Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Rangel Defends Himself Against Charges; Alaska Plane Crash May Involve Former Senator, NASA Administrator

Aired August 10, 2010 - 13:00   ET

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

TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Truth is, I'm sick of standing so far away from Ali at handoff time. CNN NEWSROOM continues right now --

ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: I like it better when you're nearby, buddy.

HARRIS: -- with Ali Velshi. Have a good one, buddy.

VELSHI: All right. You left me with a lot of news to cover this afternoon. So let me tell you what's going on. We've got a few things happening.

We are following developments in Alaska that Tony has been following very closely for the last two hours. A plane has crashed in Alaska, and there are reports that former Alaska senator, Ted Stevens, was on that plane. So was former NASA administrator, Sean O'Keefe. We do not know what the story is.

If you have been following the story, you will know there's conflicting information. There may have been eight or nine people aboard. The FAA says that five people have died, that four are injured. That would be nine people in total. But there are still some reports that are saying that there are eight people.

We do know that the -- the Air National Guard is on the scene in Alaska.

We also want to talk to you about another story that Tony was just telling you about, and that is Democratic Representative Charlie Rangel of New York speaking on the floor of the House of Representatives, defending or explaining himself in the ethics charges that have been levied against him. This is him speaking live right now.

Let's listen in.

REP. CHARLIE RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: That there was appearances, though, I was being treated differently than anyone else. But the landlord said he didn't treat me any differently. No one said that they did treat me differently. But I have to admit that I wasn't sensitive to anything, because I never felt then that I was treated any differently than anybody else. And so that ends the apartment thing. But I plead guilty of not being sensitive.

Now when it comes to the -- the negligence of -- of the disclosures and the tax issues, there's absolutely no excuse that's there. When accusations were made, I hired a forensics accountant and told them to check out what the heck is going on, because I want to make certain that when I stand up and speak that it's true.

Well, after I found out it was far more serious than the accusations, I then referred it to the ethics committee. It wasn't as though someone tracked me down: the IRS, or the clerk of the House. I filed the correct papers. And the taxes that were paid, an accountant might say that, had my accountant recognized that this 32,000 down payment for a house in the Dominican Republic that was promised to be paid off in seven years would be a complete failure, and if indeed they did not give me one nickel, but whenever they thought they were making a dollar or two they reduced the mortgage, then there's no question you don't have to be a tax expert to know that, if you didn't report that income, notwithstanding the fact that if you'd done the right thing you'd have no liability, because the taxes that were paid to the Dominican Republic would have been deducted with depreciation, I would have no liability.

Having said that, is that an excuse that's worthy? Of course not. And the fact that there was negligence on the part of the person that for 20 years did it, and the fact that I signed it, that's not really an excuse as to why I should not apologize to this body for not paying the attention to it that I should have paid to it.

But there is no -- not one scintilla bit of evidence that the negligence involved in the disclosures that there was some way to -- to hide from the public what I had. Because the -- the value of the property, they would say was 25,000, 100,000, 200,000, or whatever. It would be that it didn't make any sense that -- I was trying to disclose it.

So why did I take the floor today? When -- I haven't found one lawyer that said I should do it. I haven't even found one friend that said I should do it. But I thought about it. If the lawyers are going to continue to charge me, and I don't even know when the hearing is going to be, and I can't tell them that I want one and not six lawyers. I don't want to offend the ethics committee. They're doing the best they can. But, hey, I'm in a position...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Members will -- and their staffs will please take their conversations from the floor. The gentleman may resume.

RANGEL: That, hey, I'm 80 years old. All my life has been from the beginning public service. That's all I've ever done. Been in the Army, been a state legislator, been a federal prosecutor, 40 years here. And all I'm saying is that, if it is the judgment of people here, for whatever reason, that I resign, then, heck, have the ethics committee expedite this. Don't leave me swinging in the wind until November. If this is an emergency, and I think it is, to help our local and state governments out, what about me? I don't want anyone to feel embarrassed, awkward. Hey, if I was you, I may want me to go away, too. I am not going away. I am here.

And I do recognize that -- I'm not saying there's any partisanship in this, because if I knew of all the people that have been accused of accusations, I'm in a close district, and I -- they were Republicans, I -- give a couple of moments of thought to see whether or not, especially if I didn't have anything to work with to get re-elected, I would say, "Hey, take a look at these Republicans. They've been accused."

But I don't really think that the unfairness of this is to me -- I don't take it personally. I'm thinking about all of you. The president wants dignity. Let's have dignity in this House where the ethics committee means something, and that none of you, if the newspapers say anything, will have to wait two years before you can say, "No comment."

