Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Fighting Oil With Chemicals; Earning Power in Black and White; Catching up on Lost Sleep; Wildfires Devastate Central Russia/Bringing a Dying Rust Belt Town Back to Life/President Obama Addresses Disabled Vets/Rep. Waters to Face Ethics Charges
Aired August 02, 2010 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: Here's what we have on the headlines for you. BP is conducting a final test at its ruptured well. The Macondo well, by the way, is what they call it. 105 days later it's probably not all that usefull for you to know that. They hope to begin the static kill operating tomorrow.
A warning alarm went off on the International Space Station. We'll tell you what that means and what may be done about it. .
And President Obama right here in Atlanta, says the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq -- on schedule for the end of August, less than a month from today. We'll tell you what he said today about the future of that war.
First, let me bring you up to speed on what's going on at that well in the Gulf of Mexico. It is 105 days in. But we've not seen oil flowing out of that well since July the 15th. Let me give you a sense of what's going on. That's a picture - a live picture -- as you can see. No oil flying anywhere. The issue here is that we are going to start to see static kill.
Let me show you what static kill looks like. Basically, they're going to be sending stuff down from the surface, mud. They call it mud. It's drilling mud. It's really a chemical, a very heavy chemical that pushes anything underneath it, particularly oil, deeper down.
So they're going to be pushing that mud all the way through these twisted pipes and through the blowout preventer into that well, pushing it down. You'll see it go down into the well. And basically, after the mud, they'll send cement in, and that should do it. That should totally do the job. It should close that well off permanently.
They're also needing to -- they need to drill this relief well. I'm going to show you what this is. There are two wells that are being drilled into the bottom of the well, two drilling efforts.
The one on the right is almost there. That will be helpful if they pump this mud into the well to alleviate pressure, to make sure it's sealed. Those are basically the two efforts that are going to have to take place together, and that might mean a permanent kill of this well. Now, I want to tell you something else. There's a critic in Congress, Congressman Ed Markey, who says that BP went overboard in putting those dispersants into the ocean to disperse the oil. He said that they vastly exceed Environmental Protection Agency directives.
Now, BP denies that, so does Thad Allen. He's the national incident commander.
So I want you to hear what Ed Markey had to say, Congressman Ed Markey, and then what the response from Doug Suttles, who's the chief operating officer of BP.
I'll let you listen to these two gentlemen back to back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ED MARKEY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Even though there was an agreement in late May that the EPA led that it would be used only rarely, as the weeks and months went by it turned out that it was used on an almost daily basis. And that's why we have to ensure that internal bleeding inside of this ocean is monitored very closely to make sure that we understand what the ramifications are of having this unprecedented scientific experiment be conducted.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOUG SUTTLES, COO, BP: There were very, very rigorous protocols we had to follow. We had to apply for permission to apply them. It was based on surveillance data. The federal on-scene coordinator, the Coast Guard, had to formally approve those. Some days they approved our request, other days they didn't and they reduced our request.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: Let's go get the latest on this from David Mattingly. He's in New Orleans right now, where Chad was just telling us -- David looks cool as a cumber, but it's about 105 degrees there or something.
So, EPA, Thad Allen, BP, they're all saying that they did what they were told to do and, in fact, they weren't really allowed to use more than they were allowed to use. But bottom line is they're closing the book on that and they're hopefully closing the book on this well.
DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Ali.
In fact, we just got just a few minutes ago one of the big answers to the most lingering question in this disaster. A hundred five days since this disaster began, people have been asking that question, what happens when you combine all that dispersant with the oil?
Everyone knew that the dispersant was toxic. Everyone knew that the oil was toxic. But no one knew what was going on when you put the two together. And now we have an answer.
The test results have come back. The EPA just came out and says that when you combine these two substances together, they are no more toxic, generally speaking, than the oil itself.
So the EPA feeling very vindicated, probably, right now, in making that decision back in May to apply this dispersant in ways that it never intended to be used before. So, again, their findings were that when you mix this dispersant with the oil, it's not any worse, generally speaking, than the toxicity of the oil. So that justifies the decision, they believe, they made under extreme circumstances at the time saying that it was the right thing to do to use this dispersant to break that oil up, to keep it from getting into the sensitive ecosystems on the shore, and to help it break up and be available for biodegradation within the environment itself.
So, in fact, the exact quote that came from that release we heard, that was that decision, seems to be a wise decision. So, again, one of the great unknowns now off the table.
Here we are 105 days into this disaster, Ali. That's going to be a huge relief to a lot of people who are watching this and being very critical of how this was being used.
VELSHI: Right. And the question, when you said used in a way that it hadn't been used before, it was in the quantities that they'd never used dispersant before, there was a different amount of toxicity, some of them worse off for shrimp or oysters or other fish. But the bottom line is they had to make a decision with the available dispersants there. And the idea was that you'd disperse this oil out, and that the natural organisms in the Gulf would take care of those smaller bits of oil, as opposed to huge blobs floating either on top of the sea or inside.
MATTINGLY: Right. And that's one thing we keep forgetting throughout this whole process, is that oil is organic. And there's a natural ecosystem there with organisms that actually consume this oil. So, by putting the dispersant on it, helping it break up, the EPA says that was the right decision to make because it's helping to break the oil up and make it a lot more available to those organisms out there.
