Return to Transcripts main page
CNN News Central
NIH Moves To Ban Grants To Universities With DEI, Israel Boycotts; GOP Rep. Byron Donalds Faces Shouting, Critical Questions Over DOGE; Trump Budget Proposals To Gut Weather And Climate Research; Trump Admin To Unveil Plan To Remove Some Artificial Dyes From Foods. Aired 2:30-3p ET
Aired April 22, 2025 - 14:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:31:29]
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: New medical research funding could be on the chopping block as the White House escalates its fight with universities. The targets, schools that participate in boycotts of Israeli companies, along with those that continue to maintain their DEI programs.
CNN's Meg Tirrell has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, this new policy from the NIH is really a blanket guideline across any recipients of NIH funding. And it says it goes into place April 21st and it applies to all domestic recipients of new, renewal supplements or continuation awards.
And it prohibits any recipients of NIH funding from operating DEI programs or engaging with in what the administration calls, quote, "discriminatory prohibited boycotts of Israeli companies."
Now we know that the NIH is the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, with a budget of about $48 billion. And 83 percent of that going to external research.
And that really supports work at more than 2,500 universities, medical centers and research institutes across the entire United States.
And so this is a continuation of pressure we have seen from the Trump administration around these issues on universities.
And importantly, universities have already been making changes, particularly to DEI programs, based on pressure and policies already from the Trump administration.
So it remains to be seen exactly how this guidance will change things, how it will be applied.
But really a blanket statement about NIH funding recipients that continues the pressure we've been seeing on individual universities so far.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Our thanks to Meg Tirrell for that report.
So Republican Congressman Byron Donalds faced a contentious town hall in Florida where attendees shouted and pressed him with questions about DOGE oversight.
He then shouted back at them. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. BYRON DONALDS (R-FL): You don't ask me about my life, sir. I like how everybody's shouting at me. The black guy on the stage with a microphone in his hand saying, have you read this book? Read this book, read this book, read this book.
Come on, marginalize my life and what I've done. Don't do that. If you want to have a shouting match with me, let's have a shouting match on the facts.
(SHOUTING)
DONALDS: Oh! Settle down. Settle down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Donalds is the latest member of Congress to face constituents who are angry over President Trump's sweeping overhaul of the federal government.
CNN chief congressional correspondent the anchor of "INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY," Manu Raju, joins us now.
Manu, only the latest installment of this episodic thing of Republican lawmakers, Democratic lawmakers, to going up in front of constituents who are very angry about DOGE, very angry about a lot of things.
Donalds here, though, taking a different approach, yelling at some of his constituents.
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT & CNN ANCHOR, "INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY": Yes, it was pretty remarkable scene. I mean, the question is, how broad is this among the electorate? We've seen this happen time and time again.
Are these Democratic voters who are coming out there expressing their outrage? In probably, in a lot of cases, yes.
Are there Independent voters who are moved by what Donald Trump has been doing, what DOGE has been doing impacts on their lives, on the tariffs and prices? Are those the ones that are raising concerns?
Or are they Trump voters? Are they people who are concerned about the person they voted for into office here? What's interesting about Donalds' district is that Trump carried it by
about 30 points. This is a very conservative area. Even that county where that town hall was in yesterday, Trump won that by 30 points.
So this is a conservative area. What does it say for the broader electorate? We'll see.
But it was interesting. There was a number of contentious moments, including this one from yesterday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you approve of Elon and DOGE invading our Social Security files?
(CHEERING)
[14:35:05]
DONALDS: Elon Musk and DOGE have been authorized by the president of the United States.
(SHOUTING)
DONALDS: No, no, don't. No.
This is my question for the audience. Do you want to yell or do you want to hear?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: You know, some people equate this, Boris, to, you know, is this like the Tea Party of 2010. Is there going to be a big wave election? It's just way too early to know if that's the case.
And in that case, there were so many more battleground districts in the House. And that's why Republicans, you know, they -- they -- they stoked the antipathy towards Obamacare at the time. And then they won that election.
But this time there's far fewer districts, much harder to have that typical wave election. But we're still a ways away from that, which all comes ahead of some major decisions that Republicans are going to have to make when they come back to Washington next week to pull together the Trump agenda.
Where do they go with spending cuts? About $1.5 trillion in spending cuts. Will that hurt constituents who came to people like Byron Donalds town hall? And will the -- what will the reaction be on how they deal with those major decisions? All key questions for Republicans.
