Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Show Me the Money; Paper or Plastic?; Facebook ID Theft; Fishermen Trapped on Ice; A-Rod on Steroids List

Aired February 07, 2009 - 16:00   ET

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

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hundreds of fishermen stuck on an ice flow in Lake Erie.

A past drug test could have caught up to Alex Rodriguez. Reports showing he has used steroids. We'll talk to a reporter who broke the story.

You've heard a lot about stimulus. Still unclear about what it is and what it means to you exactly? We'll answer the questions.

We're calling the show "Show Me the Money" this hour in the CNN NEWSROOM.

A breaking story now: A dramatic rescue operation has been under way all afternoon long on Lake Erie. They were called out after several hundred ice fishermen were trapped on a slab of ice. Joining us now, Officer Robert Lanier, of Cleveland. Wwhat is the latest on the rescue operation? And we understand these were ice fishermen on an ice floe that simply broke away.

VOICE OF ROBERT LANIER, CHIEF PETTY OFFICER, U.S. COAST GUARD: Yes, they were separated, so they were technically away from a break between the land and the lake.

WHITFIELD: How many people have been rescued?

LANIER: We have rescued more than 150 people and unfortunately there were two people in the water. One of the people were recovered and brought to shore. The other gentleman was transferred to Fort Clinton, Ohio, and later pronounced dead.

WHITFIELD: One dead, 150 you've rescued. Are there still people trapped?

LANIER: The Coast Guard has a helicopter, from Air Station Detroit, and a C-130, which flew in later from North Carolina. They're just surveying the ice floe to make sure there is no one else is on the ice floe or that everybody that was on is accounted for.

WHITFIELD: And tell me about how unusual this kind of rescue is when you're talking about this many number of ice fishermen. Lake Erie, clearly, this is something a lot of people like to do on the weekends and other days during the week for that matter. They're in Lake Erie. But this is a huge number of people all at one time.

LANIER: That is a large number of people. But ice fishing and recreation on the ice is a culture in the Great Lakes. And it's something that we've become used to. But if anybody's in distress, whether the water is frozen or whether the water is fluid, the Coast Guard and multiple agencies that have participated in today's response are more than willing to assist. That's what we're here for.

WHITFIELD: All right. Coast Guard Petty Officer Robert Lanier, thanks so much for joining us. Also on the line, the sheriff of Ottawa County, Ohio, Bob Bratton. All right. Sheriff, tell me how difficult this rescue mission has been?

VOICE OF BOB BRATTON, OTTAWA COUNTY SHERIFF: It's been extremely difficult. And it wasn't for the Coast Guard, this just cost the taxpayers a ton of money. We lost a life out there today. The water was separated. There was a break. These people should not have been out there. I take a whole different approach.

In our financial status going across the country, this was wrong. These people endangered life of volunteer firemen, the United States Coast Guard. I have estimated already well over $25,000 for this. And I'm sure that's going to climb. I'm sorry a man lost his life out there today. These people should have known better.

WHITFIELD: Sheriff, you sound angry about this. We're talking about warming temperatures that you all have experienced in that area. And is that in part why you're saying these people should not have been out there? Because they should have known the risks involved when you got the potential of ice melting?

BRATTON: Absolutely. They had to build a small bridge to get from one section of ice to the other. When they got to the other, that put them further out. The weather changed, the temperature went up, the winds was coming out of the south. These are all things that are indicators. People that were out there today as far as I'm concerned were not professional fishermen. I've met with fishermen. This is a culture, as the Coast Guard implied. But it's also, it was dangerous for everybody out there. And I'm sorry, this was a ton of money that should not have happened.

WHITFIELD: And besides money, you're also talking about the danger it imposes on the rescuers who put their lives on the line to carry out duties like this.

BRATTON: They do. And I was there. I watched it. Again, I'm very, very sorry this fisherman lost his life. But you know what, we had 70 rescue people out there. We had 15 fire departments. And you know, it's just really, really frustrating that we have to engage in this type of activity today.

WHITFIELD: So when you have situations like this, conditions as such, warming temperatures, are there signs posted? Is there something to at least discourage fishermen, ice fishermen, from taking such great risks on a day like today?

BRATTON: No, there's not. There are only websites that you can go to. WHITFIELD: All right. I wonder if that's something that you all will investigate to try to discourage ice fishermen from putting their lives in jeopardy as well as the rescuers if some unforeseen circumstances were to occur. Do you think that's something that might be looked into further?

BRATTON: Well, I think you bring up a very valid point. And we will look at that as we go back and reassess this operation that happened here today. We just can't develop the attitude, go out on the ice, if you get caught, yes we'll be there to get you. We'll bring you in. You've got to have common sense. If there was a section in the code about common sense, we would have had 150 arrests out there today.

