Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Mad as Hell; Arpaio Vows to Continue Sweeps; Details of Chelsea Clinton's Wedding; Rep. Anthony Weiner Discusses House Floor Intensity; Afghan War Milestone; Electric Cars Set to Roll Out; The EV Charger
Aired July 30, 2010 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: Drew, thank you. Have a great afternoon and a great weekend.
I'm Ali Velshi, as Drew said, and I've got a new rundown for you.
Arizona heat -- we're not talking temperatures -- some sheriffs already have the power to question immigration status after arresting suspects. We're taking you on a ride-along with Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County.
A milestone in the Afghan war: July is now the deadliest month in the war for U.S. troops. More people are asking: is this fight worth the cost?
And, we are coming back -- that is President Obama's message for the auto industry. We're tracking his trip aimed at boosting the Big Three.
But, first, you have got to see this. This -- this is one congressman saying he's not taking it anymore. Here's what he said. Anthony Weiner, congressman of New York, said today, maybe the Brooklyn in me came out. He's referring to what happened last night on the flash of the House of Representatives after a bill that he co- sponsored didn't make it for procedural reasons.
Listen to him in his own words.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman from New York is recognized.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Speaker, I yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from New York, Mr. Weiner.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman is recognized.
REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: Great courage, to wait until all members have already spoken and then stand up and wrap your arms around procedure. We see it in the United States' Senate every single day where members say, "We want amendments, we want debate, we want amendment, but we're still a no." And then we stand up and say, "Oh, if only we had a different process we'd vote yes." You vote yes if you believe yes. You vote in favor of something if you believe it's the right thing. If you believe it's the wrong thing, you vote no.
We are following a procedure -- I will not yield to the gentleman and the gentleman will observe regular order. The gentleman will observe regular order.
The gentleman speaks to you and gets up and yells, thinking he's going to intimidate people into believing he's right. He is wrong! The gentleman is wrong! The gentleman is providing cover for his colleagues, rather than doing the right thing!
It's Republicans wrapping their arms around Republicans, rather than doing the right thing on behalf of the heroes. It is a shame! A shame!
If you believe this is a bad idea, to provide health care, then vote no. But don't give me the cowardly view that, "Oh, if it was a different procedure" -- the gentleman will observe regular order and sit down. I will not!
The gentleman will sit! The gentleman is correct in sitting. I will not --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is quite --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman will suspend. The gentleman will suspend.
WEINER: I will not stand here --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman is recognized.
WEINER: -- and listen to my colleague say, "Oh, if only I had a different procedure that allows us to stall, stall, stall and then vote no." Instead of standing up and defending your colleagues and voting no on this humane bill, you should urge them to vote yes -- something the gentleman has not done!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: All right, maybe the Brooklyn in him did come out. And don't worry about it, you're going to hear from Anthony Weiner in his own words. He's going to join me in about a half hour to tell us what was going on.
Let me tell you what I know so far: he had come up to speak after the co-sponsor of the bill, Representative Peter King from New York, had already spoken. Listen to Peter King.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. PETE KING (R), NEW YORK: They say they want Republican support, yet they never consulted even one Republican before they made the corporate tax increase as a pay-for (ph). They say they want Republican support before they pass this bill, but they never applied that standard when they ran through the stimulus health care, cap and trade or financial regulatory reform.
No. You only apply it to cops and firefighters and construction workers. What a sad and pathetic double standard. These heroes deserve better than they are receiving here tonight. And no matter what happens on this vote, I will continue to do all I can to pass this bill as soon as possible in the future.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: Let me tell you what this is about. So just so you can follow this along with me, because it's tough to follow. Both of these guys, Peter King and Anthony Weiner, both supported the bill that they're talking about. They were co-sponsors of this very bill.
It was called H.R. 847. It was the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation act. It would have provided free health care to those affected during 9/11 because they were part of the rescue and recovery, the heroes of 9/11. This was a bill to get them health care.
Both of these guys supported it. It got bogged down somewhere, and you heard Anthony Weiner saying vote yes if you believe it's the right thing to do, vote no if it's not the right thing to do.
I want to try and make sense of this, because it was defeated. It didn't get the two-thirds necessary to go to a full floor vote. As a result of it, that bill is defeated. It is gone. It is not showing up until somebody reintroduces it if they reintroduce it.
Gloria Borger is our senior political analyst. She's joining me from Washington.
Tell me this, Gloria, after listening to this. Am I pleased -- should I be happy that a guy like Anthony Weiner is finally saying, "Enough is enough, I'm not taking it anymore"? Or is this the kind of thing that contributes to the 11 percent confidence level that Americans have in their Congress?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, if you tried to get Republicans and Democrats together in the House right now to tell you the sky is blue, Ali, I don't think you could get them to agree on it. And what this is about, is the closer we get to an election, the more each side tries to make the other side look ineffective.