And in addition to that, once they make the accusations, they have no business making any mistakes in saying that I didn't cooperate. I got papers with my signature on. I got papers that said I tried my darndest. I got papers where my lawyer tells me she had every reason to believe that the full committee would sign on there. There was space for people to sign. I'm the only one who signed.

I don't know what changed their minds about settling this case. But my lawyer says don't offend them. My friends say don't go to the floor. And I say, what are you going to do me? Yes?

Suppose I do get emotional. Suppose I do think of my life, the beginning and the end. Are you going to expel me from this body? Are you going to say that, while there's no evidence that I took a nickel, asked for a nickel, that there's no sworn testimony, no conflict, that I have to leave here? As much as I love you Democrats that figure it would be easy for you, I'm the guy that was raising money in Republican districts to get you here. But that doesn't mean that I criticize you for saying, "Hey, that's great then, but I'm running for re-election now." I mean, do what you have to do.

And Republicans, hey, you don't have much to run on, but -- you know, but what the hell? If Rangel is an embarrassment, based on newspaper articles, I can see why you would do it. But think. Think. Isn't this historically the first time that it appears as though partisanship is -- the ethics committee? Isn't historically the first time that the recommendations of the subcommittee of investigation is turned now?

And Don, who in the heck would want somebody who politically called you corrupt to be the ranking bipartisan guy to judge you?

Now, I don't expect answers today, and I know you're going home, and I wish all of you well. But at the end of the day, somebody -- somebody has to do more than wish I go away. Somebody has to tell me, when does Rangel get a chance to talk to witness -- I haven't talked with any member of the ethics committee. I mean, in terms of settlement, my lawyers have. I haven't talked with any of the witnesses. And they had to expedite this case.

In other words, I have a shorter time to prepare for reasons that they tell me, don't challenge the ethics committee. They make up this stuff as they go along. So my lawyer -- I can understand how financially this thing can go on longer than I can afford. But she is willing to assist me in working out something in pro bono, and I'll expect the leadership to help me.

Don't let this happen to you. Don't walk away from here because it's convenient that I disappear. Because not all of you will be able to withstand it as I have. If there's no issue of corruption, if everybody, including the lead over here, has to start off with what great American I am before he drops the bomb, well, I think that should count for something.

And I am not asking for leniency. I'm asking for exposure of the facts. They've made a decision. I want you to make a decision.

Now, I apologize to the leadership. I feel for those people, especially the newcomers, that love this place so much that -- like someone said, "Charlie, they all love you." And I paused until they finished -- "but they love themselves better." I understand that. You know.

But for God's sake, just don't believe that I don't have feelings, that I don't have pride. That -- that I do want the dignity that the president has said. And the dignity is that, even if you see fit to cause me not to be able to come back, because you're not going to do it in my district, but if there's some recommendation that I be expelled, for me -- for me, that would be dignity. Because it shows openly that this system isn't working for me. And I hope some of you might think, if it doesn't work for me, that it may not work for you.

So I know we're anxious to get home. I know I can't get on the agenda. I know that sometime, somewhere, I would have a hearing. So while you're saying I should resign, I do hope that you might think about what happens if the whole country starts thinking, it's better that you resign and don't make anyone feel uncomfortable than to have the truth, at least a person, an opportunity, to say, "You have made alleged violations. I am saying that you're wrong, based on sworn testimony. And I want somebody, and I don't think it's going to be people who have been critical of me for doing the same thing that's going to be the judge."

And I know outside doesn't count, because we judge the conduct of our own members. Adam Powell knew that when they wouldn't let him be seated, and the courts, of course, overruled it. But if I can't get my dignity back here, then fire your best shot in getting rid of me through expulsion.

Now, I apologize for any embarrassment that I've caused. I'm prepared to admit and try to let young people know that you never get too big to recognize that these rules are for junior members, as they are for senior members. And that you can't get so carried away with good intentions that you break the rules, because the rules are there to make certain that we have some order, some discipline and respect for the rules. And I violated that. And I'm apologizing for it.

And I don't think apologies mean that this is a light matter. It's very serious. But corruption? No evidence, no suggestion that this was ever found.

And lastly, I close by saying that there is an organization that some of you know -- certainly Diedrich (ph) will see. National truth in government, whatever. And the only thing I can say that some of my more important Democrats on the list that sent out mail soliciting money in order to get rid of me, even before I became the chairman.

And they have a Web site that I will be giving you, because they've got a lot of members, including Black Caucus members, on their list. And one I do remember, "Send your money in now. We've got Rangel against the ropes. And we've got to get rid of him." Everyone knows who they are.

And they followed me on vacation. They followed me when I was doing business. They're at the airport. They're outside where I live. It's kind of rough.