Now, the second step behind that was, OK, you have those organisms out there, they're just going to explode in number when they start eating all this oil. And that's been happening, to some degree, and people were worried about -- scientists in particular -- watching how much oxygen was being consumed in that water, because if you have too many organisms eating up all the oxygen, then all the fish are going to die. Well, at this point the EPA says they've been watching the oxygen in the water, and at this point, they say they have not seen anything that would tell them that there is a danger sign at this point.
But, again, this is just one wave of testing on this dispersant. This is still a big experiment. And they're still watching everything that happens out there. They're not done, by any stretch of the imagination, watching how this eco rebounds now that that oil has been shut off.
VELSHI: They're not done and we're not done with it either.
David Mattingly, good to see you. You've been on this case right from the beginning. It's a long story, and we'll keep following it to the end.
David Mattingly in New Orleans.
Hey, listen, this may not be a big surprise to many of you, but I want you to go to my Facebook page and tell me what you think of this. African-Americans still do not earn as much as their white counterparts on average. We're going to find out what that disparity is and why it persists. I want your thoughts on it, too.
We'll be right back after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: OK. When it comes to making money in this country, there is still a large gap when you compare black workers to their white counterparts. There's also, as you know, a gap between what women earn and what men earn. We've examined that; we will continue to.
But today I want to talk about the gap between blacks and whites. The numbers don't lie.
In 2008, take a look at this. Income per capita for African- Americans was $18,054. This is according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Income per capita for whites is $28,502. That's per capita. That's total income divided by everybody who's out there.
That's almost a 58 percent difference. That doesn't mean everybody was doing the same jobs, but it means, generally speaking, there's a difference in what whites earn and blacks earn.
When you look at workers who earn at least $100,000 a year, six- figure salaries, 3.3 percent of African-Americans fit into that category. Almost 11 percent of whites fit into that category. Maybe that even tells the story a little bit better when it comes to building and creating wealth.
Why is this? Well, some people say education plays a very big part in this gap.
Joining me to discuss this is Dr. Michael Lomax. He's the president and CEO of the United Negro College Fund.
Michael, good to see you again. Thank you for being with us. Last we talked was a few months ago.
Let's discuss this. Let's, first of all, just understand what these statistics are.
When it says -- when the Census Bureau says that in 2008, per capita income for African-Americans was $18,000, versus $28,500 for whites, that doesn't mean people are being paid differently for the same job, but it means that African-Americans are earning less than whites are.
DR. MICHAEL LOMAX, PRESIDENT & CEO, UNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND: It does. It means that on average.
And, you know, the interesting thing is that one could argue that because African-Americans don't have the same education, by and large, as whites, so that -- you know, only 19 percent of African-Americans have a college degree, whereas about 33 percent of whites do. There are more African-American high school dropouts than there are whites. That might explain it, except when you look at these numbers again and you say, well, for blacks with equivalent education as whites, then the disparity even continues.
And the more education African-Americans have, the greater disparity is. So, you know, there's a mystery here. And you have to ask yourself why.
VELSHI: OK. Two issues, then.
The first one is, if we can get the education levels together, and just as a national figure that people should know about, the unemployment rate is between nine and 10 percent on average. But if you drop out of high school, it is double that unemployment rate, and that's color blind, that's everybody. But let's talk about this.
So, if we could do more -- and I know you're devoted to the idea of higher education for African-Americans -- why then is there that discrepancy after they're educated at an equal level to whites, and how do you deal with that?
LOMAX: Well, I mean, I think that's the big question. First of all, let's make the case, you're better off if you're educated.
VELSHI: Sure.
LOMAX: So continue to get more education. But then you have to ask the question, well, why is it when you have equal education, whites earn more than blacks do, that there are more whites at the highest end of the income ladder and more blacks at the lower end? So you have to ask, is something else at play? Is discrimination at play?
And, you know, that isn't answered by these statistics. So --
VELSHI: Michael, is it discrimination, or could it be -- I'm just going to throw something else in there. Could it be that it's the same situation with women, that when they get up to the same education levels, even higher education levels, they're not getting the same thing for the same pay, and there aren't as many of them in decision-making positions? Could that be at play, that blacks are not getting hired as well or their bosses aren't black at the higher positions? LOMAX: Well, but I mean then you have -- there's something other than their credentials, there's something other than their education at play.
Is it a good old boys network, or is it a network where you're -- if there's an equally credentialed black and an equally credentialed white, and a white decision-maker, then the white decision-maker chooses the white? Then I think you'd have to say it may be discriminatory.
I can't answer it based on the data that you've given me. But I think what we see here is that people should get more education, they're better off with it. But we need to level the playing field. And you have to ask the question, is the playing field still level?
VELSHI: The other issues is that when you talk about lower earning levels for people, it also means lower levels of wealth creation. Obviously, those who earn more can put more aside, they can leave trusts, they can pay for their kids' education. As blacks are catching up, it is harder for them to catch up on the asset level.
LOMAX: Well, and we've lost ground. You know, we were making headway on that in the 1980s and, to some extent, in the 1990s. But this recession has pulled the rug out, and we've seen home ownership losses, which is the number one way of accumulating wealth for African-Americans, is buying and owning a home, and we're losing that opportunity.
So, we've had a kick in the gut over the last several years. And the question is, are we going to be able to catch up and do we need to level this playing field in order to do that? Part of the leveling the playing field is to get more education, but part of the leveling of the playing field may be to end discrimination in hiring.