And this is a measure that, as you pointed out, is about health care for sick ground zero workers. And instead of the issue, really being about that, it became not only about politics, but it became about process. And what I think Weiner was trying to say is that a lot of times, people in Congress, when they don't want to vote for something, use process as the convenient excuse. And that's what I think --
VELSHI: We have seen that -- we've seen that a number of times. We've seen it on both parties when we talked about it during the health care reform debate. We talked about how both parties have used this historically.
BORGER: Right. Well, and, you know, here's the thing -- what the Democrats said was, OK, we want to bring up this bill, but we don't want any amendments on it, because we know the Republicans are trying to amend this money and say, "OK, you have this $7 billion, but none of it can go to illegal immigrants," for example, who might have been at ground zero. And they didn't want to have to vote on that amendment.
So, what they did was, they brought up a measure that could not be amended. In order to get it passed --
VELSHI: And that's what Peter King was talking about. That's what Peter King was talking about.
BORGER: That's what Peter King was complaining about.
VELSHI: Right.
BORGER: In order to get that passed, you can't just have a majority vote, you need to have a two-thirds vote. So, they couldn't get two-thirds of the members of Congress to vote on it.
VELSHI: So bottom line here --
BORGER: And Peter King was also complaining --
VELSHI: -- is that -
BORGER: Yes?
VELSHI: -- is that 9/11 rescuers, heroes from 9/11, will not get their health care paid for, something that both parties had agreed was a good thing, because of process in the House of Representatives.
BORGER: A process issue. Also, disagreement on how you pay for it, because the Democrats say they're closing a tax loophole, the Republicans say it's not a loophole that you want to tax foreign companies who have branch offices in the United States.
What I think could happen here, Ali, is that at some point, cooler heads will prevail. Democrats and Republicans could decide to bring this up again in September. And there are some who believe that that will indeed be the case. But they're going to have to get together beforehand and decide what the measure will contain, if they can actually agree on it. And that's the problem right now, Ali -- as I said, they cannot agree that the sky is blue, because the political stakes right now are indeed the control of the House.
VELSHI: Yes. And that is partially why people are frustrated with Congress. Gloria, thanks so much.
BORGER: You bet. You bet. Sure. VELSHI: We're going to have Representative Weiner here with us sometime in the next 20 minutes or so to talk a little bit more about what he's so mad about and what -- what he's planning on doing about it, whether he's talked to Representative Peter King. Believe it or not, both parties want this fixed, and they couldn't pass that bill.
OK, tensions high on the floor of the House of Representatives and they are high in Arizona. Totally different issue. Demonstrators are back on the streets. They are protesting the state's new immigration law.
After we take a break, we're going to head to Phoenix to hit the streets with Sheriff Joe Arpaio who is still kicking up controversy with his crime sweeps.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: Angry protests continue all across Phoenix after a more scaled-down immigration law took effect yesterday. So far, at least 50 protesters have been arrested.
Governor Jan Brewer's office filed an appeal yesterday. She wants to get the injunction lifted that is blocking four key parts of the law, including the part that allows police to question immigration status based on, quote, "reasonable suspicion."
Now, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, where Phoenix is, says he will keep doing crime sweeps and arresting illegal immigrants.
CNN's Gary Tuchman spent the day with Arpaio and his men as they went on one of their crime sweeps.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GARY TUCHMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): They're very mad.
Hundreds of demonstrators on the streets of Phoenix, with people being arrested for disorderly conduct, angry about the new Arizona immigration bill, and particularly angry at this man, who they feel is inhumane.
SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA: It doesn't make any difference with me. I'm going to continue to do what I've been doing.
TUCHMAN: What Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been doing for years is trying to determine if many of his people his department arrests are illegal immigrants, and then shipping them to federal authorities for possible deportation.
ARPAIO: So that they're every day they're out in front of this building for two years, calling me Nazi, Hitler, every name in the book they have been doing against this sheriff. Because if they can't make you stop one way, they have to throw the race card in. That doesn't bother me. TUCHMAN: So, why does Arpaio have the right to ask people if they're illegal immigrants if that portion of the law has not been allowed to take effect yet?
Well, it's a little-known fact that dozens of counties, including Maricopa County, Arizona, have a partnership with the federal government that has permitted them to make those determinations. Arpaio revels in his reputation as a tough guy.
ARPAIO: I'm turning off certain activists that don't like what I'm doing. I'm probably turning off some employers who hire illegal aliens for the cheap payment, money. So, I turn off some people. But you know what? I serve the 4 million people that live here.