WHITFIELD: All right. Ohio's Ottawa County sheriff, Bob Bratton. Thank you so much for your time. Appreciate it. Again, if you're now just joining. More than 150 ice fishermen have been rescued there who got stranded in some ice flow. We understand possibly because of warming temperatures. The ice simply broke off. And you heard the sheriff pretty angry there talking about the great risks the that these ice fishermen took. And have also cost a lot of money in rescue efforts and also put other rescuers lives on the line as a result. Two people were actually found in the water. And one sadly has died as a result of this weekend excursion.

All right. Another top story we're following for you. This coming out of the sports world. Sportsillustrated.com is reporting that Major League baseball star Alex Rodriguez tested positive for steroids six years ago. Joining us now from New York, Selena Roberts, one of the reporters who actually broke the story.

Selena, why and how did you get this information? You apparently are quoting four sources as saying that A-Rod did test positive from a Major League baseball test that took place six years ago, and these records were supposed to be kept quiet for a long time, if not forever.

SELENA ROBERTS, "SPORTS ILLUSTRATED": Right. We started working on basically a profile of Alex this last year and doing a personality profile. We stumbled across some different information. What we tried to do with this information is go to as many different people as possible, tried to get it nailed down, do our due diligence on it because as you said it's under seal. It was meant to be anonymous. So you have some delicacy there that you're trying to make sure that you overcome. So we went to as many different sources as we could. We nailed it down. I approached Alex on Thursday and asked him directly about the evidence that we had. His response at the time was, you know, talk to the union.

WHITFIELD: And what does that tell you?

ROBERTS: Well, I mean, you know, I didn't want to jump to conclusion. I wanted to give him the opportunity face to face, to say, you know. You're wrong. It's not true. I don't know what you're talking about. We were there for a few minutes. It was not very long at all. And he had the opportunity, I think, at that point to say, you know, you're on the wrong track. I don't know who you're talking to, something on those lines that he did not. He basically, you know he basically directed me to the union. And then said I'm not saying anything. So you know, then we went to the union and we were very explicit with the union. Very candid.

WHITFIELD: And what's the union -

ROBERTS: Well, we were very candid. We called the union Thursday afternoon. I left a pretty detailed message as to what story we were working on and what the information was we had. I didn't hear back from the union. We had another reporter, the gentleman who did the story with me, David Epstein, went to the offices of the player's union and confronted Gene Orza. And Gene Orza said he wasn't interested with talking with us. So those kinds of things led to -

WHITFIELD: So because of that you kind of get the impression that to a degrees whether it's Major League baseball or perhaps the union, well they may have known about this positive test, if indeed this is the case. Because it was a test that was administered by the Major League baseball to see if mandatory testing should be the next step. That they in part are protecting A-Rod and maybe the other 104 athletes, baseball players that did test positive?

ROBERTS: Well I think it's important to realize that the law actually is protecting these players. The information that was offered, this anonymous testing program that went on in 2003 was meant to be just that. Anonymous.

And as we speak now and as been going on for the last -

WHITFIELD: Are agreements even signed. Are all these players said I'm going to carry out, participate in this test because I know that all of this is confidential.

ROBERTS: Well I think there was an agreement between the Major League baseball and the players' union to adopt this program, to sort of just go ion and say OK, what are our players doing? Does it rise to cause that we need to put it in some sort of punitive action in the next year? That's what they were doing. All the players, because they all signed the same agreement, they're all, you know, linked with Major League baseball in the player's union then went forth and gave the urine samples. The results were meant to be anonymous.

WHITFIELD: And we also know at least in that year that there is no penalty for testing positive.

ROBERTS: That's absolutely correct. And what happened I think from the results of this test - what they did not plan on was the Balco scandal. And for these records to be seized with a search warrant, and for them to be occupied by the feds. I think that was sort of the curveball. No pun intended. But that was the situation that I think the union or major league baseball nor the players especially ever anticipated.

All right. Selena Roberts, it's fascinating read. Sportsillustrated.com is where the story is. And still a whole lot of questions to be answered. Whether from A-Rod or Major League baseball or even the union. Thanks so much.

ROBERTS: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. It looks like the U.S. Senate is getting close to passing a massive stimulus bill. Well Democrats have won the support of three moderate republicans. We're going to take a closer look at this bill this hour and we're also going to try to get some of your questions answered.

Economist Jeffrey Rosensweig is joining us here in Atlanta to tell us how all this spending is supposed to help. And Eamon Javers of politico.com is also standing by in Washington. But let's start with CNN congressional correspondent Brianna Keilar. She's on Capitol Hill where senators debated the plan again today even after a late night last night.

Brianna, the Democrats think they already have enough votes to pass the stimulus bill. So why are they debating today?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CNADIDATE: In short, Fred, I guess, you could say the Senate doesn't really turn on a dime. And so they went ahead and they debated this change, this compromise that was reached last night. It just obviously came to be pretty late last night.