VELSHI: Dr. Lomax, always a pleasure to talk to you. Thank you for joining us.
Dr. Michael Lomax is the president and CEO of the United Negro College Fund, joining me from D.C. on what is arguably a very, very complicated question.
We'd like to hear what your feelings are about this. Why are African-Americans, on average, not earning as much as whites are? Post it to my Facebook, Facebook.com/alivelshicnn.
All right. You probably know the feeling, work hard all the week but don't get enough sleep. I certainly feel that way sometimes. The weekend rolls around and you try to catch up.
Does it work? I have an opinion on this, but I'm going to give you some facts when I come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: All right. First of all, it feels like forever since I've seen Elizabeth Cohen here with us on the set. That's because I've been away a lot. But Elizabeth is here, and she has got probably the most important topic to me right now, because I am, as you know, the world's worst sleeper.
And you've got some information for us.
I often sleep badly during the workweek, and sometimes I get more of an opportunity to sleep on the weekend. And I always wonder whether there's a benefit to that or not. And you have got some answers.
ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, according to the study, good news for you. There is a benefit to that, because what these folks did, these researchers, they took 150 people, put them in a lab, and said, hey, you can only sleep for four hours. They would wake them up after four hours, which sounds incredibly mean, but it's all in the name of medical science. Right?
So they woke them up after four hours for five nights in a row. And on that sixth night, they let them have catch-up sleep, like two to 10 hours of extra sleep. And when they tested them, when they gave them cognitive tests, they really did improve once they had that catch-up sleep.
VELSHI: Well, that's excellent. That's good to know, because sometimes I can get that opportunity. It does mean though that the sleep that I'm not getting in the week, if I can't sleep properly during the week, that means that there's something different about the week. So maybe I can change some behaviors to try to sleep better?
COHEN: Well, you can try to get a good night's sleep. You could go to bed on time. That would probably be a good step forward, because even though the catch-up sleep did work, it only worked to some extent. You were still better off --
VELSHI: Getting a proper night's sleep.
COHEN: -- in this study getting a proper night's sleep.
VELSHI: I saw somewhere -- what is the proper night's sleep? Is it different for different people?
COHEN: It is different for different people. Seven to eight hours is what's generally considered --
VELSHI: Wow.
COHEN: I know. Who gets that? Really? I mean, unless you're two years old.
VELSHI: Right, because even if you're a bad sleeper like me, I mean, there are some people who don't get that because their work doesn't allow it or they have got kids, or whatever the case is.
What can you do to try and change that situation?
COHEN: OK. Well, there's all the tried and true things like try to drink a warm glass of milk before you go to bed, all those. But here's one that I think we don't hear enough about, which is leave the electronics elsewhere.
VELSHI: Yes.
COHEN: Don't keep them by your bedside, because people pick up their BlackBerry, or whatever, and they're tweeting and they're texting --
VELSHI: I'm totally one of those, yes.
COHEN: Right. And so your little brain is moving and moving and moving, plus you have that light shining in your eyes which makes a difference, so your brain doesn't know what's going on. So that's not a good thing.
So don't keep watching the clock. Just avoid it. But if you feel like you've been up for a while, like more than 15 minutes, just get up.
VELSHI: Get up, right.
COHEN: Right. Turn that light on, go read something calming.
VELSHI: If you feel like you've got to go work, go somewhere else and do it, but get it out of your bedroom.
COHEN: No, don't work.
VELSHI: Right.
COHEN: Don't work. Get out of your bedroom and read a nice novel, watch a nice movie, something like that. Do something soothing. If you get up and work, those brain cells are churning again.
VELSHI: Yes. I pick up that BlackBerry --
COHEN: You want to calm those little brain cells in that little head of yours.
VELSHI: -- I start e-mailing and reading stuff on the -- yes, the doctor was saying keep everything out of the room.
COHEN: Right. Exactly.
VELSHI: Sleep hygiene he calls it.
COHEN: Sleep hygiene. That's a good way to put it.
VELSHI: Yes. Just keep your room for sleeping, and other things you should in a room. Electronics doesn't --
COHEN: Right. Exactly. Right, it doesn't play a role.
That tweet can wait. You don't have to tweet right now. VELSHI: I guess so. I'm ready to try anything.
COHEN: OK.
VELSHI: So great to see you again.
COHEN: Good to see you.
VELSHI: Elizabeth Cohen, our senior medical correspondent.
All right. Listen, talk about trying to get some sleep, alarms were blaring at the International Space Station this weekend. It looks like the astronauts are going to be OK though. We're going to tell you what was going on and what they're doing about it when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: All right. We're going "Off the Radar" with Chad.
We're going to go up to the International Space Station. I saw this when it first broke, that an alarm went off.
CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yes.
VELSHI: And it said something was wrong with the cooling system. That would kind of freak me out if I were on the International Space Station.
MYERS: Do you know why it would freak you out? It's because --
VELSHI: It can get very hot and very cold up there.
MYERS: Exactly. It depends on --
VELSHI: Where you are near the sun.
MYERS: You've heard the "Dark Side of the Moon," right? That's an album. Well, the dark side of the sun is a problem because if you have the sun coming in this way, and half of your launch is over here, this is 250 degrees positive in Fahrenheit.
VELSHI: Right.
