin, Joe Johns, both inside the court for the hearings today. So, Jeff, first of all, if you would for our viewers, just remind them of what this case is about that led to this historic arguments that were made.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, the Defense of Marriage Act passed in 1996 and signed by Bill Clinton into law says that the federal government will not recognize same sex marriages even in states where it's legal. And Edith Windsor, who everybody just saw, she was married in New York State and her partner died. Her wife died and she had to pay $363,000 in federal income tax that she would not have had to pay if the federal government, the Internal Revenue Service, had recognized their marriage. So, she argued that the Defense of Marriage Act by penalizing same sex marriage, people involved in same sex marriages, that was a violation of their constitutional right. That was the case argued today. And it was a good day on balance, I would say, for Edith Windsor's side.

And, Joe, describe for us, what was the most compelling moment inside the courtroom today?

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: There were several compelling moments, but I would say there was the whole discussion about the Defense of Marriage Act and the justifications or reasons for the government passing the law. The attorney who was defending the Defense of Marriage Act maintained throughout that it was about uniformity. For example, creating a situation so that soldiers who move from bases from state to state wouldn't be confused about what their benefits are.

But Justice Elena Kagan raised a question as to whether something else was afoot for perhaps moral disapproval as she read from the Congressional record of gay people. The chief justice, Justice Roberts, shot back at that time, well, you've got 80 some senators who actually voted in favor of this in 1996. Do you think it was just about moral disapproval? So, a big question about the motivations behind the Defense of Marriage Act as well as what it does to the pocketbooks of these same-sex couples in nine states where same-sex marriage is recognized -- Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: And, Jeff, do you have any sense of either way which way this could go? Could they actually say, we're not going to take this up at all?

TOOBIN: Well, you know, I-- keep in mind that I have a famously bad record in predicting how these -- how these cases come out. But they're -- the argument that seemed to have five justices supporting it was not so much about discrimination but about what the lawyers call federalism, about the states' rights.

Anthony Kennedy, who is so often the swing vote on these sorts of issues, seemed very concerned that the Defense of Marriage Act interfered with states' rights when it comes to regulating marriage which is traditionally regulated by the states. And if he votes with the four Democratic appointees that the Defense of Marriage Act is an unconstitutional invasion on states' rights, then Edith Windsor wins her case and DOMA is gone. It is perhaps -- it would not be the ringing victory for gay rights that some people might want, but a win would be a win. And DOMA would be gone if there are five votes as there appear to be in -- to overturn the law. MALVEAUX: All right. Jeff, Joe, we've got to leave it there. Obviously, we'll be following the case very closely. Thanks again. We appreciate it.

We are also keeping an eye on the markets. The Dow is down after yesterday's record close of 14,559. Zain Asher keeping track in New York. How does it look now?

ZAIN ASHER, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Suzanne. The Dow is backing off yesterday's record high, S&P also pulling back slightly. The S&P had been on our record high watch list after getting within two points of it yesterday. But this morning, we did get news that pending home sales unexpectedly fell .4 percent but the big issue, Suzanne, is still Europe. We've got two new reports showing that confidence in Europe is falling. You've got regulators saying that European banks desperately need to raise money to plug a shortfall. Also, (INAUDIBLE) banks will remain closed until tomorrow and reportedly going to be street controls on how much depositors will be able to withdraw. Analysts are saying that Europe is getting demolished, but a selloff was overdue giving the U.S. markets want to move higher but there's -- until there's a firm plan in Europe we can and should expect volatility. Now adding to that, trading volume is going to be light as Wall Street empties out for Passover and Good Friday as well -- Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: All right, Zain, thank you. Appreciate it.

So, the little blue pill that millions of men turn to everyday, Viagra, turns 15 years old today. Eight million Viagra prescriptions were written last month alone. Such a cash cow. Why isn't a similar pill being marketed to women with sexual dysfunction? Well, Elizabeth Cohen joins us to talk a little bit about that. And you would think, right, drug companies making a lot of money over men in Viagra that they would try to develop something for women. Why hasn't that happened?

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Suzanne, it's not for a want of trying. The drug companies know the statistics that I'm about to read to you. This is a statistic that says 40 percent of women say that they have experienced some type of sexual dysfunction at some point in their lives. That's a really high number. There's a great opportunity there. So, for example, (INAUDIBLE) try Viagra in women. You know what? It didn't work. And other companies have tried other drugs for women. So far, none approved by the FDA. Either they didn't work very well or they had side effects that really called into question whether it was worth it. So, so far, they've tried but haven't succeeded.

MALVEAUX: OK. Why has it been easier to develop that kind of pill for men?

COHEN: You know, to put it sort of gently here, men are much more mechanical -- excuse me, much more mechanical than women are. For men, it is all about blood flow to a certain area of the body. For women, blood flow is also important, but what's really important is what's going on up here. There has to be desire. And when they talk to women with sexual dysfunction, it is all about desire. And it's just very difficult to get at that problem.

MALVEAUX: Yes. So, what do you do? What's the next step? It seems like it would be very hard to create a pill that creates the desire.