I'm sensitive to your feelings and the hard work by the ethics committee. But this has to stop sometime. It has to stop. One month, one year, two years. Primaries, election. And all I'm saying is, I deserve and demand the right to be heard.

And if I hurt anybody's feelings, believe me, it's the equity and the fairness and the justice that I'm asking for, and not your feelings. We're entitled to our political feelings in what we want done. But we have to respect each other, and this institution, which I love.

I love my country. I love my Congress. And there's nothing I wouldn't do to preserve this from going on. I love the disagreements. I love the debates. I love the arguments. But you're not going to tell me to resign to make you feel comfortable.

So to all of those that tried to help me to help myself, let me appreciate it. And for those who disagree, I'm sorry, but that's one thing you can't take away from me.

So thank you for listening. I do hope that -- that you have a pleasant time while you're away. And maybe, just maybe, the members of the ethics committee might think about telling me when they think they might have a hearing so that whatever they decide, I can let my constituents -- my families, my friends, know that I did the best I could as an American, as a patriot, and someone that loves this country.

Thank you for your attention. Go home.

VELSHI: OK. You've just been listening to Representative Charles Rangel on the floor of the House of Representatives. This is a very interesting development.

We're following another story, and I'll get to that in just a second, a plane crash in Alaska, where we have reports that senator -- former senator from Alaska, Ted Stevens, is on that plane. We've got a lot of coverage of that in a second. This is unusual. We went to the floor of the House of Representatives, because we were not expecting Congressman Charlie Rangel of New York to make the speech that you just heard. It's been going on for over 20 minutes right now.

I want to go to Brianna Keilar at -- at the Capitol, because she was listening to it, as well. This was -- Congress is back in session to deal with the $26 billion bill, Brianna, to deal with Medicaid and teachers -- shortfalls that states have. This was not something that was scheduled. It was not something that was planned.

But for over 20 minutes, Charlie Rangel has -- has delivered a speech about him, himself, who is he, what role did he play in some of these allegations that have been made against him, the charges that have been presented against him. Of can you frame this story for me, Brianna, and tell us what we were just listening to?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, this was pretty surprising. And the overview here is that Charles Rangel is facing ethics issues. He's been charged by the House Ethics Committee, 13 counts, the most serious of violations -- alleged violations, have to do with how he raised money for a public policy center at the City College of New York called the Rangel Center and basically that he broke a lot of House rules doing it. That's the allegation.

So we weren't expecting this. This was very much a surprise, Ali. And I've gotten some guidance from the House radio television gallery here, saying that basically, you know, he was able to go on to the floor and basically say that he wanted to defend his reputation.

VELSHI: Right.

KEILAR: And because of that, he -- because of House rules, you're able to do that. And so surprise, surprise, here he pops up on the floor.

But what was really interesting was he was saying, "I want this to play out quickly. I feel like this is being..."

VELSHI: Yes, so let me ask you this. If one isn't following this as much as I know you've been and we've been, if you just listened to Charlie Rangel talk there for the last 20 or 25 minutes, here's what you heard.

You heard a guy saying, "I'm not getting my day in court. I can't afford my lawyers anymore. This is not a good idea, but I need to tell you who I am. Everybody is dragging their heels and not coming forward with what" -- he said a few times, "Get on with it. If you to get rid of me, get on with it. Step up to it."

It sounded -- it sounded very sympathetic. You're telling me there's something else to this.

KEILAR: Well, there's something else to this, because he's talked about before, "Look, I've cooperated. I have gotten a forensic accountant to go over my finances."

The thing, Ali, is you're not really going to hear the ethics committee hit back, because the proceedings that they go through are very confidential. But what we've seen in the report is they have basically pointed a finger at Rangel himself and said he has missed many deadlines. His lawyers have missed many deadlines to submit documents. In one breath, he says on television that he has a forensic accountant to pore over his finances. And then we don't get the actual data from that accountant six months later.

So if you read the report, it kind of paints a picture of someone who has created a time line problem for himself.

But what also struck me was he said, "Look, I know, Democrats, that this is annoying for you in an election year, because this isn't what you want to be dealing with as you go into some really tough races."

VELSHI: Yes.

KEILAR: But he kind of said too bad there, Ali. I mean, that really struck me.

VELSHI: Yes. Very interesting. Brianna, thanks very much. We'll check back in with you a little bit later.

Brianna Keilar on Capitol Hill.

The other story that we're following right now is that plane crash. A plane, a small plane, has crashed in Southern Alaska: believed to have on board former Alaska senator, Ted Stevens and the former NASA administrator.