MYERS: On the shady side, you're negative 250 degrees. You need to balance that somehow, or else things are going to crack.
VELSHI: And so there's that big unit in this thing that handles that.
MYERS: I'm sorry?
VELSHI: A big, big cooling unit.
MYERS: I'm glad you said that. I'm not going there.
VELSHI: Seven hundred and fifty pounds.
MYERS: There are tubes that go back and forth with ammonia.
VELSHI: Right.
MYERS: This is kind of the funny part about an RV. Do you have on RV?
VELSHI: No, I don't.
MYERS: OK. Well, in an RV, you have this three-way refrigerator. You can turn on the natural gas or the propane gas, make the propane gas burn in your refrigerator, ,and your refrigerator gets cold.
And you have got to think to yourself, how in the world can I turn on a flame and the flame makes my refrigerator cold? Well, it's the same thing. It's the ammonia pressing through these little tiny holes. It's making its own air-conditioning.
So, the hot side is getting hot. It's pressurizing the other side. As the pressurize comes through, it expands into the gas. It's the same reason why they had this problem at the bottom of the well.
VELSHI: Right.
MYERS: You know they had these hydrates. Kind of the same thing, but just kind of in a closed system.
So, it cools this side, warms this side. It cools this side, back and forth and back and forth. Well, if the pump stops working, it's a problem.
VELSHI: Yes. OK. And the way to fix this pump -- this is not like fiddling around in your breaker box -- they have to go out for a spacewalk.
MYERS: Yes. You can't just hit it. You can't just give it a little bit of a wrap and hope it comes back. This things weighs hundreds and hundreds of pounds, and they have to go outside, go on the spacewalk -- it looks like it will be an Thursday -- and replace this pump so that the one side is the same temperature --
VELSHI: But they're not in danger.
MYERS: There is no one in danger. And, in fact, even when the alarm bells went off, they all got up, they all looked at it. One guy stayed up, the rest of them went back to bed.
VELSHI: You see, I go back and forth about whether I'd like to hang out on the space station or go out in space, and sometimes I think it seems like a lot of fun, and sometimes it seems like, wow, I don't really want to be involved in that.
MYERS: Yes. That's dangerous.
VELSHI: All right. You'll keep us posted on that.
Chad Myers with "Off the Radar."
All right. Listen, something that's on the radar, Russia, ,burning. That's what's happening right now. Wildfires are scorching thousands of acres. It's a stop on our "Globe Trek," which is coming up right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: All right. Time now to "Globe Trek," as we do every hour.
First, deadly widespread flooding in Pakistan. As many as 1,500 people have died. The death toll is expected to rise. Nearly 1.5 million other people have been affected. Monsoon rains continue to fall today, adding to the devastation and misery for millions of people.
CNN's Reza Sayah flew over some of the hard-hit areas in a government helicopter and filed this report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
REZA SAYAH, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This was our first look at some of the flood-ravaged areas in northwest Pakistan from up above. The Pakistani military taking us on a helicopter tour of some of the hardest-hit areas, and what we saw down below was widespread devastation.
Village after village, especially those next to rivers and waterways, under water. We saw thousands of homes destroyed. If they weren't destroyed, they were buried in mud.
Remember, these floodwaters were at their highest sometime on Friday. Obviously, several days have passed. Imagine what the people who were living in these areas went through then. Some of them are still stranded, many left homeless.
The Pakistani government and the military telling us they're doing what they can to get to these flood victims as soon as possible. During the helicopter tour, they made a stop at a relief camp to show us some of the work that they're doing. But over past couple of days, the flood victims we've spoken to are telling us, we're not seeing that help, and that could be because the government can't get to them.
In areas like the Swat Valley, that are dependent on bridges, many of those bridges have been demolished by floodwaters. The only way for the government and the military to get to these areas is by helicopter. The military saying they're using about 36 helicopters, but they acknowledge that's not enough to get to every area. That's why it's impossible at this point, they say, to tell how many people are stranded and how many people still need help.
Reza Sayah, CNN, Islamabad.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VELSHI: All right. And in these pictures, let me bring you some more pictures where you can see some elderly survivors being evacuated from flooded areas by Pakistani army helicopters.
U.N. officials say that thousands of other people remain stranded on their rooftops, on higher ground. Now, hundreds of survivors have expressed outrage over what they say has been the government's slow response. Officials say they're doing the best they can considering all the roads and bridges to the area have been washed out.
Food and drinking water remain in short supply. Fear is growing of outbreaks and cholera and other diseases.
OK. I want to go to Russia now.
There are fires burning in Russia, about 700 wildfires, different wildfires. They've laid waste to over 450 square miles.
Matthew Chance is standing by in central Russia with an update of what's going on. And part of this is due to extreme heat in the area.
Matthew, what's the situation?
MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, there are a couple of factors, Ali -- the extreme heat, the highest temperatures in this part of Russia for 130 years. More than 104 Fahrenheit is the temperature being recorded here in the daytime.
The other factor is the drought. It's the driest it's been in this part of the world since the early 1970s. Those two factors have combined, producing these ferocious wildfires that are literally consuming everything in their path.
Whole villages are being laid to waste by the flames. Thousands of people are having to escape the flames as they approach the forest around this area. Some of them have had to stage very daring escapes, indeed.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHANCE (voice-over): Captured on amateur video, it looks like the road to hell. The four Russians in the car are desperately trying to escape the wildfires surrounding their village.