TUCHMAN: On the day part of the new immigration law went into effect, Arpaio and his department went on a crime sweep, deputies driving into the city's neighborhoods -- in this case pull willing over a Mexican-American driver for an expired registration tag. Because the driver had a proper license, though, he was only ticketed, no taken into custody.
This man, though, wasn't as fortunate.
(on camera): So, they arrested you for not having a registration.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
TUCHMAN: Did they ask if you were legal?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Huh?
TUCHMAN: Did they ask if you were legally in this country?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They didn't ask me that. They just -- nothing. They just took me out of the car, right here on 35th Avenue, I mean, in the middle of the street of nothing here.
TUCHMAN: Are you legally in this country?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm legal.
TUCHMAN: Do you think they pulled you over because they think you're an illegal immigrant?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just because of the color, like everybody, yes.
TUCHMAN: Like the color of your skin?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
TUCHMAN (voice-over): Arpaio says he, nor his department, are racists. He insists they're doing what they're supposed to be doing.
(on camera): And sound like a cowboy. ARPAIO: No. Yes, you know, I do act like a cowboy. But instead of going after horse thieves, I go after car thieves. Things have changed.
So, we have my deputies, and we go in certain areas where crime is prevalent, and during the course of our -- maybe only 15 hours, we arrest many violators of the law. And just by chance, about 60 percent that we arrest happen to be here illegally.
TUCHMAN (voice-over): The sheriff says that the controversial elements of the new immigration law are eventually enacted, the only major change for him would be keeping illegal immigrants in his jail instead of giving them to the feds.
His opponents will be fighting him every step of the way.
ARPAIO: All right. Let's go to do the right thing.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VELSHI: Gary, Sheriff Joe Arpaio's opponents have been fighting him every step of the way already. And this debate has not become any mellower over the course of the last year or so.
Does he show any signs of softening up on any of these fronts, or is this debate just hardening his position?
TUCHMAN (via telephone): Let me you an example about Joe Arpaio, Ali. He's from Springfield, Massachusetts, originally. He's been in Arizona a long time. He says despite the fact that he's friends with so many Arizonans, the owners of sports teams, he remains a Red Sox and Celtics fans, he's not going to change.
So, Joe Arpaio is never going to change, that's very clear. Everyone knows that, the people who love him, the people who hate him. He just considers this the main mission of his life: getting illegal immigrants out of his county.
VELSHI: And as you always do, when you go on a story, you get all of these interesting elements, including talking to that one man who was arrested, who said he was in the country legally, and said that he was pulled over for the color of his skin. Did they have any issue with -- as these people were stopped or arrested, you to talking to them? Were you able to freely talk to the people who were involved in this sweep?
TUCHMAN: It was very interesting. I mean, every county, every city, every state is different, we deal with police stories. But in this particular story, Joe Arpaio's people said, yes, interview whoever you want, talk to whoever you want.
But don't take much significance with that man saying they didn't ask him about if he was legal or illegal, because under the terms of the agreement they have with the federal government, Maricopa County can't ask him until the man is in jail and it is probable cause. So, it's very likely -- we don't know for sure -- but it's very likely, eventually, authorities did ask him about that.
VELSHI: All right, Gary, excellent coverage from there. Thank you for letting us get a little deeper into -- an understanding of a story that seems black and white on the surface, but is very, very nuanced.
Gary Tuchman, once again, in Arizona covering the story -- thank you, Gary.
All right. Just how is the economy doing these days? It's a hard question to answer. A report out today says that long and winding road to recovery is actually sputtering along. And we've got some new numbers I need to tell you about when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: Boy, if there's any question I get more than any other, it's: how is economy doing? And I wish it was such a simple answer, but it isn't.
Traditionally, we use one measure of the economy, because it's the biggest measure of the economy, it's called the GDP, the gross domestic product. And I want to show you what the GDP has looked like over the last few years.
This chart takes us all the way to 2006, the last time we had really good, strong growth in the economy, a little over 5 percent a year. That means all of the goods and services that we provide in the United States increased in that quarter over the quarter before it. That's growth in GDP.
But take a look at what's been happening since then. Through 2006, it was OK. It was back and forth. 2007, you saw a bit of a dip.
And then, the beginning of 2008, that's when you first started to see the economy really suffering, negative growth. In other words, we produced less than we did in the three months preceding that period.
You can see that recession -- see all the way in 2009, it gets really low, and then it starts at the end of 2009 to taper off. And then you start seeing growth in 2010.
But now, we got numbers for the second quarter of 2010. That's the last bar on the right of the screen. And it's 2.4 percent. Well, that's less than experts and economists were expecting. It doesn't mean the economy is not growing, it just means it's growing very slowly.
Now, what were the good things in that report? Government spending was up. We know that. That's part of the stimulus.
Residential investment was up. That's because there was a tax break given to people who bought new homes.