COHEN: Right, or as some people have said, it's hard to create a pill that makes a man more sensitive and attractive, some people have sort of looked at it that way as well. But I actually got to visit with a -- with a researcher at Stanford University who is actually doing MRIs, and not just plain old MRIs, she's having women watch porn as she does the MRIs, and she can actually see that there are parts of the brain that don't light up with women who have sexual dysfunction. She's showing them porn, it should light up and doesn't light up. So, some people say that that's the kind of research that's needed in order to sort of get at what's going on in the female brain and try to develop a drug that will work on it.

MALVEAUX: Yes, fascinating. I'm sure a lot of people trying to figure out, you know, what's inside our heads, what makes us tick?

COHEN: Right.

MALVEAUX: Elizabeth, thank you very much. I appreciate it.

COHEN: Right, what do women want?

MALVEAUX: Right, absolutely.

For a full report on the lack of a little pink pill, watch "THE LEAD" tonight at 4:00 p.m. Eastern. That is this afternoon right here on CNN.

And here's what's also coming up for this hour. Why financial guru Suze Orman says legalizing same sex marriage, it makes sense. Plus, she's going to answer some of your financial questions. If you have a question for Suze, tweet me and she'll try to answer as many of those questions as possible.

And then, tablets, cell phones, computers keeping us all plugged in online and on air but except while in the air. Why fliers are told to turn off their devices. And what airlines are doing to lift that ban on electronics.

Then, why Justin Bieber's neighbors may not be fans. The 19-year-old singer is being accused of being threatening to neighbors.

This is CNN NEWSROOM. It's happening now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: A new study now finds the number of people who will survive cancer will increase by 31 percent over the next decade. So, the American association for Cancer Research reports there will be almost 18 million cancer survivors. Women with breast cancer and men with prostate cancer will be the two largest groups of survivors. Now, the reason is advances in early detection and improvements in cancer treatment. We're going to have more on this at the top of the hour as well.

And another story we're following, when you fly, do you ignore the rule to switch off the iPad or the laptop, you know? I mean, it happens, right? Takeoff, landings, you're not alone. CNN's David Mattingly reports that even the FAA is now considering waving the rules.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Pads, pods, tablets, laptops, smartphones, they all keep us plugged in online and on the air. Everywhere that is except in the air when taking off and landing.

JOHN WALLS, VICE PRESIDENT, CTIA-THE WIRELESS ASSOCIATION: It certainly appears that using an electronic device to read a magazine, to read a book, is not a safety factor.

MATTINGLY: Anyone who flies could tell you how often the rule is ignored, but it's announced every single flight. Delta's safety video even tries to have some fun with it.

UNIDENDITIFED FEMALE: And electronic devices are turned off.

MATTINGLY: But using personal electronic devices below 10,000 feet is banned on most airlines because of the possibility their signals could interfere with aircraft systems. And this hasn't been without moments of rebellion. Actor Alec Baldwin made headlines when he was kicked off an American flight for playing a game in 2011. The FAA is now looking into changing the rules to allow some devices to stay on. Passengers are waiting for clarity for all the options available to them.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think that if it keeps the people on board safer and if it messes with stuff on the plane, then I think it's OK to do.

MATTINGLY: But flight attendants, the people who tell you when to hit the off switch, also say it's a matter of getting your attention during the most sensitive parts of the flight.

VELDA SHOOK, ASSOCIATION OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS: Someone's listening to their music or they have -- they're watching a video and they've got their beats on or their noise canceling headphones, we want to make sure that if there is a situation that passengers need to hear and understand that they will be able to do so.

MATTINGLY: The national association of airline passengers actually agrees. Unplugging for a few minutes is a small price to pay for safety.

DOUGLASS KIDD, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AIRLINE PASSENGERS: So we do not as passengers want to do anything that will interfere or distract the pilots at this critical time of the flight.

MATTINGLY: The pressure is to bring the rules up to date with the proliferation of electronic devices. Even the FCC urged the FAA to allow greater use of tablets, e-readers and other portable electronic devices. Delta is also on record urging the FAA to expand use of electronic devices in flight. But limiting cell phone calls to on the ground only.

There's congressional pressure for change as well. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri says the continued restrictions threaten to undermine confidence in the FAA. The agency already allows pilots to use electronic tablets in the cockpit. An FAA committee is due to report its recommendations this summer. Changes, if any, may not come until months later. David Mattingly, CNN, Atlanta.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX: All right. You want to know how to save for a house or perhaps pay off debt or buy a new car, coming up financial guru Suze Orman is in the house answering your financial questions. If you've got something you want answered, tweet me.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: All right. Financial expert guru Suze Orman in the house, keeping a close eye as well on the impending Supreme Court action on the Defense of Marriage Act. She says that marriage inequality costs American companies. She's joining us from New York. Suze, good to see you as always.

SUZE ORMAN, HOST, CNBC'S "SUZE ORMAN SHOW": Thank you, my friend.