SANCHEZ: How they do it without touching entitlements, too, a bit of a mystery right now.
Manu Raju, thank you so much. RAJU: Thanks.
SANCHEZ: Still to come on this Earth Day, a look at where the future of the fight against climate change stands in President Trump's White House. That, and much more coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:40:58]
KEILAR: It is Earth Day, a time when the world shows support for climate preservation and environmental protections. But the Trump administration has been retreating from some of those safeguards.
The president signed an executive order in January, withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris agreement. It was a landmark agreement, but he called it a rip off.
And DOGE has slashed federal weather and climate research programs. And CNN has learned the U.S. wants to impose tariffs as high as 3,500 percent on solar panels coming from Southeast Asia.
But today, the White House said the president is committed to protecting the planet.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He wants America to have the cleanest air and the cleanest water. And we want to do what's right for our environment and for our earth.
And a lot of that is making sure that we have clean and sustainable energy. And we know that we produce natural gas cleaner and more efficiently than any country in this world. And the president wants to see that continue.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KEILAR: Let's talk about this now with Michael E Mann, presidential distinguished professor of earth and environmental science at the University of Pennsylvania.
And he's also director of the Penn Center for Science, Sustainability and the Media, and vice provost of climate science, action and policy.
And the author of the upcoming book, "Science Under Siege." So he must be really smart on this because he's done so many things.
Michael, thanks for being with us.
And you heard what the press secretary said there that the president wants the U.S. to have the cleanest air and the cleanest water. When you look at what he has done so far, policy wise, from the Oval Office, is that what it tells you he's going for?
MICHAEL E. MANN, CLIMATE SCIENTIST & DIRECTOR, PENN CENTER FOR SCIENCE, SUSTAINABILITY AND MEDIA & AUTHOR: Yes. Hi, Brianna. It's good to be with you. Or I'd like to say it's good to be with you on Earth Day.
Of course, it's not an auspicious Earth Day because the administration is engaged in this assault on, you know, environmental preservation.
And what's so disturbing is the use of Orwellian language. And there's nothing else to -- to call this, really. It's literally doublespeak.
It's claiming that they're doing exactly the opposite of what they're doing, claiming they're for clean air and clean water, when just today, they actually -- they eliminated policies, EPA policies that are intended to protect children from dangerous so-called forever chemicals that cause cancer and other ailments.
And so they're literally involved in a dismantling of all of the environmental protections, protections on clean energy -- on clean water and clean air and, of course, climate as well, in -- in the actions that they're taking right now. Just the opposite of what they were claiming in that press conference.
KEILAR: So that's an issue of PFAs, right, these forever chemicals? And the -- the -- the White House is out today with a press release where they say, "On Earth Day, we finally have a president who follows science."
And it goes through a myriad of things that he's doing, carbon capture, pausing restrictive emissions rules for coal plants, expanding responsible logging.
But then there's also something about ending the forced use of paper straws. And in that specific note, it says that paper straws contain dangerous PFAs chemicals, forever chemicals linked to significant long term health conditions.
What do you make of them heralding something specifically like that about PFAs and then doing what they're doing with this EPA regulation?
MANN: Yes, well, I mean, what it shows is that there's some cognitive dissonance here, that they're actually engaged in, you know, supporting measures that are actually antagonistic with respect to other measures that they're supporting.
That they are at odds with each other because, while they might be claiming that they're trying to reduce the use of, you know, wood paper straws that do have certain dangerous chemicals in them.
[14:45:01]
When you look at their overall policies, they are actually paving the way for polluters to dump far more of these extremely dangerous PFAs, these -- these forever chemicals into our water supplies and -- and, of course, and pollution into our air.
So they're claiming to do exactly the opposite of what they're doing. And they're hoping that people won't take them to task. They're hoping that journalists won't take them to task.
They're hoping that people are too confused about the seemingly contradicting claims to sort of sort it out themselves, and they just sort of throw their hands up in defeat.
And so that's what they're hoping, because to the extent that we are misinformed and misinformed and disengaged, that simply enables the agenda of the polluters, whose pocket they're in.
KEILAR: Michael E. Mann, thank you so much for being with us. We really appreciate it. It's always great to have you.