What we do know is that the plane has crashed, that there are five people dead, that there may have been eight or nine people aboard. We don't know whether there are three or four survivors, a lot of conflicting information. We're going to try and bring you the latest right after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: OK. I want to bring you up to speed if you've been following this plane crash in Alaska. Let me tell you what we know right now.

First of all, a plane has gone down in Southern Alaska. It's a plane -- we are unclear as to how many people were on board. There appear to have been nine people on board. There are some reports that say there were eight people were on board. What we do understand is that five people have been killed. We know that two are hurt.

Now, who do we think was on this plane? We think former Alaska senator, Ted Stevens, various sources have confirmed that he was on the plane, although his family has not, even though we've spoken to a family spokesperson. But we believe former senator, Ted Stevens, was on board. Former NASA administrator, Sean O'Keefe, was on board. We know that, because he heads the North American division of EADS. That is a British -- a European aerospace and defense company, the parent company of Airbus. They have confirmed that he was on board.

But we do not know what their fate is. We do not know whether either Sean O'Keefe or Ted Stevens have survived.

We do know that the FAA is on scene, the Air National Guard is on scene, but it's a particularly rugged part of the state, and it has -- and there are some weather issues there.

But let's find out more about the situation on the ground. Let's go right to Anchorage news anchor and reporter Matthew Felling of our affiliate KTVA; joins us now by phone from Anchorage, Alaska.

Matthew, what do you know?

MATTHEW FELLING, ANCHOR/REPORTER, KTVA-TV (via phone): Well, we do know everything that you did confirm. And we're getting a lot of reports, a lot of reports from different quarters of the state.

A lot of mourning is already taking place from people who didn't want to step forward and confirm what may be on the horizon with regards to Senator Stevens.

And he was out -- he was flying 350 miles away. Alaska is a vast, vast state. He was flying to a destination called Dillingham, which is out towards the western coast of Alaska, for a fishing trip with a bunch of his friends. You want to get your fishing in, in Alaska, in August, because while you guys are dealing with hurricanes...

VELSHI: Sure.

FELLING: While you deal with hurricane season on the East Coast, here it actually is the very inception of fall. And a lot of people are getting their last catches of the year. And it's a routine for most of Alaskans to try to get out during this time of year, even though you do have to fight some serious rain, some serious cloudiness. And that's what we're dealing with.

The National Guard and everybody and all the rescue teams out there are dealing with 100-foot ceilings when it comes to getting in, getting out, trying to get help to the plane crash. And as of right now, that's what we're dealing with.

We're hearing a lot of information. I do know that Senator Murkowski, the current senior senator of Alaska, has completely cut short her campaign. And she's in a battle against an up and comer, Joe Miller, in the primary race. She has cut her campaigning short. She's coming back down to Anchorage from Fairbanks, and it's kind of -- everybody is circling the wagons. Everybody is heading here.

I understand that the medical teams in Dillingham are bringing everything they can back to Anchorage, because it is the city -- the state's largest city. And we're going to take it from there. And I just got off the air a few moments ago doing breaking news, trying to get the entire state up to speed.

VELSHI: Excellent. We'll keep in touch with you on that. Matthew, appreciate that.

Matthew Felling is a news anchor and reporter for our affiliate KTVA in Anchorage.

Let me tell you a little bit about what's going on. Matthew was just talking about Dillingham. It is in southern -- southwestern Alaska. The plane, the aircraft -- there's a map of where Dillingham is. The aircraft is a DeHavilland DHC-3T. It's a single-engine, high-wing airplane. That is the airplane, by way. That's not an airplane like the one. That is the airplane that has gone down. It's owned by GCI, which is the Alaskan telecommunications provider. So is the lodge that they were apparently headed to.

Let me tell you a little bit about Ted Stevens, for those of you who don't know. Although most of us remember, because he's been so prominent in the news in the last few years.

He was the longest-serving Republican senator in U.S. history. He narrowly lost his re-election bid in the 2008 election because, just weeks before that, he had been convicted about lying on financial disclosure statements about renovations to his home in Alaska. He lost that election narrowly, but he's very popular in Alaska.

His conviction was actually overturned in April of 2009, because of prosecutorial misconduct, and the new attorney general at the time, Eric Holder, declined to retry the case, which means the conviction was vacated. He can now go forth saying that he had no convictions.

I want to tell you about the other man that we're talking about who we know was on that plane. We don't know what his fate is, but his name is Sean O'Keefe. He was the NASA administrator from 2001 to 2005. He was also the secretary of the Navy in 1992.

These two men were good friends. So we don't know yet what the fate of Sean O'Keefe is. But I want to bring in somebody who does know him, who does know -- knows him very well, actually. He's a former astronaut. His name is Leroy Chiao. We've spoken to him before. Leroy is there in Houston.