Through the wind screen an inferno rages. Fallen trees engulfed by flames block the road. For a terrifying moment, panic sets in.
"Get back!" they shout. "Let's go."
The men eventually get through without injury, but in huge swathes of western and central Russia, wildfires are leaving a trail of death and destruction.
(on camera): Across this vast region, the forests have turned to tinder, ignited by the slightest spark. The air is full of this choking smoke from the wood flames. The undergrowth is all turned to ashes. And of course, the flames are so ferocious, they're consuming everything in their path.
(voice-over): We traveled to the village of Maslovka, near Veronezh, one of Russia's worst affected regions. Almost every house here is burned to the ground. All 500 residents were evacuated, but a few have returned to pick through the debris or patch up their scorched homes.
Desperate to control the flames, Russia says it's deployed nearly a quarter of a million people to fight the fires. But around Veronezh, many are just volunteers with buckets. Like the passengers of the trapped car, they appear dangerously close to being overwhelmed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHANCE: Well, Ali, one of the important factors the government now says is causing the new fires to outbreak is that people are being negligent. Even though they're getting the warnings, even though the crisis has reached a pinnacle here in Russia because of these forest fires, people are still throwing out cigarette butts, they're still not, you know, extinguishing their barbecues and campfires, and that's causing more fires across a vast region of this part of Russia, Ali.
VELSHI: Yeah, often the same case. And that drought is expected to continue for some time in Russia. Matthew, good to see you. We'll keep in touch with you on this story. Thanks so much, Matthew Chance in central Russia.
And if you've got a BlackBerry, you might be glad that you're not living in the United Arab Emirates. The government is suspending operations of more than half a million BlackBerry users because of security concerns. Now, this long-running issue involves the way the information is encrypted and sent overseas. The government says, as it is now, there's no way to monitor that information.
So starting October 11th, services like e-mail and text messaging will be suspended. Analysts say the move could have major implications for the BlackBerry users in the Persian Gulf region. Other gulf regions have been following the issue and could take similar steps.
All right, coming up, you're going to meet a Pennsylvania mayor who has a big dream -- to breathe life into a Rust Belt community. He doesn't look or act like your average mayor, and that is just the way he likes it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: This hour's top stories start with the latest word -- I didn't say the last word but the latest word -- on dispersants. It comes from the EPA, which has just wrapped up a second round of testing on those chemicals that were used in vast quantities to break up the oil from the BP leak in the Gulf of Mexico. The agency found that the effects of the dispersants were no more toxic than the oil itself. The decision to use them, the EPA says, was wise.
A new tropical depression has formed in the Atlantic Ocean. It's about 1,300 miles east of the Lesser Antilles, but forecasters say there's no immediate threat to land. This is the fourth tropical depression of the year. If it were to become a storm, it would be called Colin.
And after four years in Afghanistan, the Dutch have become the first NATO ally to pull out their combat troops. From a peak of almost 2,000 fighters, the Dutch expect to have no more than 60 in country by the end of the year. Their main area of responsibility in southern Afghanistan is now in the hands of troops from the United States and Australia.
All right, today's "Mission Possible" takes us to Braddock, Pennsylvania. Many see it as a rusty remnant of what the steel industry in America used to be, a town where the population is shrinking as its problems grow. Well, one man sees things differently there. The mayor of Braddock is John Fetterman. Instead of problems, he sees possibilities and promise, and he has the kind of determination that dwarfs his 6-foot-8 300-pound frame. There he is. He joins us from Pittsburgh. Welcome, Mr. Mayor. Hang on a second while I tell our viewers a little about Braddock, Pennsylvania.
Before we talk, I want to give you a sense of where you would find Braddock, Pennsylvania, if you were looking for it. Take a look on this map. It's located just a little bit south and -- well, looks to be, yes, southeast of Pennsylvania -- Pittsburgh. Braddock looks like a lot of aging Northern towns that thrived during the early part of the 20th century. But it's fallen on hard times, depressed real estate values, lost jobs, lost hope.
It was originally built around Andrew Carnegie's first steel mill in 1873. At one time in the '40s, 20,000 people called Braddock home. Today, fewer than 3,000 people do. Now, the mayor would tell you the property values aren't depressed, they're just attractive to developers. In 2008, the average value of a home in Braddock dropped to $6,200, all of this in a city that's about two thirds of a square mile big, a small town with big hopes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN FETTERMAN, MAYOR OF BRADDOCK, PENNSYLVANIA: I see Braddock's future as it's not going to resemble anything what it was at its apex. I'd like to see Braddock continue to become a safer, more just place that is moving towards better outcomes for everybody.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: All right, Mayor John Fetterman joins us now from Pittsburgh. Mayor, thanks for being with us. Let us get a little of your background, first of all. How'd did you get involved?
FETTERMAN: Sure.
VELSHI: Why are you the mayor of Braddock? FETTERMAN: Well, I came to Braddock about nine years ago. I started an out-of-school youth program that helped young people get their GEDs and jobs, and like, driver's license thing. And it just kind of grew and expanded from there, and I was elected mayor in 2005.
VELSHI: On what platform? Was it sort of -- you wanted to -- you felt that you could really change things in Braddock.
