Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Cantor to Resign as Majority Leader; Police Release Teen's Name in Oregon School Shooting; Immigrant Children Flood Borders; California Judge Rules Public School Tenure Unconstitutional

Aired June 11, 2014 - 15:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RANDI KAYE, CNN ANCHOR: Political newbie brought down the GOP's number two man, Eric Cantor, in part by campaigning against immigration reform. The House majority leader will soon be out of a job.

Over and over, Brat portrayed Cantor as way too soft on immigration, and now a potential White House candidate, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is sounding off about Cantor's loss and Brat's beliefs on immigration.

Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: We just saw this race in Virginia where Eric Cantor, the second ranking Republican in the House, was defeated by a candidate who basically ran against immigrants, and his argument was this.

There are Americans out of work, so why should we allow immigrants into our country to take those jobs? And I think that's a fair -- I think that's a fair question.

But the answer is not to throw out of work and deport the 11 million immigrants who are contributing already to our economy. The answer is to grow our economy to create more jobs.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAYE: Let's bring in our political panel to discuss Brat's upset victory. With me are commentator and Republican consultant Margaret Hoover and Will Cain, commentator and columnist for conservative publication, TheBlaze.com.

All right, so, Margaret, to you first on this one, John King here at CNN says that it was arrogance that was behind this. What do you think?

MARGARET HOOVER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: There is some evidence to suggest that that could be true. For example, $1.5 million was left in Eric Cantor's war chest at the end of this. He didn't spend all the money he had going after Brat. That said, he did spend $5 million. He did have about 23 staffers in his office. It's not that he didn't take it seriously, but there is a real question of whether he took the threat seriously enough.

KAYE: And, Will, a lot of people are shaking their head, how did they not see this coming? Because some people on the ground have said that there was this attitude of "ABC," "Anyone But Cantor," but that Cantor himself and his team did not pick up on that.

WILL CAIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah, there's certainly a sentiment across this nation that is "throw the bums out," incumbency is its own weight. And it came to be seen that Eric Cantor was serving a constituency in Washington, D.C., not in Virginia, and that's why you hear slogans like "ABC."

I have to say, Randi, we hear Hillary Clinton saying that this was about immigration and that Dave Brat was essentially -- what -- opposed to any form of immigration.

That is what I'm sure Hillary wants it to be about. That issue, she thinks she wins on, but I think this has much more to do with the local politics of Virginia. We try to pull these big stories out of it, and it has to do with those people who went door to door in Virginia.

KAYE: Yeah.

HOOVER: And let's be clear. This was 12 percent electorate turnout. So all this guy needed, Brat needed, was 6.1 percent of the primary electorate. In closed partisan primaries, they do not represent the majority of that district, let alone America, so for the Tea Party to be emboldened, which they surely are, is actually misreading the tea leaves here.

CAIN: I think even saying that it's the Tea Party is a little bit of a stretch. He couldn't get a return call from most Tea Party organizations. I'm talking about Dave Brat, so this is an upset.

It is an upstart against an incumbent. I'm not sure all the rest of the narratives we want to put on it are necessarily true.

KAYE: Wasn't the Tea Party looking to not even really back him. They were looking to back other candidates that have a better shot, right?

HOOVER: Right, but what's at risk is the entire effectiveness of the GOP caucus, frankly, because Boehner and Cantor, while they had a contentious relationship at times, had learned to work together and frankly needed each other and needed each other's coalition.

Now that Cantor has been knocked out and has removed himself from leadership, there is a very strong chance that you're going to get somebody else in that number two position who frankly doesn't have the backing of the Tea Party caucus or who frankly does have the backing of the Tea Party caucus, and then the ability to actually get anything done; forget immigration reform.

CAIN: This is where Margaret and I have to part ways here. I am not --

KAYE: Is this the only place? Really? Come on.

CAIN: No, we have others, I'm sure, but I'm not that much a believer in let's get professional governors in, professional politicians, guys who know what they're doing, who are experienced.