Leroy, can you tell us, what have you -- what do you know about -- first of all, have you heard anything that we don't know about Sean O'Keefe and his status? And then tell me a bit about Sean.

LEROY CHIAO, FORMER ASTRONAUT: Well, no, of course, I was coming into CNN to talk about the space walks to prepare the pump module aboard the International Space Station when the news of the plane crash broke this morning, and I was quite shocked and concerned to learn that my friend Sean O'Keefe was on board the plane. So I don't have any news that you don't have, certainly, and I'm just waiting like everyone else to hear more from the -- from the scene.

But Sean is a terrific individual, impressed me from the outset, and I'm just praying and hoping that he's OK.

VELSHI: Sean is also the current North American head of the parent company of Airbus, EADS, based out of Europe. So he's the North America head. They have confirmed that he was on the plane.

But again, we are not getting complete information about who's survived, who's injured, and who didn't make it out of that. We'll stay on top of that.

Leroy, stay with us for a second.

On the phone, joining me now from McLean, Virginia, is Bob Francis. He is the former vice chair of the National Transportation Safety Board. They, of course, have sent a team up there to Alaska to -- to determine, as is often the case, what happened in this crash.

Bob, thank you for joining us. Do I understand that you -- you know both Sean O'Keefe and Ted Stevens?

BOB FRANCIS, FORMER VICE CHAIRMAN, NTSB (via phone): I know Stevens very slightly. He was -- he was on the Senate -- in the Senate, when I was up for confirmation, and part of the process is you go in and talk to the senators, and let them sort of look you over. And he was one of the few that actually took the time to speak with me. And he is a very, very knowledgeable aviation person. And particularly knowledgeable about the high risk that is involved in flying in Alaska.

As you may know, he -- he was in an accident in Anchorage at a -- a light jet accident. And he -- survived, but his first wife was killed in that accident.

VELSHI: And, of course, the other man that we know is on that plane, Sean O'Keefe. Obviously, he worked for - an aerospace and defense company. These are guys who know a lot about aviation, but they were on a small plane, a Dehavilin DHC-3T, a single-engine, high- wing airplane. We can show it on the screen here.

Bob, this is a common plane used by bush pilots, or lots of them. It's a common way to get around in Alaska. They are not inherently dangerous.

FRANCIS: No. And you should emphasize that even though this original aircraft was built probably in the '60s or something like that, there is a company in Texas that is doing updates. And they basically rebuild these -- these otters and put turbine engines on them. So, this -- this was not an old, old airplane. This was --

VELSHI: That's an important --

FRANCIS: A model -- modern equipment engine, avionics.

VELSHI: That's an important distinction, because when you hear -- I think I heard it was built in '54, '56 when it went into service. But it's very common with airplanes, they get overhauls. The mechanical parts are replaced and renewed. But the frame can go on for a very long time if there hasn't been damage to it.

FRANCIS: That's correct. And this company in Texas has done a lot of these conversions. So, you know, they've shown over time that -- you know, you can use them with skis, you can use them with floats and wheels.

VELSHI: Have you got some sense from what you're doing, and I know that at the -- at the NTSB, you don't - speculate, and people investigate. But from what you've heard so far, do you have some sense of what might have happened?

FRANCIS: Well, I mean -- I'm a little more free to speculate now. I think you look at the inherent risk of flying small airplanes in Alaska, and it's pretty high. And then you look at what they're saying about the weather, fog and rain.

And that's -- you know, going into a small place, I don't know if they're going into the airport there, then maybe they had navigation aides. Or if they were going into a lake where the lodge was, then they probably didn't have any kind of navigation equipment at all. So -- I think it's really hard to speculate at this point --

VELSHI: Tell me this then. When you hear about plane crashes, you hear sort of about two kinds. You hear about the kind where everybody on board perishes and nobody would have had any chance at all. And then you hear something like this, where the FAA is telling us there were five people who died and either three or four survivors on this.

So, what kind of an incident would have caused that? Does that mean they weren't all that high or they weren't coming -- didn't hit whatever they hit at speed?

FRANCIS: Well, I would guess that that probably means that they were coming down, they were in control, but for some reason, they couldn't keep flying. And that maybe they landed at the end of a field or a clearing or whatever it is, and there wasn't enough room to stop the airplane.

Or perhaps they didn't get to the clearing, but they got into trees somewhere. I mean, it's -- you know, there are all sorts of different possibilities. But to have a light aircraft land under some kind of control, presumably, and have some survivors is not that unusual.

VELSHI: Okay. Bob, thank you for that.