What was the bad part about it? Consumer spending. Consumers are worried about their jobs and about the economy. They're not going out there and making large purchases, worried about whether or not they will have a job, because unemployment is still high.
And debt -- people still have a lot of debt, and they don't have access to credit. So, you don't spend the money you have because you're worried about the fact that you might not get that money if you needed to borrow it later on. That's affecting the economy.
The good news is that there has been some growth. But the stuff that was good this last quarter is temporary.
The bad news: those problems with debt, those problems with credit, those problems with unemployment, something bigger has to happen before they go away.
So, if somebody wants to ask you how the economy is doing -- it's tepid, it's milk toast, it's OK. It's not great. The concern is about what does the future hold.
If you want more discussion on this, tune in to "YOUR $$$$$" this weekend and every weekend, Saturdays at 1:00 p.m. Eastern and Sundays at 3:00 p.m. Eastern -- where we have sort of bigger discussions about your money, how to invest it and how to prepare yourself financially for your future.
Speaking about money -- this isn't really about money, this is more about love. But for me, it always comes down to being about money. Here comes the bride, Chelsea Clinton, getting married tomorrow. After the break, we're going to take you to Rhinebeck, New York, to see what we can find out about the super-secret expensive wedding.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: Well, it's all the talk, the wedding of America's royal daughter. Saturday, Chelsea Clinton is met set to marry her longtime boyfriend, investment banker Marc Mezvinsky. This huge wedding is all about secrets and speculation, because the details have been kept hush-hush.
We pretty much know it's going to be held in Rhinebeck, New York, about 90 miles from New York City. We don't know for sure who will be attending the wedding or how much the royal event will cost -- but we've got some estimates. And since I'm the money man, I figured I would give you a closer look at what we are hearing this is going to cost.
Let's put a few pieces together. First of all, air-conditioned tents, because it's hot out there, $600,000 for those tents. They don't -- there's catering, obviously -- $750,000 in catering.
And you have to have rest rooms. You have a lot of people. So they've got porta-potties, but apparently, they have porcelain toilets, $15,000 for porcelain porta-potties.
I just roughly, you know, add that all together and then you throw in some other people's estimates and this is what we come up: a total cost, somewhere between $3 million and $5 million for this wedding. Maybe. Who knows?
Susan Candiotti is in Rhinebeck, and she has been working on some more of these secrets. Let's find out what she knows about the wedding of the year -- Susan.
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wedding? What wedding? Oh, is that why I'm here?
Thanks, Ali. OK, I got it. Now, look, you want details, you have sent an intrepid reporter like me to try to find out what we can.
I can tell you one thing, that road that you see over my shoulder is the road that leads to the location where the marriage will take place between Chelsea Clinton and her investment banker, Marc Mezvinsky. Of course, that is tomorrow night. But tonight is, of course, the rehearsal dinner.
And guess what? There has already been a sighting of Bill Clinton in town. Yes, the former president showed up to have lunch in an Italian restaurant. Coincidentally, we ate this yesterday afternoon. We approve, it was very nice.
And he was asked whether he is excited, and he said, "Yes, I am." He was asked whether Chelsea will look beautiful, and he said she looks beautiful every single day. Just like a dad, right?
Now, as for the wedding that is going to take place at the estate of former millionaire John Jacob Astor, the mansion and sprawling estate where he lives is over 100 years old. You can best see it from the air, but we tried to take a look to see what we could tell -- what it looks like from the ground. And so, we did a drive-by yesterday. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CANDIOTTI: You can see why the couple would have chosen a spot like this. Look how remote it is. There's a beautiful old stone wall that protects the property. It's heavily wooded. As you see, you can barely get a look at any buildings on the property itself. And you certainly, from the road, cannot see any of the tents that have been set up for this event.
You know, you see cars driving by and deliveries being made. It's quiet now, but, boy, come wedding time, it will be very busy here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CANDIOTTI: And as you can imagine, of course, everyone who lives here is very excited. Well, for the most part, really -- because it's bringing a ton of money to this town, and after all, there could be a number of celebrities here. Although they are quick to say, we often have celebrities here, especially during the summertime. So, everyone is looking forward to this. Now, the FAA, has, of course, imposed a no-fly zone during the wedding ceremony, when that takes place tomorrow night, no surprise there, and they will be patrolling the Hudson River to make sure that there aren't too many people hanging around or trying to sneak on to this private property. But, of course, we can be sure that some paparazzi, no doubt, and others may have staked out positions across the river, perhaps, looking over at the estate. So, we'll see what happens.
VELSHI: There's a picture to be had, someone will get it, I'm quite sure.
Susan, great to see you as always -- Susan Candiotti in Rhinebeck, New York.
I want to stay in New York. I lived there for a long time, not in Rhinebeck, but in New York City. And if you are from New York, one name you're familiar with is Anthony Weiner. He is a congressman from New York.
