Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

What The COVID Endgame Looks Like For America; President Biden Optimistic On Passing Infrastructure Bill; Interview With Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) About President Biden's Agenda And Capitol Hill Investigation; Memorial Service Held For Gabby Petito; Former Spears Tour Manager Tells CNN About Her Conservatorship. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired September 26, 2021 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSEPH PETITO, GABBY PETITO'S FATHER: I want you to be inspired by her.

NATASHA CHEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Investigators tonight trying to work out why a passenger train derailed in Montana, killing at least three people.

MEGAN VANDERVEST, PASSENGER ON DERAILED TRAIN: The first thought I really had when I woke up was, oh, my god, we're derailing? We didn't know what was going on for a couple of minutes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Behind the scenes in Britney Spears' battle to free herself from the control of the courts.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: I'm Pamela Brown in Washington. Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

And we begin tonight with a question that has no easy answer. What does America's coronavirus end game look like? After a horrific summer surge that plagued the unvaccinated, the numbers of new cases and hospitalizations are finally falling. More than half of the U.S. is now fully vaccinated. But at the same time, we're back to an average of about 2,000 COVID deaths a day. And in places like Idaho, the virus is killing so many people, hospitals and funeral homes don't have enough space to store the bodies.

Is this what living with the virus looks like, or is there more we can do to stop the suffering?

Well, one man who has been right at the center of this global crisis is Dr. Scott Gottlieb. He was the FDA commissioner in the Trump administration and also the author of "Uncontrolled Spread: Why COVID- 19 Crushed Us and How We Can Defeat the Next Pandemic." And he's on Pfizer's board.

Dr. Gottlieb, so great to have you with us tonight.

DR. SCOTT GOTTLIEB, FORMER FDA COMMISSIONER: Thanks a lot. Thanks for having me.

BROWN: So let's jump right in. Here's what the summer of the Delta variant has looked like. We're going to put this up on the screen. The cases have been falling now for two weeks, so is the worst over?

GOTTLIEB: Well, nationally cases are falling because it's being driven by sharp declines in the south where the Delta has really run its course. You've seen an extreme surge of Delta infection course run through the southern states. You're now seeing the virus migrate to other parts of the country. So the Midwest is experiencing a surge in infection, the Pacific northwest as well. And the northeast I don't think is impervious to a Delta wave of its own.

So I don't think that this has run its course. This has been a highly regionalized epidemic from the very beginning. This Delta wave is going to surge across the country and hit different regions at different times, but I think on the back end of this Delta surge of infection around the country, after we get through this, this may be the last major wave of the infection and we're going to start to transition from the pandemic phase of this virus, at least here in the United States, to a more endemic phase where the coronavirus becomes a persistent threat but you're not seeing levels of infection quite the same way that you've seen them in the past year and a half.

BROWN: And I want to delve into that a little bit more in just a second, but first going back to what you were saying because we know how this virus works, right? It goes from one part of the country, and then it spikes in other parts of the country. When do you think the wave of the Delta variant will be done in the United States? When do you think it will have its course?

GOTTLIEB: Yes, probably by Thanksgiving I think that it'll have run its course. You're seeing very dense epidemics right now in the Midwest, in the Pacific northwest became inflamed a little earlier than that. I think the big question mark is whether the northeast is going to see its own surge of infection.

There is a presumption that because it has high vaccination rates and high prior exposure from previous waves of infection. That is somewhat impervious to a big wave of infection as people who believe that the surge of Delta that you saw in the summer really was the surge that you're going to see in the northeast.

I'm a little bit more skeptical. I think that you're still going to see a wave of infection sweep across the northeast as kids go back to school and they become sources of community spread. And people return to work, the weather gets cold and people move indoors. But I think by Thanksgiving you'll have seen this move its way through the country. The virus isn't going away, but prevalence levels will decline to a level that feels more manageable, maybe 20,000 cases per 100,000 people per day.

By comparison, at the peak of the epidemic in the south, we're at probably 120,000 cases per 100,000 people per day in states like Alabama and Mississippi and Florida.

BROWN: Right. And there's also the question as you look ahead, like as you can probably hear in my voice, I'm recovering from a cold. But of course I thought oh, no, is this COVID? And there's this like mad scramble, and that's only going to get worse, right, as we head into the winter months where people are going to be getting sick not just with colds but COVID and the flu, and you're trying to decipher what it is you have going on.

What do you think that's going to look like?

GOTTLIEB: I think it's going to create a real demand for testing. And that's why it's so important to get point of care diagnostic tests into the hands of consumers and into doctors' offices as well, things like the BinaxNOW where people can test in the home are going to become very important for differentiating coronavirus from other forms of respiratory diseases that come in with some of the symptoms, especially to you point, as the flu picks up.