Stay with us. Bob Francis, the former vice chair of the NTSB, Leroy Chow is a former astronaut joining me from Houston who knows Sean O'Keefe very well. We know Sean O'Keefe, former NASA administrator, and North American head of EADS (ph) is on that plane, we just don't know what his condition is.

Also we know that the Alaska Air National Guard has reached the site. We have got them on the phone right after this break. Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: All right. I want to bring you up to speed with what we've got on the Alaska plane crash, which may be carrying Senator -- former senator Ted Stevens and is carrying the former NASA head, Sean O'Keefe.

Let's go right to Major Guy Hayes of the Alaska Air National Guard. He is standing by. Major Hayes, what can you tell us?

MAJ. GUY HAYES, ALASKA AIR NATIONAL GUARD (via phone): Yes, we currently have two Alaska Air National Guard para-rescuemen on scene providing medical assistance to crash vicitms. We have also got a U.S. Coast Guard C-130 circling overhead, providing communication support.

What they have just told me is they're going to take the first two victims off the scene and take them to Dillingham for further medical support. And that U.S. Coast Guard Jay Hawk is going to come in and land and take another victim out of there as soon as possible.

VELSHI: Okay. So you're -- let me just -- what we're trying to first establish here is the math on this. We have heard that five people have died, and there are either three or four victims. You're talking about three victims at the moment.

HAYES: Well, I can't confirm any fatalities or who was on board the aircraft, but I can tell you that, yes, they have definitely worked on two people. They're working on a third person to get him out of there right now.

VELSHI: Okay. So, as far as you understand, there are three people injured.

HAYES: That's the current information that they have been working on, at least three people at this point.

VELSHI: Okay. You've got a C-130 in the air. We heard this happened obviously last night, Alaska time. So, the weather may have changed. Do you have any sense of the conditions there under which they're working?

HAYES: The weather conditions when they landed was about a quarter-mile visibility. We've had a lot of wind, a lot of low cloud cover, so it's been pretty difficult to get into the area. It took them roughly about 12 hours, I think, from when the plane was spotted by good samaritans until we got there on scene.

VELSHI: And what kind of terrain is it, do you know?

HAYES: Not positive, but like most of Alaska, it's probably mountainous and just very difficult to get into.

VELSHI: Okay. Do you know that -- that they have found everybody they have to find? HAYES: Can't confirm that at this point. They're just -- they're working on the folks that they've -- that they can at this point, and we'll get more information out as we get it.

VELSHI: Major, do we know anything yet about the circumstances that led to this crash or whether there was a signal sent out or a call for help?

HAYES: No details have come out of at this point. I'm sure the NTSB will do an investigation to get more information out as they can.

VELSHI: Does the Alaska Air National Guard have everything it needs to complete this rescue or recovery? Are you calling for more help? Are there more people moving in, or is this everything you need?

HAYES: Absolutely. The Alaska Air Guard is set up for this. We have you know, rescue helicopters, we have fair rescuemen. We do this on a regular basis.

But we're working in conjunction with the Alaska state troopers, the U.S. Coast Guard and we're calling in all the support we can get to make sure we get to these people as quickly as possible and get them out of there so they can have the medical support they need.

VELSHI: Okay. Major Hayes, I know you cannot confirm whether there are fatalities or how many there are, but you're telling me from your understanding there are three people under treatment, three people being treated by the Air National Guard.

HAYES: That's right. Currently right now, we've been trying to get at least three people out. And I think they're getting ready to go back again to work on more people.

VELSHI: Okay. So, there might be more. There might be more people who could use treatment. In other words, there might be more survivors.

HAYES: That's correct.

VELSHI: Okay. Major Guy Harris (ph) of the Alaska Air -- Guy Hayes, I'm sorry. Guy, thank you very much for joining us.

We'll continue to bring you updates on the situation as we get them. We're starting to get a little clearer on it, but I can see why there's confusion about how many people have survived and how many haven't. We believe there were eight or nine people aboard, as Major Hayes says. Three are being treated at the moment. But they may be going back to treat others. Weather conditions are still tough in southern Alaska.

OK. Another topic I want to talk to you about. We talked about this a little bit yesterday as a result of the president's conversation about education. Bill Gates. You know him. He says college students of the future will not need traditional college. The way we know of, since they study online. We're going to ask the president of Penn State University what he thinks about that when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: All right. President Obama putting education front and center for a second day in a row. He is pushing Congress to protect teachers' jobs today after making a push yesterday to dramatically increase U.S. college graduation rates to keep up with the rest of the world. The U.S. used to be on top, and now we are 12th.

President says, quote, "Countries that outeducate us today will outcompete us tomorrow." He pointed out the U.S. has fallen from first place to 12th place in the world in the percentage of young adults who have college diplomas. This is a traditional way of looking at it.