Boy, last night, he got mad on the floor of the House of Representatives, and I'm talking really, really mad. You have got to see this, and then you've got to hear from him directly why it happened, after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: This just in to CNN.
After a nearly two-year probe of Representative Charles Rangel, House Ethics Committee investigators recommended the congressman be reprimanded. Now this is according to one of those investigators, Representative Gene Green, a Texas democrat. A reprimand would be a relatively light punishment compared to censure or expulsion.
The recommendation was made to the Ethics Committee before Thursday's public hearing, detailing charges against Rangel. The full committee and the House would have to approve any sanction against Rangel. And when asked about the recommendation, Rangel said, "it's untrue. "
We'll, of course, continue to bring you details about this story as they become more available.
I want to stay on Capitol Hill for a minute. I want you to listen to something, Representative Anthony Weiner from New York. Last night, he was the cosponsor of a bill that didn't succeed and he was mad. He was really, really mad.
Listen to him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman from New York is recognized.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from New York, Mr. Weiner.
REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: Great courage to wait until all members have already spoken and then stand up and wrap your arms around procedure. We see it in the United States Senate every single day, where members say, we want amendments, we want debate, we want amendments, but we're still a no. And then we stand up and say, oh, if only we had a different process, we would vote yes.
You vote yes if you believe yes! You vote in favor of something if you believe it's the right thing. If you believe it's the wrong thing, you vote no.
We are following a procedure -- I will not yield to the gentleman, and the gentleman will observe regular order!
(CROSSTALK)
WEINER: The gentleman will observe regular order!
The gentleman gets up and yells, trying to think he's going to intimidate people into believing he is right. He is wrong! The gentleman is wrong!
The gentleman is providing cover for his colleagues, rather than doing the right thing. It's Republicans wrapping their arms around Republicans, rather than doing the right thing on behalf of the heroes.
It is a shame! A shame! If you believe this is a bad idea to provide health care, then vote no! But don't give me the cowardly view that oh, if it was a different procedure -- the gentleman will observe regular order and sit down!
I will not! The gentleman will sit! The gentleman is correct in sitting. I will not --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman will suspend.
WEINER: I will not stand here and listen to my colleagues say, if only we had a different procedure that allows us to stall, stall, stall and then vote no.
Instead of standing up and defending your colleagues and voting no on this humane bill, you should urge them to vote yes, something the gentleman has not done!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: Representative Weiner was responding to Representative Peter King, who had just spoken before him. Peter King and Anthony Weiner are both cosponsors of this bill that failed, and we're going to talk about why it failed in just a moment.
We did invite Representative King to join us. He is somebody who has joined us in the past, quite regularly. He was not able to join us today, but we do have with us Congressman Anthony Weiner, a democrat from New York.
Congressman Weiner, no one has ever doubted that you are a passionate guy. Anybody who has ever followed you in politics, you're passionate, I think most of your colleagues are.
But even you said earlier today to somebody, I guess the Brooklyn came out in me. What made you get that mad last night?
WEINER: Well, Ali, this isn't about me or Peter King. You know, for nine years now, people who got sick because they did the right thing, they came to Ground Zero to try to help their neighbors, sometimes they're just living in the wrong neighborhood, those people quite literally dying every single day.
You know, I have a guy who works for me, Ed Coltan (ph) and every day I listened to him cough and wheeze. He was a police officer who is now retired. This is what this is about. And you know, sometimes you would think, even in this moment in our political lives, that there are some things that should transcend politics. You have nights like last night, where 95 percent of Democrats voted to give 9/11 responders health care, and simply because it was a democrat imagine, just about every Republican voted no. And frankly, that was outrageous.
And the fact that the excuses that were being made, well, we don't like this being done so quickly, we don't like it being done on this calendar, we don't like it on this day, at the end of the day, the American people want us to stand up and vote for what we think is right, and that's what got my goat last night.
VELSHI: And so you said that, you said vote yes if you believe you should vote yes; vote no, if you believe you should vote no. But I think what we've learned in the last year or two as we've all become -- this whole country has become intimately involved with the legislative process is that that happens far less than you would expect it to. Most people think you vote yes on things you support, you vote things on no on things you don't. And then you get in and you realize the whole political system works against you actually voting the way you think you should vote or maybe that your constituents think you should vote.
WEINER: Well, that's exactly right. And I thought -- maybe naively, I've only been in Congress 12 years -- I thought naively, if there was ever an issue that should transcend that type of posturing, it would be whether to provide health care for 9/11 first responders. These are people who are approaching the nine-year anniversary. People of the 430 of the 435 Congressional districts.