There is no doubt Eric Cantor was a good politician as far as working the backrooms, but I believe in -- you know, new blood is good blood. As a default mechanism, new is good. Turnover.

KAYE: Who do you think it hurts and who do you think it helps?

HOOVER: This hurts John Boehner. It depends on who runs. Jeff Sessions is going to run for majority leader. Kevin McCarthy is going to for majority leader. Cathy McMorris Rodgers is probably going to run for majority leader.

KAYE: Why does this hurt Boehner?

HOOVER: It hurts John Boehner if he doesn't get somebody who he can partner with that can help sort of corral the Tea Party caucus and help corral his --

KAYE: He really depended on Cantor for access.

HOOVER: They absolutely had a symbiotic relationship that made the effectiveness of the GOP House, to the extent it was effective, it was because of that relationship which is now totally --

CAIN: Let me offer you one person that it hurts, and this is the most important thing to take from this race. Margaret mentioned it.

Eric Cantor spent $5 million. Dave Brat spent $100,000. This hurts people that believe money is a corrosive effect in politics and that it dictates our outcomes. It clearly does not.

KAYE: So Cantor was always like the "no" guy in the Obama discussions. Who is going be that person?

HOOVER: You have now a Tea Party caucus who's emboldened, and I think you're going to be hearing a lot more "no" from the Tea Party caucus.

You have a Jeff Sessions as the majority leader. Frankly you're going to be hearing a lot more no from the Republican House.

To the extent that people may not have like Eric Cantor, there's going to be a lot more Jon Stewart comedic rips at the GOP for being obstructionists after this.

KAYE: What do you think Brat's greatest challenge is from here on in, Will?

CAIN: His greatest challenge, and I think he'll live up to it, is to represent his own constituents. And if you listen to anything Dave Brat said, that's the message that he rammed home, over and over. I am here to respond to the constituents in this district in Virginia, and I will be accountable to them.

I think that's what you -- every one of these guys, that's what their job is to do. It's not to work the backrooms of D.C. It's not to rise in leadership. Not to spend 20 years getting reelected to the same position, over and over. It's to spend a short time representing your people well.

KAYE: And so what happens to immigration now?

HOOVER: It's not -- certainly this does not bode well for it. There is an interesting question about why Cantor has decided to step down.

The altruist outside of Washington wonders whether he might not be liberated, not having to serve the GOP caucus anymore, and just forget the lame duck. Why not just try to get immigration reform through?

Do the right thing, because you are not held accountable. You have already paid the ultimate price. You've lost your seat, so just go for the good policy now.

CAIN: Don't do it comprehensively. Just don't do it comprehensively. You can get immigration reform through.

KAYE: Will, Margaret, nice to see you guys. Thank you.

We've now learned the gunman who walked into an Oregon school with an AR-15 rifle, knives and a brown paper bag filled with loaded magazines was a student.

Police have just named this boy who killed his classmate, and we have all the details from a press conference that just wrapped up. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Welcome back. Just a short time ago we learned the other student's name in that shooting at a high school in Oregon. Two students died. One of them, police say, was the gunman.

CNN's Sara Sidner is in Troutdale, Oregon. And Sarah, you were at that news conference. What did you learn about the teen-aged shooter?

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We got some details about sort of his day at school. We know that he was 15-years-old. His name was Jared Padgett. He got on the bus, according to police. He was carrying with him a guitar case and a duffle bag.

He got off the bus, went into the gymnasium. He was inside for a while, apparently putting on some of the gear that he had with him, including a helmet, and then the shooting started.

Now, police say that he used an AR-15 rifle, but he also had on him a semiautomatic handgun. He had plenty of ammunition with him. He also had a large knife.

We know that he ended up killing another student, another freshman, 14-year-old Emilio Hoffman. We also know that he injured a teacher, Todd Rispler. That teacher is expected to be OK, was grazed by a bullet, and everyone is calling him a hero.

He managed to make it out and make it into the administration office, so that police could be called.