Now, a traditional four-year degree. Is it still the golden ticket to success, or are bricks-and-mortar colleges becoming dinosaurs? Let me just give a statistic. The unemployment rate is 9.7 percent in the United States. If you have only a high school education, you are twice as likely as the average American to be unemployed.

Bill Gates. I just showed you that picture of Bill Gates. Let's go back to that for a second. I want to read the quote. Bill Gates, by the way, who dropped out of college before starting Microsoft -- he was going to Harvard -- says that in the future, placed - "placed- based college education will be five times less important than it is today." Place-based college education. I.e., going to a place to get your education.

Joining me now to help put it in perspective is Penn State University president Graham Spanier. He is a national leader in higher education, obviously a college that is very big. One of the biggest in the country. Has great reach.

Graham, thank you very much for being here. We appreciate you talking to us about this.

We wanted to go right to one of these place-based colleges educations. I wanted to address two issues. Before we talk about Bill Gates, let's talk about this business of the U.S. coming in 12th in terms of the proportion of young people with a college education. This is a remarkable drop from first place. Some of it is due to the recession, some of it due to the higher cost of education, some of it is due to the fact that people don't know that a four-year degree is necessarily going to be their ticket to a prosperous life.

What is your view on where we stand in the world in terms of the number of people, the proportion of our young people, who graduate from four-year colleges?

GRAHAM SPANIER, PRESIDENT, PENN STATE UNIVERSITY: Well, I don't think anything has gone particularly haywire in American higher education. I think other countries are catching up with us. There used to be a huge gap between the quality of higher education in the United States and that in many other countries. And now other countries are catching up with us.

It's always been true in the United States that only about six out of every ten students who attend a college or university in our country actually graduate. Which means that about four in ten don't --

VELSHI: Which is kind of where our numbers are right now. They're a little better than 40 or 45 percent.

SPANIER: One of the reasons, however, is that we have a somewhat different standard in the United States for coming into a university. People focus on a lot of the big-name universities and how competitive it is to get in.

The truth of the matter is that 90 percent or so of the more than 4,000 colleges and universities in the United States admit just about anybody with a high school degree. And that means that a lot of them are not well-prepared, and therefore, they're not going to end up completing that college education.

In other countries, it's much more selective, right from the beginning, and only those who are likely to graduate get in in the first place.

VELSHI: That's a very good point. Because we talk about other countries, where they have a much better graduation rate, but, in fact, those who are not going to make it through college don't get into college or don't start in college.

What's a better measure? Is our system better? Is that better? Wouldn't it be better if we were getting more people into -- giving more people college education?

SPANIER: Well, I think it would be. We would like to have students better prepared when they come into our university, so part of the problem in the U.S. is a kindergarten through twelfth grade problem. But then we open the doors of opportunity wide in higher education, and a lot of those students are not going to succeed.

Now, it's not just preparation. It's financial aid, it's the high cost of tuition. It's motivation --

VELSHI: And let me ask you about that, because obviously, that's a big area of focus for the president. About the cost of it. Is a traditional four-year degree, even at a large public university like yours, is it worth the investment? Or is there some legitimacy to the fear that it sets you up for a lifetime of debt and maybe not be the income you think you might earn?

SPANIER: There's no question that it's worth the investment. Those with a college degree earn twice or three times the amount of those with a high school degree who in turn earn more in lifetime earnings of those who drop out of high school. So, if you're just looking at it from a pure economic standpoint, the return on investment is phenomenal with a college degree. And if you play your cards right, you get a good job and do what you're supposed to do, you are going to be able to pay back your debt. But it's true. A very large portion of college students today do end up with some debt when they graduate from the university.

VELSHI: Let me ask you this. I'm going to ask you to address that comment by Bill Gates, who says place-based college education will be five times less important in the future. Is he prophetic? Is he misguided? And part of it is -- is he sort of right because we're headed in that direction, anyway? I mean, I know schools like yours -- lots of schools offer a lot more now to people who can't be in that class every day.

SPANIER: Well, he's identified a trend. He's right about that. But it's grossly overstated.

Five years from now, ten years from now, even twenty years from now, higher education is going to look much more like it does today than something that he is describing. But I would agree that the single greatest unrecognized trend in American higher education is what I call "hybrid learning." It's the merging, the melding of web- based education, distance education, with resident instruction.

VELSHI: Graham Spanier, what a pleasure talking to you. I hope you'll come back and we can continue this discussion, because we enjoy talking about education --

SPANIER: Be happy to any time.

VELSHI: Thank you very much for your time. President of Penn State University, Graham Spanier joining me now.