You know, I remember -- I remember vividly, and you probably do as well, on the West Side Highway after September 11th, you can look at the different license plates of the firefighters, of the people who just came there to help. All around the country. Well, those people were told the air was safe. They're quite literally dying by degrees right now.
All this is about is whether they give them the same honor and the same health care that we have offered other people who have been attacked in circumstances like this, and that's what this is about.
VELSHI: What was it, without getting arcane and into House rules, what was it that was the procedural problem? What were the Republicans mad at that they said the Democrats did to get this through? And how can that be changed to right this wrong?
WEINER: Well, look, the fact is that we have a special procedure for things that are noncontroversial, so they don't go on for months and months and months of debate, things that we basically agree upon. And this was one of those bills, or so we thought.
And we were very, very close. You know, people don't realize that if only 21 of the 155 Republicans that voted no changed their position and voted yes, maybe if Peter King did more time calling them rather than calling names of democrats, then this thing would have passed.
This is a common procedure, it's used all the time. It was used today a couple times already. Because, frankly, it was beyond a lot of people's understanding why anyone would want to politicize this and make it a long, drawn-out fight. It's already been nine years, it's already gone through two committees, it's already many amendments to it. The time is done for stalling. We need to provide these first responders, who are my neighbors, with the care that they need.
VELSHI: What -- have you talked to Peter King? I mean, you guys both want this bill done. What happens now? Is it dead? Can you guys come together and somehow get this back?
WEINER: Well, it's not dead. I mean, I don't look like much, but I can take care of myself and we're figuring out a way to resurrect it. And even the most heated of tension can't transcend the idea that this isn't about a couple politicians or even two parties. This is about the people we're trying to help. And we're going to try, again, through whatever procedure we possibly can.
But I've got to tell you something. There is a certain thematic theme going on here in Washington. And that is the Republican Party, and I'm not the first to say it, it has taken this posture that anything Democrats propose they're going to be against, no matter how virtuous. And they'll say they want more amendments, they'll say we want more time, they say we don't like the day of the week, we don't like how many pages are in the bill. But the fact is, we have to suspend that, if for no other reason than these people simply can't wait any longer. They were not Democrat or Republican when they ran down to Ground Zero.
VELSHI: Here's how Gloria Borger put it, our senior political analyst. She says that a lot of Americans see it -- you know the confidence in Congress is at record lows, it's at about 11 percent. And that if you -- you went in Congress and you asked people to agree that the sky is blue, they wouldn't be able to agree on that.
So here's the difficulty, you may be right in saying that it's Republicans who won't agree to anything Democrats do, but what the country sees is distasteful bickering over everything. So some people might see you and say, boy, that was passionate, I'm glad somebody has finally put their foot down and says we're not taking it anymore. And yet, what somebody else might see is, this is what they do in Congress? What have you been hearing from people?
WEINER: Well, I have got to tell you something. There is a lot of passion on both sides of the aisle, and you're right, there is a lot of dissatisfaction. But part of the reason there is dissatisfaction, in my view, is the Republican Party has been brilliantly effective in their tactic of stopping things from happening. We saw the United States Senate just this week table a small business bill to help out small businesses, like the ones I have in Queens and Brooklyn. They have been successful at it.
What we're trying to do is every single day with three yards and a cloud of dust is to get stuff done. But last night took it to a whole new level, because last night is about providing health care to 9/11 responders. Ask the 155 Republicans that voted no why. Are they going to say it was the procedure? Honestly? Why don't they just vote yes and then complain about the procedure later once the bill gets passed?
If they really believe this is a good thing, they should vote for it. And unfortunately, I think when it comes down to it, when you scrape everything away, a lot of those people voted no simply because the Democrats are in charge of Congress.
VELSHI: In the interest of getting people the money that they need, can this go forward as a bipartisan effort? Are you reaching out to Representative Peter King and others to say, can we get this back on and help the people that need to be helped?
WEINER: Well, we're doing what we can. But I just want to reiterate this, we got 12 of the 160-some-odd Republicans to vote with us yesterday. That ain't very good. I did a whip organization on the democratic side with Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler and Joe Crowley and others, and we only lost four Democrats in the entire Congress on this bill.
So we're doing what we can. We do need some bipartisan help. Whatever the procedure is, we're going to need those Republican votes. And I would just say, whatever party you belong to, you should call up your congressman and say, whatever process they're going to use, the most important thing is to vote yes when it comes to the floor.
You know, people don't stop me on the floor and ask me about the sections of the parcel men tear rules. What they ask, are you up or down? And last night, unfortunately, Democrats voted for 9/11 health and Republicans voted against it.
VELSHI: All right, Anthony Weiner, thanks very much for joining us, good to see you. And, of course, we have extended the invitation to Representative Peter King, we hope he'll join us, as well. Thanks very much. We'll follow this very closely.