So this was their chance to discuss it. At the same time even when I'm talking to my sources and when they talk to republicans, they admit privately this bill is going to pass the Senate. That's what they say. That's their expectation. And so this debate, this rare Saturday session of debate was for them a chance to make some noise about why they don't like the bill. We're hearing some of the same arguments we've heard before. They say there's too much spending. Some of it they say is wasteful. There's not enough tax cuts.

And they say that this is being just rushed through Congress. On the other hands, we heard a lot of Democrats today saying that this is essential that this be done quickly so that more jobs aren't lost. Those Democrats having won over - yes, three Republicans, only three while the vast majority of Republicans are against this. But three being enough to push them over the 60 vote threshold that they will need come Monday when they have a vote on this compromise and then expected on Tuesday when they have a vote on their version of the overall bill, Fred.

WHITFIELD: OK. And so what's the expectation of what the stimulus bill just might look like? Yes, we have some numbers from what's come out of this compromise. Overall, what you should take away is that the bill that came, the version that came out of the house was just under $820 billion. And then after that we saw it really grow in the Senate to well over $900 billion. And what his group of Democrats, democratic and Republican senators did was pare it down back to about $827 billion.

Let's talk about some of the stuff that stays in under this compromise. $14 billion in Pell grants for low income students. And then $3.5 billion to make federal buildings more energy efficient. $7.5 billion for education grants. That's what is in.

Now let's talk about some of the things that were cut in their entirety. $25 billion of a general fund for education. That some critics call the slush fund that might not even go for education. $16 billion for school construction. And then $122 million, something that got a lot of criticism, Coast Guard cutters, ice breakers. These are vessels that take care of ice.

But you see, Fred, those education cuts, this is the big deal for democrats. Because this was their baby. This was the big priority for them. And certainly as this moves forward in the House and the Senate, they have to hash out their differences in their bill. This is something that's going to get a lot of scrutiny because you're going to have a lot of democrats who don't want to say good-bye to that especially in the House.

WHITFIELD: Yes, including the President who made it very clear that having kids go to crumbling schools was unacceptable and that falls under that category. Of school construction and refurbishing.

KEILAR: Yes.

WHITFIELD: That has been chopped out. All right. Thanks so much. Brianna Keilar appreciate it.

All right. No way to sugar coat the latest job loss numbers. The unemployment rate surged to 7.6 percent in January. 598,000 American jobs lost last month. Think of it this way, that's roughly the population of Las Vegas.

Companies eliminated more jobs in January than any single month dating all the way back to 1974. Since the start of the recession in December of 2007, more than 3.6 million jobs have simply vanished.

All right. President Obama says his stimulus package will put people to work. He sounded frustrated when talking about some of the criticism that has been aimed at his plan all week long.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRES. BARACK OBAMA, UNITED STATES: You get the argument this is not a stimulus bill, this is a spending bill. What do you think a stimulus is? That's the whole point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Whether you call it a spending or a stimulus, there seems to be some confusion about how this plan will actually work. We brought in economist Jeff Rosensweig to help us sort all of this out. All right. So Jeff, how is the spending? How is all of this money actually supposed to get the economy moving? Put people to work?

JEFFREY ROSENSWEIG, EMORY UNIVERSITY: The most important thing is they're trying to concentrate on the types of spending they can get people working right away, some aspects of construction and infrastructure development. Maybe things to get people working in hospitals and schools.

The criticism on the other side is that tax cuts often do work faster than government spending. But I do think that if you have government spending that's very targeted on creating jobs, it can happen quickly. And ultimately, it's only spending that guarantees that a job is created. Tax cuts could be saved.

WHITFIELD: But you heard the president earlier this week was a little testy about it. Was he not? Where he said you know stimulus is spending. This is what a stimulus plan is. It means you have to spend. Is he right?

ROSENSWEIG: I think you do need both. And we can develop that. But I think he was right. He was elected with an agenda. And it seems like people are trying to strip that agenda. It was getting ridiculous. They were trying to strip out spending for student loans, for instance. Things that are really needed. You know, I think about it, maybe we're going to end up with 15 million unemployed people that might as well do something worthwhile with their time until the economy turns up.

Why would we cut things like student loans? Aspects of construction? So I think he was right and it was time to show if not anger, a lot of forcefulness. Because he's there to lead and we were there to move this thing forward.

WHITFIELD: The Obama administration says we want you to expect job creations. Upwards of four million in two years. How soon are we talking if there is a stimulus plan that everybody can agree on and indeed the president is to sign it somewhere within the next couple of weeks, how soon are we talking jobs being created? A matter of weeks? Months or closer to that year point?

ROSENSWEIG: I think jobs are created more within months than weeks but they can be created within a few months. The worrisome thing and that's why we do need to get moving is even if we're creating or as he says saving jobs, it's not like we're going to have a net gain of jobs in the next few months. You know, think about it.

We're losing at a rate of 600,000 a month. So we're really hemorrhaging so in some sense this will stop some of that hemorrhaging. We can. It's just too painful to keep losing at that rate. So I think we'll have less jobs a year from now, I hate to say it that we do now but this is a way to stop the thing from just falling into the abyss.