We also know where the shooter got his guns. Listen to what the police chief of Troutdale had to say about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHIEF SCOTT ANDERSON, TROUTDALE, OREGON, POLICE: The shooter obtained the weapons from his family home. The weapons had been secured, but he defeated the security measures.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: Now, they did not say exactly what that meant, whether he broke into a secured area or not, but they said that, indeed, his family had those guns, and they were secured, and he managed to get to them, anyway.

We also want to talk about, of course, the victim in this case, so many people talking about Emilio Hoffman, saying what a great kid he was. He was starting his freshman year at the school, and that year was supposed to end today, actually, the students preparing for graduation for the seniors and the rest of them preparing for summer vacation. Now they are dealing with this tragedy.

KAYE: Those chilling details, Sara Sidner, thank you very much.

Disturbing scenes like this one are popping up like this one are popping up across America, kids huddled together, not a parent in sight. This is just one in a tide of border crossings by children.

CNN is in one of these border towns, and we'll take you there, live, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: The pictures are disturbing. Children in a shelter at an air force base in Texas, crammed shoulder to shoulder on hard floors, not a single parent in sight.

It's a scene also playing out in Arizona and California, as the federal government struggles to handle a sudden surge of unaccompanied minors flooding into the U.S. from central America.

The tide is not expected to recede any time soon. Gary, what is behind the massive influx?

GARY TUCHMAN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This is the international border fence. Every day lots of illegal immigrants go over, through, and around these fences to get into this country.

What's different is that there are so many children and mothers with children. Most of these children are not from Mexico. They come from El Salvador and Honduras.

Why? Those countries have among the highest crime rates in the world. Many people want to get out. If you have family there, they are willing to send children along the way to seek safety.

In addition to that, Randi, what people know in those countries under U.S. immigration law. if you're from Mexico or Canada, you can get sent back immediately. but from other countries you're not allowed to be sent back right away.

Children and mothers of children know that they are treated more leniently. If you do have family here, it is very likely that you will end up staying in the United States.

KAYE: The conditions there look really tough for these kids. How long are they being kept at these holding centers?

TUCHMAN: What's what they're trying to do is find family members, then sent on their way to family members.

But they've set up basically a campground, indoor campground at border station here in Nogales, Arizona, and then, after they're initially checked in for 72 hours or so, they're being sent to military installations in Texas, in California, and also Oklahoma.

There will be, perhaps, as many as 3,000 children in these three states in three military installations while they decide what to do with them. If you get worse, they're going to run out of space. They've got the federal government and state governments have some decisions to make.

KAYE: Gary Tuchman, thank you. See more of Gary's reporting on "Anderson Cooper" 8:00 p.m. here on CNN.

A group of nine underprivileged children accomplished something even large organizations could not. Their lawsuit could completely change how our education system works and who may be teaching your kids in the very near future.

We will discuss what this means for you, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: The way California hires and fires teachers denies children the right to a quality education and is unconstitutional. That's what a judge ruled in a contentious case about a job protections versus a child's right to a good public education.

The landmark decision says, laws currently on the books harm mostly poor and minority students by saddling them with bad teachers.

Opponents, namely, teachers union, plan to appeal, but supporters are thrilled.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BHAVINI BHAKTA, TEACHER/WITNESS FOR PLAINTIFF: Policies like these that inhibit the ability of schools and principals to put the very best teachers, and only the very best teachers, in front of our students, are simply not defensible.

This is a win for teachers. This is a win for students. This is a win for California.

GLENN ROTHNER, ATTORNEY, UNITED TEACHERS OF LOS ANGELES: We believe very strongly that we will prevail on appeal.

NIKKI CICHOCKI, CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF TEACHERS: There's nothing than good that's going to come out eliminating these statutes. It's not going to help us to have chaos.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAYE: The plaintiffs in this case praise the ruling, calling it a celebration. Critics assail it as detrimental and a way to scapegoat the teachers for bigger problems plaguing the system.

So the question is, who's right? To debate the merits of this ruling are Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, and Jeanne Allen, president emeritus and senior fellow at Center for Education Reform. Thank you both for being with me.

Jeanne, to you first, you think the ruling is fantastic. Why?