Over to Afghanistan. Last month was the deadliest month for U.S. troops in the Afghan war. Sadly, until today. Nearly ten years into this war, what is the mission? Where do we go from here? We'll go live to Kabul for what the Afghans are saying, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: It is the longest war in U.S. history. Today, another deadly milestone in Afghanistan. Over the past two days, six American service members were killed in southern Afghanistan. Their deaths bring the total for July to 66, making it the deadliest month since the war started nine years ago.
The total number of American troops that have died in the war now stands at 1,113. Many Americans are now asking, why are we still fighting this war, even members of President Obama's own party have expressed serious reservations about the course of this war.
Let's take a look at a timeline showing key developments getting us to where we are today.
Shortly after the 9/11 attacks in 2001, President Bush ordered the invasion of Afghanistan. The mission was to overthrow the Taliban, push al Qaeda out of the country so that they couldn't use it as a base for attacks against the West. There was a measure of success, but then the focus shifted to the war in Iraq.
In 2004, Hamid Karzai was elected the president of Afghanistan, a move the U.S. hoped would start to unify this country, a country that hadn't been unified in generations.
Five years later, Karzai was re-elected amid allegations of widespread vote-rigging. Many Afghans today view Karzai and his government as corrupt and say that the Taliban did a better job of serving their needs.
In February of last year, President Obama ordered an additional 17,000 troops to Afghanistan. In December of that year, he announced an additional 30,000 troops would be deployed this year to take part in counterinsurgency operations.
As we mentioned, July is now the deadliest month for U.S. troops in the war. President Obama says he will start withdrawing American forces in July of next year. Hamid Karzai says he wants full security control of Afghanistan by 2014.
Now, today, this war poses many problems and questions. Take a look at this. President Bush's initial goal for the invasion was to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda. Nine years later, the mission is more or less the same. The cost of the war, though, billions of dollars.
The Afghan government? Well, many analysts agree the government is corrupt. After it's early defeat, the Taliban have come back as strong as ever and heavily involved in the drug trade. In some corners, they've got a lot of support from Afghan villagers.
And finally, the Obama administration's goals have met limited success at best to strengthen national and local governments, to improve infrastructure, to improve education and the status of women. In Kabul today, more violence outside the U.S. embassy. Joining us now with today's news and how Afghans feel about the situation is our correspondent in Kabul, Atia Abawi.
Atia, tell us what has happened just today?
ATIA ABAWI, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ali, what happened today is something that frustrates all Afghans.
Apparently, there was some contractors who were leaving the U.S. embassy. There were security contractors, and they were weaving out of the lanes on Airport Road. Airport Road is a very main road for the Afghan people themselves. And actually, it's a long road connecting the airport and the U.S. embassy. As they were speeding down this road, they had a head-on collision with Afghan civilians. Two died -- one man, one woman -- four in that car also injured.
This obviously enraged the people who were in the area. It's a very busy area. They approached those vehicles, and according to an eyewitness, one of the contractors fired a weapon. That made over 1,000 Afghans come after these men that were in these vehicles. It was the Afghan police who had to step in, save the Americans and take them away.
But those cars remain, and those Afghans took -- their stress out on these vehicles. They burned the vehicles. Rocks, piles of rocks that we saw on the aftermath. The frustration is there when it comes to civilian deaths, and that is the one thing that the NATO forces do realize and they're trying to change it. But the question is, is it too late, or can they make any way forward when it comes to the people of Afghanistan -- Ali.
VELSHI: Give me one sense, one of the things about having you there is you are able to speak to people and you get some sense, whether it's officials or Afghans, what they're feeling is. When you take any one of these milestones, the fact that it's the deadliest month or the fact that maybe they're making inroads or not in certain places, what's the general feeling of the western presence in Afghanistan? Should NATO forces be there, should the international force be there, or should they get out?
ABAWI: That's a very interesting question. And Afghanistan is such a big country that when you go from province to province and village to village, I've talked to these Afghans, you get a different perspective everywhere you go.
What's interesting about Helmand Province, which is considered one of the most volatile provinces in Afghanistan, I can't tell you how many Afghans I have spoken to in Helmand in the last two years that I was here who were excited for the Americans to come in and change their way of life. But then there are other districts and villages where the Afghan people are frustrated and they do feel that the Taliban are giving them a better government than the Afghan government. It's not necessarily that they like the Taliban, but to them it's just the lesser of two evils right now and they feel like less Afghans will die if they come into power. But, again, those are just separate perspectives. And you come to the cities, the majority of them support the American troops and they want the international community to change their lives.
VELSHI: All right, we'll continue to cover this story with your help.
Atia Abawi in Kabul on the latest in Afghanistan.