WHITFIELD: All right. Jeff Rosensweig, thanks so much.

We're going to talk with you again a little bit later as we continue to receive a number of e-mails from people who have questions about how will the stimulus work, how will it affect me and will delve a little bit more into the political wrangling on Capitol Hill.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. This hour we're focusing a lot of time on the stimulus. There we are. Focusing a lot of time on the stimulus package. How it would work and what it means to you. Eamon Javers is a financial correspondent with politico.com. Good to see you, Eamon. I've butchered your name earlier. I hope I finally got it right.

EAMON JAVERS, POLITICO.COM: That's quite all right.

WHITFIELD: My apologies on that. All right. So we've heard a lot of the wrangling taking place on Capitol Hill this weekend. The senators going the extra mile, if you will, to try to build some compromise. Senator Susan Collins said earlier Americans don't want to see us divided. They want to see compromise. And we've done that. And republican senator Ben Nelson says it is responsible and realistic. Meaning the compromise they've come up with.

JAVERS: Right.

WHITFIELD: How convincing is this to the American public? Do people in general get it?

EAMON JAVERS, POLITICO, COM: Well they're going to get a bill ultimately at the end of the day. So it doesn't matter whether Americans generally understand the inner workings of the Senate. But in Washington we throw around this term all the time called bipartisanship. You know, both parties coming together to work together and the question is, you know, what, how do you call something bipartisan if you can only get one, two, or three Republican votes.

Barack Obama didn't get any Republican votes when they passed this bill out of the house last week. So I guess three Republican votes is a victory of sorts for bipartisanship. But still he's facing enormous resistance from the opposition party here. And all of his charm offensive, inviting folks over to the White House to go to the Super Bowl with him. All that really hasn't worked on Capitol Hill with Republicans. So they're going to have to drop back and punt and get this bill done which is democratic votes and a couple of republicans that they convinced to be the swing votes.

WHITFIELD: So I wonder what are the other options? How do you bring bipartisanship in Washington? If people feel like traditionally it doesn't happen. Is there at least an effort that you invite Republicans and Democrats to the White House you all sit down and talk? What takes place on Capitol Hill is another matter. Is it a bipartisan effort that you've at least extended the hand to both sides to get them to talk about it. But does it mean that it's only bipartisan if everyone comes to agreement?

JAVERS: Well, you start stability, right? I mean, in Washington, the atmosphere has been so poisoned for so many years. The Republicans and Democrats haven't been doing much talking to each other, except to hurl insults at one other.

WHITFIELD: But aren't they doing that?

JAVERS: I'm sorry.

WHITFIELD: We're hearing that.

JAVERS: Well, we are but it's mostly on the specifics of the policy, not on people's personalities and personal lives as much as we've seen in the past. And so Obama just by inviting folks over to the White House. By making the gesture at least of going up to Capitol Hill to meet with Republicans, the opposition party in the House, he's bringing stability back there, talking to one another.

Now, he hasn't been able to convince everybody that he's right. Maybe he shouldn't be able to convince everybody that he's right in the democracy, all kinds of opinions ought to be heard.

WHITFIELD: OK.

JAVERS: But he's got people talking. Now, he's got to come finish that sales job and get a couple of votes here next week in order to get this thing passed.

WHITFIELD: OK. Eamon, we're going to talk to you again. I want to ask a little bit more about this tone of the new republican national committee chairman because he has some strong words about the stimulus plan as well but for now, lets' go to Josh Levs who's been fielding a lot of e-mails from people. I guess people are looking for a little clarification on what this stuff really means.

JOSH LEVS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. They are. You know what, we invited you earlier to answer some of your questions here. It's at weekends@CNN.com and it's amazing how many we're getting. I got them pulled out here on the board behind me and we've been getting through dozens and dozens.

I believe we got both our guests who we're going to field some of these questions, right. There they are. We got Jeff and we got Eamon. Is that right? Is that Eamon? Am I saying it right?

JAVERS: That's right.

LEVS: All right.

JAVERS: Checking my blackberry there.

LEVS: Well, see. She went to do it for me. Now I know how to say your name.

(LAUGHTER)

LEVS: Thanks very much. Let's just get right to the viewers questions. I want to start off with this. A lot of people writing with frustration about tax cuts. Dixie says "Republicans keep saying that the answer is to cut taxes. What good will that do for the families that are out of work? How does that create new jobs?

We got another one here. "In order for a tax break in someone's paycheck to work, they must be drawing a paycheck in the first place." That's from Christina. Look a lot of people say they don't understand how that can help. I'd like to ask both of you to tackle this. Jeff, let's start with you. We have this ridiculously complicated tax code in America. Is there some way that people will be held by tax cuts aside from the hope that it will lead to job creation?