JEANNE ALLEN, PRESIDENT EMERITUS, SENIOR FELLOW, CENTER FOR EDUCATION REFORM: Hooray. This is hooray for teachers, hooray for students.

We have 10 million -- more than 10 million children in this country every year, Randi, who are failed outright by protections that leave ineffective teaching, ineffective systems, and ineffective programs in front of our kids.

And they've been there not because our teachers aren't great, but because the system protects mediocrity at the expense of those kids. So this is a great day for the rights of children and teachers.

On top of that, we have hundreds of thousands of young people who want to become young teachers, often enter the system and are pushed out, because things like tenure and seniority protect the adult at the expense of kids learning.

We simply can't have that anymore.

KAYE: Dennis, we talked to some teachers who said that it was past time to do something about low-performing teachers. So what would your solution be?

DENNIS VAN ROEKEL, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION: I think the most important thing to realize is that due process procedures do not prevent ineffective teachers from being hired. They do prevent good teachers from being fired for bad reasons.

But the real problem here is that there are teachers who should not be in the classroom. That's what they're saying is the problem.

I believe the real solution is to say. What is wrong with the hiring, recruitment, and licensing procedure that those people are allowed to be in the classroom?

I think it's absolutely wrong in America to have an unlicensed, untrained, uncertified teacher put in as a teacher of record. You need to stop the pipeline.

Every teacher who is made teacher of record should be fully trained, certified and licensed. That's how you solve the problem.

ALLEN: But, Randi, this really isn't about certification, with all due respect to Dennis, and we'd welcome at the Center for Education Reform and join hands with Dennis and his colleagues in solving this problem.

The reality is those policies, certification, don't cause teacher to be great or to fail. We have 91 teachers in 10 years in California who were dismissed -- 91 -- and yet 22 percent of fourth graders can't do math. What's the problem?

It's implementation. We have to give local school leaders, local school educators, and local parents the ability to hold their teachers and schools accountable, to put their parents and students at a high level of standards, and to be able to control their own destiny locally without these top-down state and national mandates that don't do anything but protect failure.

VAN ROEKEL: I was talking to a CEO the other day and he said to me if any division in his corporation had more than 10 percent turnover, he'd be down there to see the problem.

If there are 91 people who were put in the classroom who are deemed to be totally incompetent and ineffective, I still believe that this solution is to solve the problem of not letting them in in the first place.

It shouldn't be to let anybody and then make it easy to fire them. The solution is to only high well-trained, certified and licensed teachers, and then have a good evaluation system. No one wants an incompetent teacher in the classroom, especially us.

KAYE: With so much talk of a teacher shortage, Jeanne, if teachers are laid off, where do we get the new ones?

ALLEN: That's it. There's not a shortage of people wanting to teach. That's exactly right. There's no shortage of people wanting to teach.

There are a shortage of people who systems are permitted to hire and who can be retained and rewarded because we basically -- what the judge just said in California, let's be clear what this means, what the judge said is, tenure laws, laws that allow a teacher who has been in the classroom for less than two years to get tenure without having to prove her or himself are not fair to kids.

What that does is it sets up a system where those teachers, whether they're good or not, can never truly be evaluated for performance. We are beyond the point in time --

VAN ROEKEL: It doesn't --

KAYE: Dennis, very quickly.

VAN ROEKEL: That argument doesn't hold water in that they're hired and they have two full years to assess them, each and every day or whenever they want to determine.

ALLEN: We should assess them every day for the rest of their lives.

VAN ROEKEL: No, that's not true. It's not true at all.

ALLEN: Every day.

VAN ROEKEL: All it is is due process, and for two full years in order to get rid of any teachers, all they to say is we're not hiring you for next year.

The idea that laws that protect good teachers from being fired for bad reasons is something that we need. And they were put in place long before unions.

KAYE: Dennis Van Roekel, Jeanne Allen, thank you both very much.

And thank you, everybody, for watching. I'm Randi Kaye. Enjoy the rest of your afternoon.

Jake Tapper picks it up from here with "THE LEAD."