MALVEAUX: Well, it's very nice to see you as well. First of all, explain to us because I know that you wear many different hats here. So you and K.T. (ph) your partner got married in South Africa. You're watching what happens at the Supreme Court. Tell us why this matters.

ORMAN: It matters a lot. Number one, on a personal level. But really on a rights level. When two people love each other and they are committed to one another, they should be able to get married whether they are a male and a female, a female and a female, and a male or a male. And why is that? Because financially speaking, there is a tremendous amount of discrepancy, of bias, that goes on for a gay couple. Gay couple partner has to pay income tax on the health benefits. Social Security, not part of it. Not part of estate tax, on limited (ph) estate tax, to be able to transfer assets from one spouse to another. And on and on and on. So the day has come now where we pay taxes, we're vital members of society, we should have the rights to love each other and to also be honored as one just like everybody else.

MALVEAUX: And, Suze, you and I have talked about this before. But you say that of course there's a lot of inequality when it comes to gay couples, gay married couples as well financially, but you've also made the case this would be a smart economic move, smart financial move for this country as well. How so?

ORMAN: Well, you know, for instance, I'll give you an idea. Let's just say that the Supreme Court overturns DOMA today. And they do that in June when they announce. And now it is legal on a federal level they're recognizing it. We have nine states that say if in fact, let's say California -- yesterday's decision says California is legal but only for California. We have nine states now that will be recognized. Number one, I personally would seriously consider leaving Florida, my state of residency, and go to where? Whether it's New York, California, so I can be legal.

The same is true with companies. When companies provide benefits for same sex legal marriages, whether it's with pensions or whatever, they will attract money. They will attract a certain type of employee. You know, you have places like Rhode Island where -- you know, I was speaking with the governor there. And it was like, yes, what does he want? He wants Rhode Island to say it is legal so that he can attract business to Rhode Island. So when the laws are favorable it will also be favorable for a business as well.

MALVEAUX: All right. Suze, we asked Twitter followers to ask some questions. Here, we have one person who is asking here, "we are subject to furloughs and we follow a strict budget but need to make cuts for a bit. What is the best way?"

ORMAN: You know, so many times when you have to cut money, you cut you never go out to eat, you never go to a movie. You cut, cut, cut. And all of a sudden because you've cut everything out you explode and before you know it you do what? You go out and you spend more money than you did beforehand. Just cut a little from every category. If you go to the movies four times a month, go twice. If you eat out once a week, eat out every other week. If you get a haircut, once every four weeks get a haircut every six weeks. Little by little if you cut, you won't feel like you cut and you'll be able to carry on for the rest of your lives.

MALVEAUX: Here's somebody else asking "I have a rental and need to keep a large amount of money for expenses. I put it in a money market at 1 percent. Where can I get a higher percent?"

ORMAN: You really can't today. That's what's so very, very sad about the fact that interest rates even though they are low so if you want to borrow money to buy a house or something, great for you. But if you're retired or need money that has to be safe and sound, there is nowhere today you can put it to get maybe higher than 1 percent or 1.5 percent interest. Just be patient. Leave the money there. One percent is better than taking your money and putting it in the market and losing 10 percent. So just leave it there.

MALVEAUX: Finally, Suze, another person asking in foreclosures or short sales, do banks really add their losses to the sellers as added income on their taxes?

ORMAN: So it depends what kind of home you happen to be foreclosing on or short selling. If it is a rental property, oh, yes, you will pay income taxes in many of the cases not all on the difference between what you owed and really what you got for that house. If it's a primary residency, you do not owe income taxes on it at all.

MALVEAUX: All right. Suze, thank you so much. For everything. You figure. it all out for us. As always.

ORMAN: All right. I hope I see you soon.

MALVEAUX: Absolutely. Appreciate it.

Check this out. It is a symbol. It is going viral on social media. It shows support for same sex marriage. Now, whether or not you support it got us thinking could actually liking this sign of support get you in trouble at work? We're going to explain why.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Domestic violence expert returns to the stand today in the Jodi Arias murder trial. The psychotherapist testified yesterday that victims often keep their abuse secret because they're ashamed of it. Now, the testimony this is apparently meant to address a key question in the case. Why there are no witnesses to backup Arias' claims that her boyfriend, Travis Alexander, physically abused her. Arias, as you know, charged with shooting Alexander in the face, stabbing him multiple times and slashing his throat. She claims she killed him in self-defense.

A disabled man who was stuck inside Disneyland's Small World ride has been awarded $8,000. He sued after the incident happened. This happened back in 2009. The boat ride that broke down is Jose Martinez a paraplegic was just about to get off. Other riders were evacuated immediately, but Martinez had to wait 30 minutes with the ride's signature tune blaring before the crews actually got out to him. And Disneyland says park officials they believe acted appropriately.

Police make a dramatic rescue caught on camera. The officer's camera. A 38-year-old man slammed his truck into a building. This happened in Euclid, Ohio. Burst into flames, you can see. Trapping him inside. Police put out the fire. Then pulled him to safety through the window. The man was treated and released and then arrested on DUI charges.