JEFFREY ROSENSWEIG, EMORY UNIVERSITY: Well, you know, we already had this experiment. We spent something like 168 billion last spring on these kind of tax cuts. And as economists, we were not able to measure any positive effect on the economy. So I think the question here is actually quite astute.

What I am worried about is that people that are either out of work, about to fall out of work, or getting such a low wage or part-time employment. There's a rapid increase of people who want to work full time but can only get part time employment. They're making so little that they're really not paying taxes anyway. So we really need to focus on getting people to work in full time jobs that pay enough that they even have to worry about taxes. I think that's an astute question.

LEVS: Well, based on our e-mails I can tell you there's thousands of people applauding for that right now. Let me go quickly to Eamon. As you know, what's going on Capitol Hill in this respect. Are we seeing a true ideological divide on this idea of whether tax cuts can stimulate the economy, or are we seeing this kind of traditional positioning of Republican versus democrat? People switching back to their standard arguments?

JAVERS: You know, I tell you. I mean arguing on Capitol Hill about tax cuts versus spending is a little bit like arguing about religion over Thanksgiving dinner with your family. I mean, you're not just going to win. I mean both sides sort of come to the argument with their data points and their white papers and each side has a fleet of think tanks in Washington churning out data that supports their position. It's very hard to sift through all that and come up with their real answer, partly because in economics unlike other sciences, you don't have the opportunity to do real world experiments. So you can't try a million things and see what works.

LEVS: Right.

JAVERS: We only have a couple of chances to do anything like this. And in this case with a stimulus, we're in hugely unchartered territory. Nobody has ever really tried anything like this before. So there is no real answer to how this will work. No one really knows.

LEVS: And there's tremendous pressure. While I have you really quickly I want to show you one more question that relates to this. It comes from to us from Jim but a lot of people asking similar things. "I wanted to ask if anyone has noticed what is going on with lobbyists and are they active in the stimulus plan?"

Eamon, this is just for you. How much of an effect are lobbyists having in this specific bill right now? JAVERS: This is a field day for lobbyists. I talked to a lot of lobbyists all week and they all have little pet projects and little things that they want to flip to this bill because in Washington, the saying is this train is leaving the station which means they know this bill is going to get passed. They want their little pet project in there and it's so big that the chances of their little thing getting noticed are pretty slim. So lobbyists are crawling all over this bill right now.

LEVS: We'll keep those question coming, weekends@CNN.com. Fred, I'll be back later this hour with some more questions from our viewers who are e-mailing us.

WHITFIELD: Yes. And I got some more questions too.

LEVS: Yes, you do.

WHITFIELD: Michael Steele, the new leader of the Republican National Committee who now says you know the fastest way to boost the economy is to allow people to keep the money that they earn. He says he doesn't like this uncontrolled spending. I can't wait to hear what Eamon and Jeff have to say about that. Much more straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. We want to get back to our panel and your questions about the stimulus plan. What is it? What does it mean to me? We have economist Jeffrey Rosensweig who is with us from Emory University and financial correspondent Eamon Javers with politico.com and CNN's Josh Levs who has your e-mail questions. So Josh, what are they asking now.

LEVS: All right. I'll tell you some more of what we're hearing from our viewers. A lot of people asking similar ones. They're saying look we know housing is at the core of this. So let's just get to this one. Someone who asks to remain anonymous. "Can you please elaborate on whether or not there's any relief for those of us in America who are struggling, fighting to keep our homes? We know there have been other kinds of legislation but Jeff, let's start with your financial view on this. What in this actual bill could pragmatically help a person hold onto his or her home?

ROSENWEIG: Well, there is still going to be some negotiation as we know between the House and the Senate. But there is a hope that there will be a $15,000 tax credit for people who buy a home and that is to try to get the market going. But that really won't help someone who is struggling to hand on to their home. What we need and there is some jockeying about this is to have something that will reduce the mortgage payment who will have to pay now.

If you think these people should pay it back because they borrowed it, you could make the mortgage and just put it on the back until the economy is doing better and their income is higher. But you've got to get the payments down now.

LEVS: So the short version, it's not there. You're not seeing anything really that would pragmatically help those people that are struggling.

Eamon, is there on Capitol Hill -- is there a real understanding and sensibility that says, look, this is one of the most important issues in America right now, we have to get something to help people hold onto their homes? Any hope that that will happen in this bill?

EAMON JAVERS, POLITICO.COM: Oh, absolutely. And I would say this bill is probably not going to be the main vehicle for that sort of thing. There have been a couple of proposals sprinkled around Washington for dealing with that here, but I think what we're going to see next from the Obama administration is a big push on housing.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner just said within the past couple of days that he's going to literally beat the banks over the head with a baseball bat in order to get them to lower the mortgage payments that people have to make so that people who are struggling to make those payments now might be able to, under some kind of Geithner-driven plan, be able to actually lower those payments. That will help people who are really struggling to make those payments now, as opposed to just doing what we can to stimulate the economy, generally.