There is some indication that this may be a mild flu season. I hope so, it's still a little too early to draw conclusions. But the mitigation steps that we're doing to try to control the spread of coronavirus is while effective against COVID, but not that effective, seems to be even more effective against the virus like flu that spreads predominantly through droplet transmission.

[18:05:10]

So hopefully we have another mild flu season. That said we're in for a whopper of a flu season at some point because this will be two years that we haven't put flu immunity into the population. So that's going to leave us very vulnerable to influenza as well.

BROWN: So you believe this year we're going to be seeing the flu unlike we have in the past couple of years just to be clear on that?

GOTTLIEB: This year based on the data so far, it may be a mild flu season. But at some point we're going to have a very bad flu season precisely because we've had two -- we will have two mild flu seasons in a row. Still a little too early to draw conclusions. But if you look at South America and you look at Australia, which are usually harbingers of our flu season, they've had very mild flu seasons and we haven't seen flu pick up yet at the same levels we've seen historically.

So it's a little too early to draw conclusions. We don't know how well the vaccine also is going to cover flu yet this season, the predominant strain that circulates. But so far there are indications this may be a mild flu season.

BROWN: So you've talked about getting to a place where we learned just to live with this virus, but we still have places like Idaho where funeral homes can't handle the volume of deaths. Is this what living with it looks like, or what will it look like once we get to that point where this is just sort of the second flu that we're just going to have to always deal with? GOTTLIEB: Yes. I think on the back end of this, you're not going to

see the same level of extreme death and disease that we're experiencing right now after this Delta wave courses through the country. The reality is that people -- everyone in the country or most people are going to end up with immunity from coronavirus. Some people are going to choose to acquire it through vaccinations, some people are unfortunately going to require their immunity through no choice by getting infected.

This Delta infection isn't going to spare many people because it's so contagious. So people who choose to go unvaccinated, they're going to be very vulnerable to getting infected through this Delta wave. So in the back end of this, if we're at 90 percent levels of immunity across the population which is probably where we'll be, we're probably at 80 percent right now, you're not going to see the same level of death and disease because most people will be protected with some level of immunity.

The vaccines are very protective against hospitalizations and severe disease so they're doing their job. And natural immunity is going to confer a level of protection at least for a period of time. I don't think that people who rely on natural immunity acquired through -- from infection are going to be impervious to the virus in perpetuity. I think they will eventually need to get vaccinated, but so far the immunity confer by protection does appear to be protective for a period of time.

BROWN: So that's interesting. So right now you said, you believe that 80 percent of the population has some protection, whether it be from the vaccine or for prior immunity. Is that why you say now that you believe the Delta variant will be the last really bad variant, because of the level of immunity we've reached?

GOTTLIEB: Yes, exactly. I'm talking about adults over the age of 18 as well. We've vaccinated about 77 percent of adults over the age of 18 with at least one dose of vaccine. Most of them will complete the series. A good portion of those who are choosing to remain unvaccinated probably have been infected with Delta in part some, people are choosing to go unvaccinated because they know they've had infection.

Some people are choosing to go unvaccinated because they're more cavalier about COVID which probably portends that they were more likely to come into contact with it. So I would guess that about 40 percent of those who remain unvaccinated have been infected. We know at least a third of the country has been infected with COVID. So on the back end of this, you're going to have a lot of immunity in the population.

And that's just going to cut down on the ability of this to transfer at the same rate and also cause the same amount of death and disease that we're seeing right now. But the reality is that there's still a lot of pockets of vulnerability. And COVID is so contagious. It finds its way into those pockets of vulnerability. You have social and geographic compartments in this country that are unvaccinated or under vaccinated and that's where Delta is getting in. BROWN: Yes. COVID will find them, that's for sure. That's what we've

learned from this. Millions more Americans are starting booster shots now. We know this well because you're on the Pfizer board. Is this going to be an annual thing and once people get that booster shot, can they then relax some of the precautions they may have been taking?

GOTTLIEB: Well, look, based on the data from Israel, and it's short- term data, we've really only followed people out a little bit more than a month. People who've received the booster shot seemed to acquire very protected immunity. It seemed to restore the original immunity that people had after the second dose. And so you have about 95 percent protection against infection and severe disease and hospitalization.

Now again, that's only a month of data. We don't know how durable that's going to be and we don't know how durable the vaccines are going to be overall. There is a belief that after the third booster you're going to get a more robust and more durable immunity that could be more prolonged.

That said, I still think that this is likely to become an annual vaccine at least for some cohort of the population, in part because immunity is going to decline in those who are -- who mount the less robust effect from vaccines particularly older individuals, immunocompromised individuals.