All right, let's turn our views to the future. The future -- well, let's look at the car of the future. It may not run on gasoline at all. Just plug it in, charge it up, and drive. We talk electric cars after this break, stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: President Obama in Detroit, Michigan today getting a firsthand look at the Chevy Volt. Prices just came out for this. This is the electric vehicle, it's one of several electric hybrid vehicles that are hitting the showroom very shortly. I wanted to give you a sense of them. These could be the car of the future.
Let's first of all talk about the Chevy Volt itself. Prices just came in for this thing. It's a plug-in hybrid. It's got a lithium ion battery pack that'll drive you for 40 miles just using electricity and it's got the small gas engine which basically kicks in after the battery gives out and generates electricity to power a motor. You can run 400 miles with this thing. It's $41,000. You get a tax credit, takes it down to about $33,500. Hits showrooms in November in six states and D.C..
Nissan Leaf, that's a joint venture. It's an all electric car. A hundred miles on a single charge, that's what the Nissan will get you. It's $32,700. You take a federal tax credit there it'll bring it down to $25,280. Available in December initially only in five states.
You probably haven't heard of these other models, though. The Think City. It's a two-seater built by a Norwegian company formally owned by Ford. It's all electric. It's got a hundred-mile range. Don't have a price but we think with that tax credit it'll probably come in less than $20,000. It'll be available late this year in New York and in other cities.
There are a few more of these things, but we will continue to talk to you about that.
When we come back, what do you do with the electric cars? How do you charge them? Charge them at home? Maybe charge them at work? What if you want to drive somewhere else? There are electric charging gas pumps, if you will, going to be showing up all around the country. I'm going to talk to somebody who is putting those up after the break. This could be your future, don't go anywhere.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) VELSHI: Before the end of this year, you're going to be able to go into a dealership and buy an electric car. Electric hybrid or totally electric, but you're going to have a car that can really run on electricity, if you want one. The prices, though some people think are very high, after some tax credits, they could be in the $20,000 to $35,000 range. Keep in mind, you don't have to buy gas.
But where are you going to get this electricity? Can you just plug it in anywhere? Is it going to be like cell phone chargers where you can't use somebody else's? Let's talk to some people who know right about this. J.R. Read is the CEO of ECOtality, Paul Bradley is with Frog Design. They have designed the EV electric, the electric vehicle charger.
J.R., let's start with you. What are these? Where are they? How are they going to work to give us this world where we can drive electric cars?
J.R. READ, CEO, ECOTALITY: Ali, there's going to be a couple of different types of chargers. There's going to be what's called level 2 chargers which are set up for a 2 to 2.5-hour charge. They'll be located in malls and in places where you'd likely spend two hours or so.
There also is what's called our level 3 charger, which is a charger that will charge your car completely in 15 to 25 minutes. Those are going to be at places like Starbucks and coffee shops and places that you would spend 15 minutes or so, such as the pharmacy and the like.
These are all very high-tech chargers. They're all going to be very, very interactive. It might even have some media components to it to help pay for the cost of these chargers being distributed.
VELSHI: Hey, Paul, this could be the thing of the future. In other words, everywhere you think you see a gas station, you may in the future have an electric charger. That may be the most ubiquitous thing like -- like ATMs.
You're a design guy, what's this going to look like? Where are they going to be where I'm going to experience them?
PAUL BRADLEY, EXECUTIVE CREATIVE DIRECTOR, FROG DESIGN, INC.: Well, not just design, but at Frog Design we combine technologists, strategists, research and designers to come up with simple intuitive solutions to complex problems. And I think ECOtality provided us with this great opportunity to define the precedent for what electric vehicle charging could be in the future and the time is right to build this infrastructure.
So I think we really believe that we need to build this into the environments that suit people's current lifestyles. So your home, your garage is obviously a likely scenario for this place and somewhere people are going to do a lot of their charging. But also out on the road, level 3 chargers will eventually come out. In the next 60, 90 days I think you'll see an announcement from ECOtality where these are located along highways for long-distance travel. But also in commercial environments where people are going and spending time, these units will be located and available to them to charge their vehicles essentially while they're not with their vehicles.
VELSHI: All right, brilliant. This is going to be the future, guys. We're very excited to see how this works out. We'll be following, we'll be waiting for those announcements. We'll be following. I'm going to be very excited the first day I see one of these EV chargers on the road.
J.R. Read, thank you for being with us. Paul Bradley, good to see you both.
READ: Thanks, Ali.
VELSHI: We'll keep on top of this whole situation. You can learn about your electric vehicles right here at CNN.
Listen, the other thing you can learn about is how things get done at the House of Representatives, at Congress. I'm going to play that tape for you again of Anthony Wiener's outburst, his dramatic outburst on the floor of the House of Representatives last night because a bill didn't get passed that was going to give health care to 9/11 heroes.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