LEVS: Eamon, while we've got you, let me ask you another question that a lot of people are writing us. Almost every time we open the floor to viewer questions, we hear a lot about outsourcing. Anything being done in this bill, or is there any reason to believe that very soon, we'll see some new legislation that will really affect the number of jobs that are outsourced, as people view it?

JAVERS: Yes, that's an interesting question. I'm not sure if there's anything here dealing directly with outsourcing, but there's been a big debate over the "Buy America" provisions and whether those are appropriate or not, and whether by insisting that federal spending only go toward American companies, American jobs, you actually create some kind of a trade war with our allies around the world and harm global trade, which we need so desperately right now. So that is a hot issue here in Washington, and it's something that folks are keenly attuned to.

LEVS: And really quickly, Jeff, I want to get your financial perspective on this. Then back to Fred.

Jeff, you know, it is a hot-button issue, and it's something that a lot of people have a lot of strong feelings about. Talk to me economically here. Will cutting back on outsourcing do a lot to build jobs in America, or could it, as we were just hearing from Eamon, also have a downside in that respect, limiting trade, those kinds of things?

ROSENSWEIG: It's very dangerous because it's thinking on a very partial scale, like we bring this one job back. But as Eamon said, retaliation will occur very quickly.

And what has actually kept our economy growing over four years until it slowed down and fell into recession last year is our growth in exports, our sales to some countries that are still growing. For instance, in Asia. They would have immediate retaliation. If I could throw in a little history, in 1930, our country led this movement toward protection, toward trying to keep jobs in your own country, harming other countries with something called the Smoot-Holly Tariff. Every country retaliated.

It was a beautiful, stupid way to move from a recession into a depression. I hope we do learn something from history.

LEVS: Well, they're not holding back, Fred, are they?

WHITFIELD: I like that, beautiful and stupid.

(LAUGHTER)

WHITFIELD: OK. Well, you know, guys, we're going to take some more questions, too, but, you know, I also want to ask -- Michael Steele, RNC chairman, had some interesting things to say.

And Jeff, I know you already said in part that in order to stimulate the economy, you have got to spend some. But Michael Steele said in his radio address today, the fastest way to boost the economy is to keep the money that people earn. He wants more tax cuts instead of what he is now calling uncontrollable spending.

So, Jeff, how do you respond to that way of classifying what the stimulus bill is doing?

ROSENSWEIG: You know, I'm not against tax cuts, but where the Republicans would want tax cuts, if they had their druthers, would be, for instance, someone making $150,000 a year or $200,000, would get a tax cut. So they'd have more money. But if they have a job, and so they're paying so much tax, they can spend as much as they want.

Where we might need tax cuts I think is where we can create jobs for people. You know, the small businesses create jobs. And there's been very little talk about giving tax cuts to small business people, or people who might want to start a small business. Franchises, for instance, are often owned by women. I think more than half are owned by women.

So we've already had that experiment where we wasted money, giving tax cuts last year in a way that wouldn't create jobs. But there are creative ways we could give tax cuts when we really think the goal of this tax cut is to create jobs. Maybe give someone a little more money in their pocket, a small business owner, so they can hire more people, or not lay off people.

WHITFIELD: All right, Jeff. Thanks.

And Eamon, I want your reaction right after this break.

We're going to take a short break for now.

Josh, we know you're going to be sticking around as well.

Talking more about the stimulus bill, what it means for you, and if it's actually going to help your pocketbook.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. So while senators continue to haggle about a compromise of the stimulus bill before it eventually makes its way possibly to the House, and then eventually for a signature from the president, we're trying to help break it down for you so you understand what the stimulus plan means for you.

We've got Jeffrey Rosensweig who's with us. And we also have Eamon Javers with politico.com. And CNN's Josh Levs. We're taking in some of your e-mails.

But before we took a break, I was asking you gentlemen about the RNC chair Michael Steele's comments about tax cuts, wanting more tax cuts and less what he called uncontrollable spending.

So Eamon, I'll let you tackle that...

JAVERS: Sure.

WHITFIELD: ... because this is kind of what has brought part of the fight between the Republicans and the Democrats to a head.

JAVERS: Yes, sure. And I'll tell you, politically, what's going on here with Michael Steele is he's the newly elected chairman of the Republican National Committee. And the Republicans have just gotten the shellacking in a major election.

They've lost the control of the Congress, they've lost the White House now. And what they're doing is they're resetting and going back to first principles. And first principles for Republicans mean tax cuts. It goes back to the old Reagan idea of cutting tax cuts, that government is the problem, not the solution.

And, of course, Republicans got away from that in recent years. During the past eight years when they were in control of Congress, they ran up enormous deficits of their own. They got away from their core idea, and Steele here is trying to get them back to the basic idea as they figure out how to tangle with this incredibly popular new president.

WHITFIELD: Yes. OK.

Well, having that been said, now, Josh, let's go to some of those e- mail questions and spark more discussion.