FETTERMAN: Yes. Well, I just thought that things could change, and they should change and they need to. And it was a moment where I didn't necessarily expect to win but won by a very close margin. And it's been a great ride ever since.
VELSHI: We were curious -- the reason we wanted to talk to you is to see whether the things that you can do, the changes you can implement in this small town can be copied elsewhere. Can they? Have you had success in any of the areas that you've been trying to achieve?
FETTERMAN: Well, I think we have had success. We're into our 27th consecutive month without a homicide, and other crimes and things of that nature are down dramatically, as well. We partnered with Levi Strauss, the jean manufacturer. We're part of their national campaign in 2010. And we're rebuilding our brand-new youth center in town. We've doubled the size of the urban farm in town. And we're providing a lot of summer activities for young people, as well as continually expanding other opportunities, whether it's green development or whether it's saving other buildings and structures in town. There's a lot positive things going on.
VELSHI: You just mentioned the homicides. If you don't mind showing my viewers your arm and what's tattooed on it?
FETTERMAN: Oh, no. It's -- well, this is Braddock's -- this is Braddock's Zip code. I don't know if I can -- see that there--
VELSHI: Yes, you sort of see it, yes.
FETTERMAN: OK. And then this right here is--
VELSHI: There we go. We can sort of see (INAUDIBLE)
FETTERMAN: There we go. And those are dates when we've lost people in town due to violence, you know, during my administration. So to go 27 months without that has been probably the single greatest blessing that we've had here in town, among many.
VELSHI: You have described Braddock as possessing malignant beauty. What do you mean by that?
FETTERMAN: Well, 90 percent of our population is gone and we had 90 percent of our buildings were abandoned, and some needed to be torn down. So we've lost a great deal, so -- and many people would consider that blight. But to me, it's a very historic place, a dignified place that deserves to be brought back. I mean, not to what it was. It will never be what it was. But I think, hopefully, what we're showing in town is that no place deserves to be abandoned or left behind. And I would just point to the partnership that we have with Levi's that kind of points to the possibility of just kind of trying different things.
VELSHI: And you -- you know, look, Braddock is not terribly different from a lot of places in that part of Pennsylvania or Ohio, formerly prosperous places with steel and with other industry. You don't believe that much of that sort of industry is coming back, so what is going to bring prosperity? What's actually going to bring some jobs to you? What's going to help people earn a little money? What's going to help those home prices go up?
FETTERMAN: Well, I think the bottom line is I've been lucky enough to partner with the Environmental Defense Fund in trying to advance the climate bill. I don't care where you are politically -- left, right, center -- I just think the country needs a comprehensive energy policy. And I was lucky to partner with them and made some ads and made some direct appeals to both houses of Congress to get a comprehensive bill passed. And I still would love the opportunity to continue that fight and it's sorry that the bill seems to be stuck in the Senate right now. But you know, green energy, you know, wind turbines, 200 tons of steel in every windmill, 8,000 moving parts -- that is very much what underpins this renaissance that I think we could have in the blue-collar job market.
VELSHI: So you feel that that could be something that could go across the Rust Belt to these factories that are empty with these workers who are sitting idle, that they can take part in an energy renaissance, being the suppliers and the builders of the components of a new alternative energy infrastructure.
FETTERMAN: Absolutely. And to anybody who doubts that, I -- you know, consider a different option. It -- you know, it would replenish the decimated supply of blue-collar jobs in not only my community but in other communities in the Northeast and also provide cleaner energy.
And we have the oil spill down in the gulf, and right now we have the Marcellus shale debate, you know, in this part of the state, especially after the release of the movie "Gasoline," has really had an awakening in terms of the environmental impact that that could have in our state, as well, too. And I just think now we're poised to really -- we need to move past the political divides and get a comprehensive energy bill in the United States.
VELSHI: Mayor John Fetterman, great to talk to you. Thank you for being with us. And we hope that your goals for Braddock work out for Braddock and for other towns around you and it's an example that we can use elsewhere. Good to talk to you.
FETTERMAN: Well, I'm deeply flattered. Thank you for having me.
VELSHI: My pleasure. All right, if you want more information about Braddock, Pennsylvania, you can get it at City-data.com and enter Braddock, Pennsylvania.
OK, it's about time for chat with my old friend, Ed Henry. He is far from the White House today. He's off the ``Stakeout.'' Well, actually, he's not because President Obama is right here in Atlanta, so that's where Ed Henry is. He's putting on that fetching jacket over that fetching tie he's got. He's going to tell us about President Obama's plan for Iraq right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: You know when you, like, only talk to somebody, like, on e-mail or on the phone or on I-Chat or something, and then you meet in person and sometimes it's a little awkward?
(LAUGHTER)
VELSHI: That's kind of how it feels right now.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Why are we standing like this?
ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I don't know.
VELSHI: This is weird.
HENRY: It is kind of weird.
VELSHI: All right. Well, you're here--
HENRY: Yes.
VELSHI: -- which is unusual.
HENRY: The president's here. That's why.
(CROSSTALK)
HENRY: He's already left.
VELSHI: He's gone and you're still here.
HENRY: He goes in and out, but I thought I'd stay for you.
VELSHI: That's nice!
HENRY: Unless you want me to leave?
VELSHI: No, no. It's very good of you to be here. I just -- I just -- it's just--
HENRY: By the way, Rick wants me to come on at 4:00 o'clock.