And still to come, what will the Trump administrations plan to dump artificial food dyes mean for your kitchen pantry? Dr. Sanjay Gupta will show you what to expect, next on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:50:37]
KEILAR: This week, we're paging our chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, on the latest announcement from the Trump administration. Today, the White House is set to announce a plan to remove artificial dyes from our food.
SANCHEZ: Specifically, the new plan would force the removal of petroleum-based synthetic dyes.
Let's go to CNN's chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta.
Sanjay, first off, what are petroleum-based dyes? What's the concern there?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. So petroleum- based dyes are kind of what they sound like. They are dyes that are based in petroleum.
And the reason they're based in petroleum is because that's a really stable chemical. So you want a color -- and these are going to be colors that you don't typically find in nature.
That's one way to know that we're talking about these petroleum-based dyes. You want a color that's going to stay stable for a long period of time.
So a couple of examples here. You -- again, if it doesn't look like something found in nature, good chance it's a petroleum-based dye.
These cherries, for example, that is red dye number three. That is something by the way, that the FDA has banned since January. This is a yellow dye in your Cheetos, yellow dye number six.
This is a yellow dye number five in these lemon treats over here. Blue dye number one. Red dye number 40. You get the idea. There's about eight or nine of these dyes out there if you count the red dye number three. You know, they've been around for a long time. The big concern, even since they came out -- and we're talking some 30 years ago -- was this potential link between these dyes and certain types of cancers in animals, specifically.
So there was a concern that they had these carcinogens, these cancer- causing agents within the dyes, and they could potentially be toxic. Specifically, when it came to neurobehavioral issues as well in children.
So this is all sort of been percolating out there for some time. There's been concerns about these dyes. But there hasn't been sort of this cause-and-effect relationship established between these dyes and potential harms. And I think that's what slowed things down.
We knew this was coming from this administration. They've been talking about it from the start. And I think -- sounds like we'll see what happens today. But it sounds like most, if not all, of these dyes are likely to be banned.
KEILAR: So why not just use a substitute like they use in other countries?
GUPTA: Yes, I mean, I think that that is the argument. What, you know, people have done in many other countries, many countries in Europe and Canada, they basically said, look, we have not been able to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between these dyes and those harms that you just saw on the screen.
But maybe, just in terms of abiding by what is known as the precautionary principle, we should go ahead and start using other dyes, natural dyes.
So, for example, Brianna, I mean, these are a cereal made with many of these dyes here in the United States. Many of these petroleum-based dyes, you could actually make some of these same colors with natural dyes.
So carrot juice, for example, watermelon juice, blueberry juice, things like that. And that is already happening in many countries around the world.
Do we know for sure it will make a difference? Do we see lower rates of some of the harms that you just saw on the screen in those countries that don't use those dyes? That's not clear.
So there are many people who say, look, it's probably a good idea. There is no nutritious value to this. But to be clear, cause-and- effect is a really hard thing to establish.
SANCHEZ: There may not be nutritious value, but maybe there's some emotional value in enjoying some Cheetos.
I know it's not the advice you would have for folks, Sanjay, but I do wonder, if you wanted to cut dyes out of your diet, what advice would you have? GUPTA: You know, this may not be the most popular answer here, but the
reality is, if you look at these dyes and really look at all the various products that they're in, they're mostly in these foods that you see on the table. And these are all mostly ultra-processed foods.
I mean, so, you know, the standard advice is, read the labels, see if you have the dye in there. But it's challenging. You don't see what the dose of the dye is. You don't know what the cumulative effects of those dyes are over time.
When I grew up, these didn't really exist. My kids have grown up with them. What is the impact on their bodies versus mine?
Best advice, though, to your question, is avoid these ultra-processed foods. I mean, eat real food.
I know that's sort of standard advice, but when you look at the presence of these dyes and where they're located, it's mostly going to be in ultra-processed foods.
[14:55:01]
If this worries you, and it might, you know, sort of eliminating or at least reducing those foods that will go a long way.
KEILAR: Yes, mom.
(LAUGHTER)
KEILAR: I promise I will.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: It is very good advice, as always.
Dr. Sanjay Gupta, thank you so much.
Make sure to submit your questions by scanning the Q.R. code on your screen right now. Sanjay will be back tomorrow to answer your questions.
Still to come, today, markets saw a rebound. We'll tell you what's behind investors seeming optimism. There's some caveats there. We'll explain when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