LEVS: Let's zoom in on the board. I want everyone to see this one.

At first when I saw it, I thought maybe it's too specific. Then I realized, no, it's one of the biggest issues in America.

"My husband was laid off in November. We took the COBRA option and it is a lot, over $700 a month. How will the stimulus help us with the insurance payments?" I mean, if you think about this, so many people losing their jobs then lose their insurance. And one of the things we want to see is people be able to have health insurance when they're struggling that way.

Jeff, let's start with you. What pragmatically -- you know, again, there's so much language, hundreds of pages -- what pragmatically could this bill do to help someone hold on to health insurance through COBRA?

ROSENSWEIG: Well, you know, I was studying this, this morning, because they were going to have the government spending be very useful for people like this who were really hurting and at risk. I believed that the package was going to pay two-thirds of that, but then they said, oh, we've got to make this package smaller, let's only pay a half.

Well, it does save some money off the package, and I think that can be good. But this family, they just are unemployed. They just lost their job. Why would we want them to still pay a lot of money for health insurance, which could break them? And, you know, then some families if they can't afford it, they don't get health insurance.

Well, that's how people end up in bankruptcy or in terrible trouble in this country, is they don't have the insurance. So I think this was another place where maybe it was a stupid place to cut.

We cut science and research. We cut things that are really going to hurt our future. And this will hurt families that are already hurting right now.

LEVS: Let me quickly get Eamon on that.

Eamon, is health care having a voice in this debate?

(CROSSTALK)

JAVERS: Yes. Well, that COBRA thing was one of the chips that got traded here in this horse-trading over what's going to happen to get the size of this bill down. And that's why the old expression is the devil is in the details. And it really is for people who are following one specific thing that they need to see. And as the trading goes on, that thing gets thrown out the door in order to get the size of the bill down.

So, you know, clearly, health care is a major issue on Americans' minds. And that's the irony of this whole Daschle fight that we saw last week, is that Barack Obama wants to reinvent American health care top to bottom, let alone COBRA. And he wanted Tom Daschle to be his guide to do that.

Now he's lost Daschle at his side. And he's going to have to go ahead and figure out some kind of health care plan. Without Tom Daschle, it's going to be a very, very heavy load (ph).

LEVS: There's bipartisan consensus that that was a real loss when it comes to trying to get legislation pushed through when it comes to health care.

JAVERS: Sure.

LEVS: Anyway, listen, I've got to say, thank you so much to both of you.

And thanks to the viewers for sending us such great questions -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right. Thanks so much. And hopefully everybody has a much clearer view of what this all means to all of us.

Economist Jeffrey Rosensweig, Politico.com's Eamon Javers, and our always very versatile and effervescent Josh Levs.

LEVS: Well. A good day for me.

(LAUGHTER)

WHITFIELD: All right. Well, let's talk about some other matters at hand.

From deep freeze to warm as toast? Well, not quite, but warmer weather in some parts of the country will hang around for a while. Meteorologist Karen Maginnis joins us with details.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. Well, not all companies are suffering in these tough economic times. Business for outplacement firms is booming. Those companies help laid-off workers find new jobs and advise them on self-employment. Outplacement executives say there's a lot of fear out there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DOUG MATTHEWS, PRESIDENT, RIGHT MANAGEMENT: What's different than the past few years is the terror that people have because they're so frightened that there's no jobs out there. There are still job openings out there, and there's a lot of people in the market, but there's also a lot of need still in the marketplace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right. So many of those jobs are actually in the health care industry. It added 19,000 jobs just last month alone. Private education is also a growing field, with 33,000 new hires in January.

Don Lemon is here to talk about what is next in the NEWSROOM.

Good to see you.

DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: It's just -- oh my gosh. It's sad every time you hear about it.

WHITFIELD: Oh my gosh. It's depressing. LEMON: And they always say if you're lucky enough to have a job. You know, Monday starts your workweek, but there are people who are sitting at home, Fred. So tonight we're going to go behind those unemployment numbers that we have been reporting on, everyone's been reporting on, and the facts and figures about them. We're going to bring you some of the faces of this recession.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The people that are out there that have lost their jobs, they feel like they've failed. Our hearts are with them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Yes. You know what? It's real people, and they are struggling to survive this economic crisis. And they tell us what it is like, and we try to offer some help for them as well, Fred.

But we want you to join the community. Tell us what's on your mind.

Do you have questions about anything? You want to know anything about where you can get help or what's going on? Make sure you log onto Twitter, Facebook, MySpace of iReport.com.

Also tonight at 7:00 p.m. their first meeting, Fred, was fueled by race and inspired by hate. Now half a century later, get this, a former KKK member asks U.S. Congressmen John Lewis for forgiveness for brutally beating him at a bus stop. The two have met in person...

WHITFIELD: It's powerful.

LEMON: ... and now 72-year-old Owen Wilson (ph) and U.S. Congressman John Lewis will join us together live tonight. That should be very interesting.