And in part because this coronavirus is going to migrate. It's going to evolve in ways that at least partially evade the protections offered by the existing vaccines and the immunity from existing infection.

[18:10:06]

And so you're probably going to need to update the vaccines on some schedule. If not every year, maybe every couple of years.

BROWN: And that's all still being looked at, the data coming in, so we'll hopefully have an answer for that at some point.

Stay with us, Mr. Gottlieb. We've got more questions for you in just a moment, including some questions from our viewers.

And also ahead this hour, the president's signature spending plan in a fight for survival on Capitol Hill tonight. At stake, Joe Biden's legacy, the fortunes of his fellow Democrats in the midterms, and trillions of dollars to help Americans everywhere.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: And we're back with former FDA commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb.

Dr. Gottlieb, Pfizer says it's going to ask the FDA to OK a vaccine for younger kids in a matter of days. But meantime in the U.K. the government's vaccine advisers, they're saying that healthy children don't need to be vaccinated. So what do you say, should all children be vaccinated? [18:15:07]

GOTTLIEB: Well, look, I think this is a choice parents and pediatricians are going to need to make. I certainly would encourage parents to consider vaccinating kids. This is a dangerous pathogen, it's dangerous in kids. I think a lot of people focus on the number of children who tragically died from this virus and say that, you know, the amount isn't much more than what we see with a typical flu season.

But I wouldn't be so cavalier about this virus. We know that this virus has long term consequences, and a lot of people who contract is including children. We see lingering effects of this virus in kids and neurological effects as well. So I think we don't understand this virus, and I certainly would want to see children protected through vaccination and not have to go through a course of illness with this coronavirus.

BROWN: Your new book, I want to talk about, it's called "Uncontrolled Spread: Why COVID-19 Crushed Us and How We Can Defeat the Next Pandemic." There's a lot to learn from your book here. Are we now better or worse prepared to deal with the next pandemic?

GOTTLIEB: Well, I don't think we're any better prepared from a structural standpoint. I think we're better prepared insofar as we understand what our weaknesses were. We really don't have a capacity in this country and agency capable of mounting the kind of response that you need to a public health crisis of this magnitude. I think there was a presumption that CDC had the capacity to do that. It doesn't.

It doesn't really have a logistical capability. It doesn't even have the data capability to collect real-time information and do real-time analytics to inform policymakers in a current crisis. It's very retrospective. It's (INAUDIBLE) doing very exquisite scientific analyses that take months to do. In the setting of a fast-moving crisis, when you're trying to give guidance to consumers in a real- time fashion, the CDC didn't have the right capabilities to do that.

So I think that we need to reform the agency, build in new capabilities, and come up with new structures of government to try to deal with the crisis of this magnitude. We need to look at public health preparedness through a lens of national security and try to prepare that way.

BROWN: But does it concern you at all that even if the agency was set up in the way you described, the way it should be set up for a pandemic, that just given the bitter, you know, political divides, people can't even, you know, agree on wearing masks, that we're not going to, as a society, have a very easy time dealing with the next pandemic from that view?

GOTTLIEB: Well, look, the political leadership around it certainly didn't help. We didn't have a consistent message and we didn't have a lot of strong leadership trying to get the country to agree and get behind collective action in some of the easier things that we could have done to try to mitigate the spread like wearing masks, like encouraging vaccinations, like discouraging people from engaging in certain activities that we knew were risk for spread.

I think there's even a more fundamental question, though, coming out of this, and that I think that there's a lot of people who feel that the guidance they got from public health authorities was not very well informed, changed a lot, wasn't explained well. The best example is the requirement that people have to stay six feet apart which was the single costliest piece of advice or guidance that the CDC issued through this pandemic.

It's what forced many schools to close because they couldn't maintain six feet of distance between students, and that wasn't grounded in very clear science, and it was shifting over time. Finally CDC reverted to three feet. But originally they wanted to require people to stay 10 feet apart.

I think the presumption is that the public health officials put out guidance that at times wasn't well informed, wasn't well explained. And people now are going to have a more fundamental question on whether public health officials should be more empowered in setting public health crisis. And I think to mount the right response to a crisis, we're going to need to empower our public health agencies, but there's going to be a lot of people who are very skeptical about doing that.

It's not just going to be right-left divide on this question, although it's certainly going to break down along political lines. But I think it's much broader than that. I think the skepticism is going to be more pervasive. And so we're going to have to get over that more fundamental question before we get to the hard work of actually trying to reform these agencies and build in the right capabilities.

BROWN: Your former boss, ex-president Donald Trump appeared this week on OAN and said, "Nobody really ever thought a pandemic would happen. It sounds like sort of an ancient thing." What do you think about that? Is there any truth to what he just said?