VELSHI: Rick Sanchez?
HENRY: Yes. Is that all right?
VELSHI: You'd do the stakeouts for him?
(CROSSTALK)
HENRY: We're not going to call it "The Stakeout," but--
VELSHI: All right. All right. Well, you do ``The Stakeout,'' and the president's here. He's -- these are pictures of him. He was very close here. He was downtown. He was here for--
HENRY: Yes, Disabled American Veterans--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- conference. He gave a speech, wanted to talk about veterans' benefits.
VELSHI: Yes.
HENRY: But they also saw this as sort of a pivot point in the war in Iraq. When you talk to top White House aides, August 31st is the deadline the president committed to--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- to get all combat troops out. There are still going to be tens of thousands of troops there. But it's important to note that on the positive side for the White House that he made this campaign promise early on--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- and he stuck to it. He said 16 months, all combat troops would be out. It's really about 18 months or so. But it's within -- clearly--
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: How much -- I mean, there are going to be 50,000 U.S. troops still there--
HENRY: Right.
VELSHI: -- many of whom will be there until the end of 2011.
HENRY: And that's one of the challenges because on the flip side, while he's keeping a campaign promise, you've got Republicans out there today saying, Wait a second, this is a president who, as a senator, opposed the Iraq surge of troops--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- by the Bush administration--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- that he's sort of acknowledging now worked. He didn't quite say that, but he's sort of acknowledging that it worked, even though he opposed it back then. VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: And secondly, when you talk to our own Arwa Damon on the ground in Baghdad, the security situation on the ground is still not exactly stable. And there's a big dispute going on. the Iraqi officials have put out numbers in the last couple days saying that July was one of the worst months--
VELSHI: Yes.
HENRY: -- in terms of deaths and security in two years. White House officials insist those numbers are bogus and--
VELSHI: What do we -- what do we make of the -- the 50,000 who are staying, they're not combat troops, they're advisers.
HENRY: They're not called combat troops.
VELSHI: But you see, when I was a kid, I used to think when they'd say that they're advisers, I think they're guys in suits--
HENRY: Right.
VELSHI: -- who tell people things. These are soldiers.
HENRY: Yes, and we can't minimize the fact that they're still -- even if you don't call them combat troops--
VELSHI: They're in harm's way.
HENRY: -- if you're very close to the combat--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- they're still in harm's way, and that's why--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- the sacrifice goes on. And I think the other important point to make is that the administration was kind of with a wink trying to say, Look, take a look at Afghanistan. A lot of people think the situation is awful right now--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- just as they did on Iraq a few years ago. But the president now is surging troops to Afghanistan. There's going to be 100,000 U.S. troops--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- in the next month or so there on the ground in Afghanistan. And just as he promised that he was going to pull troops eventually out of Iraq, he's now saying, Look, after this surge, next summer, June, there's going to be a pivot point in Afghanistan, as well-- VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- where some troops will start coming out and we can responsibly wind it down.
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: The problem is, just as we're saying the situation in Iraq is not that stable, the situation in Afghanistan--
VELSHI: Not a -- right.
HENRY: What's it going to be like next summer?
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: Nobody knows.
VELSHI: Right. And there was criticism of the last administration saying that they took their eyes off the ball in Afghanistan because of focus on Iraq.
HENRY: Right. And there's the danger now that--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- just the opposite could happen with this administration. They insist it's not going to--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- and that they're paying attention to both Iraq and Afghanistan, trying to find that healthy balance where you're responsibly winding down in Iraq and ramping up in Afghanistan, at least in the short term.
But again, this has put a -- you can't underestimate what kind of a strain this has been on the U.S. military.
VELSHI: Sure.
HENRY: And the president was talking to disabled American veterans because we've got so many veterans coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan in very difficult shape. And so even if the war in Iraq ends, you know, soon, the legacy is going to go on for years and years and years.
VELSHI: Did you bring anything?
HENRY: No. You know, I actually came to collect because you gave me a necktie related to the World Cup on July 19th.
VELSHI: Yes.
HENRY: We have the tape.
VELSHI: Yes.
HENRY: And that was the day before my birthday. Now, you may--
VELSHI: Yes. You're right.
HENRY: You slipped up there. You should have waited a day--
VELSHI: I gave you a tie and cufflinks on that day.
HENRY: And I gave you a tie and cufflinks a few months ago--
VELSHI: I should have given you a tie on that day--
(CROSSTALK)
HENRY: -- cufflinks for the birthday.
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: So do you have the birthday present?
VELSHI: I'll tell you what--
HENRY: Because--
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: I know you got to be on Rick Sanchez's show, but -- Atlanta -- are you sticking around?
HENRY: I'm sure Rick has a present for me.
VELSHI: Are you sticking around for the evening? Because we could -- I can take you out for dinner.
HENRY: I'm going to stick around. Yes, I'd love to.
VELSHI: All right. Dinner it is, then.
HENRY: We'll take "The Stakeout" to the steakhouse.
VELSHI: "The Stakeout" at the steakhouse. You -- you do a little bit of research in a little while--
HENRY: I've done a lot of research on steaks.
VELSHI: And -- and so you know where we can go.
HENRY: Yes. Yes.
VELSHI: You can work something out. All right, the president, you mentioned, is -- he's gone.
HENRY: Yes.