All right. Look at this. I want you to see this picture. Is this a bird? Is it a plane? It's actually -- take a look at that. It's -- it's neither of those. It's a house, and it's our "Big I," coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: I want to show you that picture again right before we went to break. I showed you a picture of something. Let's see that again. All right. Can't really tell much from that picture.

But that's a wing. It's the wing of a plane -- it's actually the roof of a house as well. It's designed by architect David Hertz in Malibu. He designed a house that sits on 55 acres using glass, concrete and a deconstructed Boeing 747.

That's him. That's David Hertz. He's the architect. I've never seen anything like that.

David, thank you for joining us. What is that thing you're standing next to and why does it have parts of an airplane made into a house?

DAVID HERTZ, ARCHITECT: OK. Well, thank you, Ali. Well, I imagined this roof essentially while standing on this site. You can see this wonderful mountain range behind me, high at the end of the western edge of the Santa Monica mountains. While standing here, I envisioned a floating roof so that I would not obstruct that wonderful view. And I drew a section that tended to look upwards so -- to not look at the roof and imagined a -- it looked like a wing. And I said, why not use a wing?

And so what you see here are the left and right sections of a 747. And I've used other pieces I'd be happy to show you.

VELSHI: Yes. Please walk us around.

HERTZ: Well, we've used other sections. This is a section that is recognizable as a fuselage section with the windows. We've also used for the wing house the left and right wings of the house and the two horizontal stabilizers of the tail section.

Another piece that we've used is shown here, which is the engine cowling. The engine cowling will be used as a water feature and a fire pit outside. And you can see this here. So we found that there is tremendous purpose in reusing these airplane parts --

VELSHI: Have you ever seen anybody do this before?

HERTZ: No, I hadn't. I always loved the beauty and technology of airplanes and imagined a floating roof as a house, and this became a perfect opportunity to use it.

VELSHI: OK. A couple of questions for you. First of all, where did you find the plane? I mean, I didn't know you could just buy plane parts. And how did you get it up into the hills of Malibu?

HERTZ: It's a fascinating story. There are actually thousands of airplanes that are in the California desert. I remember seeing them while driving up to the Sierras. We actually were able to buy a plane for about the price of a car, $200 million 747 new, it's about $30,000. We cut it in half lengthwise, cut the wings off, closed three major California freeways. And then right over the ridge, we used a Chinook helicopter to fly the wings in, literally dropping them on site and then creating them in place.

VELSHI: This was your conception -- this isn't your house, though? Someone else is going to live in it?

HERTZ: No, this is a house for my client, Francie Rewald (ph) who had the courage and vision to embrace the vision and idea that I came up with.

VELSHI: The construction is not of -- I mean, this is more traditionally constructed house. You've incorporated these airplane parts, most notably the wings. But it's not -- they're not living in an airplane?

HERTZ: They are not living in an airplane, and thank you for making that distinction, Ali. It's really conceived as a sublime architectural element that cascades down the mountain. In my original renderings, I imagined these thin, floating roofs of the wings which are cascading down the ridge to really blend into the landscape rather than a box sitting on the mountain itself.

And those were really the inspiration for using the wings as floating roofs, so they're not living in the house. They'll be living underneath the wings, which are then enclosed with glass.

VELSHI: Worth pointing out, you sort of see yourself as an architect. You sort of see some advantage of using things that are already out there as an ecological plus.

HERTZ: Absolutely, Ali. We essentially short-circuit the whole extraction of raw materials when we repurpose, even better than recycle. These cars, airplanes and other vehicles are made of heavy materials extracted from the Earth's crust. And rather than down- cycle them, meaning turning them, say, back into an aluminum can, this is actually repurposing and reusing.

And I suggest taking advantage of the billions of dollars of research and engineering that went into creating this amazing structure that uses materials in the most efficient manner possible to achieve the highest strength. Why not repurpose and reuse that?

VELSHI: They're built a specific way. By the way, so that as pilots fly over that, they don't see two dismantled wings of a 747 and become concerned, you actually had to get the FAA involved in this?

HERTZ: Right, we are in the flight path for L.A.X. And you can clearly see the wings and the two horizontal stabilizers from the tail section that form the uppermost tier. And so that they are not recognized as a downed aircraft, they are registered and identified so it's not a crash site.

VELSHI: David, good to talk to you. Fantastic work. Maybe someday when I'm out there, you'll be able to let me take a close-up tour of that. That's fascinating.

David Hertz is the architect of the Wing House in Malibu, California. What a pleasure talking to you.

HERTZ: Thank you, Ali.

VELSHI: If you want to find out more about this house that is made out of various parts of a 747 as well as see more of David's environmental architecture, go to his Web site, which is www.studioea.com. That's studioea.com.

We're taking a break. I'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)