WHITFIELD: We look forward to that.

LEMON: Yes.

WHITFIELD: That's incredible.

LEMON: It is an incredible. You don't want to miss that.

We're live at 5:00 p.m., but also at 7:00 p.m., right here in the CNN NEWSROOM.

And I know you will be watching.

WHITFIELD: Thank you.

LEMON: It's always good to see you.

WHITFIELD: Always good to see you as well, Don. Thanks so much.

LEMON: Thanks, Fred.

OK. Facebook, a top social destination. You already heard Don pumping his Facebook location.

Well, it's popular on the Internet, where friends can connect, catch up, and sometimes get taken. Are you listening up here? Hackers, uh- huh, they strike.

Will you be stunned?

Will you, Don?

LEMON: No, I wouldn't be stunned, because I know they strike. And they've actually hit us before on Twitter.

WHITFIELD: Oh, right.

LEMON: I'm not necessarily sure about Facebook, but parents have to be careful about Facebook as well, too, with predators. Yes.

WHITFIELD: We'll have to talk about that some more. Yes. Oh, gosh, yes.

LEMON: Yes.

WHITFIELD: All right. First, there's other stuff.

Reading the front page over a cup of coffee might be headed in a digital direction.

Fred Pleitgen has the story of the paperless morning paper on the "Edge of Discovery."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Four billion. That's an estimate of how many trees are cut down every year to make paper products.

Gentlemen, put down your chainsaws, because the Plastic Logic e-Reader is almost here.

RICHARD ARCHULETA, CEO, PLASTIC LOGIC: The device is kind of very thin, very light. It is about the size and weight of a pad of paper.

PLEITGEN: Due out next year, the e-Reader says so long to all those piles of paper.

ARCHULETA: It works by taking anything that you would normally print out or read on paper, like a newspaper or a magazine, and transfers them from either computer or a wirelessly to the device so that you can read them.

PLEITGEN: At this one-of-a kind production facility in Dresden, Germany, nanotech is saving Mother Nature, where an environmentally friendly process creates the e-paper's unique flexible plastic design. And with the swipe of a thumb, Plastic Logic hopes to usher in a green-reading revolution. ARCHULETA: No more cutting down trees, mass production of paper, no big printing presses, and, of course, no big trucks distributing the paper.

PLEITGEN (on camera): An estimated 1.7 billion people read one of these every days. If Plastic Logic has its way, selling a few e- Readers might just save a few of these.

Fred Pleitgen, CNN, Berlin.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right. Life on the Internet -- things are often not as they seem. Take, for example, the latest swindle, thieves hacking into Facebook Web sites and asking for money.

Would you ignore a desperate request, even if it appeared to be coming from a friend?

CNN's Jason Carroll explains.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Facebook has become a popular way to reach out and touch someone in cyber world.

BRYAN RUTBERG, FACEBOOK TRACKING VICTIM: I've reconnected with old friends from high school days, college days, grad school days, people I used to work with.

CARROLL: Bryan Rutberg expected to find old friends. What he didn't expect was for a cyber criminal to find him. What happened to Rutberg started about two weeks ago when his family noticed something frightening.

RUTBERG: When my daughter was alarmed that my Facebook status had changed. And I hadn't changed it.

CARROLL: A new message on Rutberg's page read "Bryan is in urgent need of help." of course he wasn't. He was safe at home in Seattle.

RUTBERG: Somehow they had taken over access to the page. I had been locked out, someone had changed the e-mail address associated with the account.

CARROLL: A hacker, posing as Rutberg, sent messages to friends claiming he was robbed at gunpoint in London and needed money to get home. He even left a message with Rutberg's Facebook friend Benny Rubinstein. Listen to the recording.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He is currently in London. He is in trouble um, he was robbed.

CARROLL: Rubinstein wired $1,200 to London. BENNY RUBINSTEIN, FRIEND VICTIM: It's not only not just a financial thing. It's also an invasion of your privacy, who your friends are.

ROBERT SICILIANO, SECURITY ANALYST: People really have forgotten, you know, basic safety. When mom said don't talk to strangers, that was good advice.

CARROLL: Security experts say there are two ways to better protect yourself.

JIM LEWIS, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & INT'L STUDIES: Having anti- virus programs and making sure they're up-to-date. The second thing you can do is everyone can kind of push some of these companies to do a little bit better job in protecting privacy.

CARROLL: With the help of Facebook, it took about a day for Rutberg to regain access to his account. RUTBERG: Every user of the Web should be better educated and I think Facebook has a role to play there as do any of the social networking sites. Letting users know that if their site is hacked, how to respond and giving them an easy way to get in touch with the companies.

CARROLL: Facebook says though this scam affects a small number of users, they're instituting changes that will better notify users when their account is modified.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right. That was Jason Carroll reporting.

I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

Up next, Don Lemon and the NEWSROOM.