VELSHI: He's already gone? HENRY: Yes, he left about a half hour or so ago. And this is--
VELSHI: OK.
HENRY: -- one of the funny things about covering the president. He's in and out.
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: He did a fund-raiser, a speech, you know, ran around, and he's already heading back to the White House. I thought I'd stick around a little bit.
VELSHI: Well, and it's also a little bit more crowded in the White House if you were there in that briefing room.
HENRY: Tomorrow's going to be the first briefing where we have the new seating layout, and I think we have a wonderful graphic here, which is basically -- I'm on the board--
VELSHI: Yes.
HENRY: -- of the White House Correspondents Association. We had a board meeting yesterday and--
VELSHI: So there's an empty seat there, isn't there?
HENRY: There's any empty seat where Helen Thomas used to be, but it's important to know it's not the Helen Thomas seat. She had it because she was the senior wire reporter years ago for UPI.
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: Then she became a columnist at Hearts. She kept the seat. Then when she retired after the controversy, there was an open seat.
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: Fox, Bloomberg, as well as NPR, National Public Radio, all bid for a front row seat. A lot of people were kicking up controversy on the outside and saying--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- you know, Why are you going to move Fox into the center seat where Helen Thomas was? The board's intention -- I'm speaking as a board member, not--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- with my CNN hat for a second -- was always to move AP, which is the senior wire service--
VELSHI: Right. HENRY: -- and we did that yesterday unanimously -- to the center seat because that's a tradition. Wire service reporter starts the news conferences with the president--
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: -- and then says, Thank you, Mr. President, to end it. And then Fox ended up winning unanimously to move up to the front row. Bloomberg will stay in the second row. NPR moves from the third row to the second row. There was a lot of maneuvering going on.
VELSHI: Right.
HENRY: And all three news organizations are fantastic and they made good pitches, you know, in their case. And bottom line was that back in 2007, CNN moved to the front row. Our Washington bureau chief, David Bohrman, felt like Fox was next in line at that time. I did, too. And I voted that way, as did my colleagues unanimously.
VELSHI: We shall talk more about it at dinner. Now I understand why we were standing here, so you could show us that.
HENRY: Yes, I wanted to show you!
VELSHI: All right. Well, we'll see you in a little bit, and I'll be on Rick's show, too.
We're going to take a break. I'll be back in a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: I want to bring Brianna Keilar in with news just in on the ethics investigation relating to Congresswoman Maxine Waters. Brianna joins us from Capitol Hill. What have you got?
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, let me tell you, Ali, this is coming from the Ethics Committee. They just put out an announcement saying that they are going to go forward with a trial for Democratic congresswoman Maxine Waters of California. This is going to go down very similarly to the one we saw with Charlie Rangel last week, starting with that initial hearing.
And the statement from Maxine -- well, first let me break it down, why she's being investigated by the Ethics Committee. It has to do with a meeting that she set up, she says at the behest of the National Banking Association, but it had to do with a large minority- owned bank, One United. They met with Treasury officials, and this was a meeting she set up. Ultimately, that bank went on to get about $12 million in federal funds, though Maxine Waters insists she was doing nothing but trying to help a number of minority-owned banks that were really facing tough times during the financial crisis in 2008.
She says in a statement, Ali, "I have not violated any House rules. Therefore, I simply will not be forced to admit to something I did not do and instead have chosen to respond to charges made by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in a public hearing." So she wants her day in court, Ali.
VELSHI: All right. And she -- and they have granted that? She'll get that?
KEILAR: Yes. So she's going to get that. The question, of course, is when is that going to be because, as you know, Charles Rangel is already going through this rare process, quite a public spectacle. And this is, of course, on the cusp of an election season for Democrats.
VELSHI: Yes. All right, Brianna Keilar, thanks very much, Brianna on Capitol Hill with that news. We'll cover both of those cases as we continue to cover Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters.
Now, what can you tell by looking at my face? I'll look at the science of expression coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: Time now for the "XYZ" of it. Today's "XYZ" is courtesy of an article that appeared in "The Las Vegas Sun." It's about body language, something that's very important in my line of work. The article quotes an ophthalmologist who spent his career looking into people's eyes to determine what they really mean, someone who says everyone is walking around with a gold mine of information right on their face.
Some interesting facts about facial expression and body language. For starters, expression and body language betray us so often because most of us are concentrating on what we're saying, making it tough to disguise the non-verbal signs that we're sending off. And that goes for all of us, even those of us used to being in front of the public or a camera. Apparently, even the most disciplined among us do things like touch our faces or put our finger in our ear when we're anxious.
What about guys like Rick Sanchez and me, who use our hands a lot when we talk? Apparently, when we stop using our hands abruptly, it may be a sign that we're stressed or lying. Some mannerisms increase when you're telling the truth, some decrease.
But let's end on a positive note. Can you tell when someone is being sincere? Well, according to the same expert quoted, you can. He says a true smile is not in the mouth, it's in the eyes. In a real smile, your eyes go into a little squint, the kind of that people don't like to be photographed with. The expert says that in a really good laugh, your eyes will often completely shut. If you just smile with your face, well, that's a fake smile.
A few other tips. You're more likely to be trusted if people can see your hands. So I'll sign off with this, full of view of my hands and a big, squinty, full-face smile. I can't really do that while I'm talking.
Time now for my very expressive friend, Rick Sanchez, and "RICK'S LIST."