GOTTLIEB: Well, look, we've prepped for a pandemic for years, going back to -- I remember in the Bush administration where I served, we put in very detailed plans. We were worried about a pandemic with an h5n1 flu. And we even prepped for a pandemic during the Trump administration. There was tabletop exercises including crimson contagion which was a tabletop exercise prepping for a hypothetical pandemic involving influenza. So we prepared for a pandemic.

We just prepared for the wrong pandemic, and I think what we found were a lot of the preparations that we had put in place for a flu weren't really applicable to a coronavirus, and even insofar as they might have been applicable to a coronavirus, they weren't very good. The kinds of plans that we put in place really weren't adequate.

So first example, we tried to stockpile certain components that we thought we would need in a setting of a public health crisis, but didn't envision that in a setting of a global public health crisis, and a pandemic would be a global event.

[18:20:00] Every country would need the same equipment at the same time, and so all the low-margin commodity, components and complex health care supply chains would be demanded all across the world and we'd run out of them. So what do we run out of for example when it came to testing? Not the actual platforms for running the test. We ran out of the nasal swabs for collecting the samples or the pipette tips for transferring the samples on to the very expensive platforms that perform the diagnostic testing.

Nobody envisioned that. Nobody envisioned that the supply chain wouldn't be available to us in a setting of global crisis. We should have, but we didn't.

BROWN: You've mentioned earlier when I asked about the political divisions and not even getting people to wear a mask, you talked about sort of a failure of leadership at times. Do you think that Donald Trump's actions cost lives?

GOTTLIEB: Well, look, I say in the book certainly there were failings of political leadership. What I tried to do in the book, though, is look beyond that, because I think a lot of people have looked at the failures of the political infrastructure and delved down to the more structural features of government that weren't ready and weren't in place to try to deal with a public health crisis of this magnitude.

The political shortcomings weren't just at the White House. I think the biggest shortcoming at the White House as I said was the lack of consistency. The administration lost their focus. And so by ELECTION DAY, a view had taken hold in the White House that uncontrolled spread was inevitable and we weren't going to be able to do much to mitigate it. And I just don't believe that's true.

But there were also political shortcomings at the agency levels, too. We didn't get the operations of HHS together in a more coordinated way to try to mount a better response. So for example, CDC and FDA needed to be working together, and the NIH, early on. And that just wasn't done. And I talk a lot about that in the book. The lack of coordination between the different components of government that had to be working together. And that wasn't necessarily going to be directed by the White House. It had to be directed at a level below the White House.

BROWN: It's interesting, I covered the White House at the time, and I remember one White House official cavalierly saying to me, and this was around the time that President Trump was pushing for -- then President Trump was pushing for schools to reopen. They said, well, we just need to get kids back in the class because, I mean, everyone is going to get this virus at some point or another, and it's just going to spread wildly, and there's no way to contain it.

And I just remember that sticking with me, how kind of casual they were about that, what you just pointed out as one of the issues that you didn't believe was actually true. I'm curious as you try to figure out where do this virus came from, because that is important in preventing another pandemic, right? What do you think about the origins? Has your thinking on that evolved whether it came from nature or a lab?

GOTTLIEB: Yes, look, I don't know that we're going to have a definitive answer to this question, just a battle of competing narratives. I think overtime the side of the ledger that points in the direction of this coming out of a lab has probably grown. We've had more circumstantial evidence certainly that suggests this could have come out of the lab. And the side of the ledger that says that this came out of nature, out of a so-called zoonotic source, really hasn't evolved, it hasn't grown.

If anything it's been diminished by the fact that we've, for example, proven that the wet market in Wuhan wasn't a source of spread, it was just a stop along the virus' path through that country. I think the bottom-line question, though, is the one you raised, which is, if we assess that there is a probability this came out of a lab, it changes how we look at high-security labs, so-called BSL-4 labs and how we look at high-end research all across the world.

And I think it's going to require us to get our intelligence agencies, as I talk about in the book, more engaged in the public health mission overseas, trying to monitor for these kinds of threats and getting better international governors around the research that could lead to things coming out of labs, like so-called gain-of-function research. And it's not clear that this is a result of a gain-of-function research. But we knew that creates risk, and if we assess that this could have come out of a lab, we're going to need to do a whole lot better getting a handle on what's going on in these high-end labs around the world where these risks are being created.

BROWN: As you can imagine, there's a lot of viewer questions, and I want to round out with a couple of questions from our viewers. One asks, and I'm curious about this personally, too. How can the Biden administration help make low-cost or free rapid testing widely available? What is the step-by-step approach to get it done?

GOTTLIEB: Yes, look, there's a lot of tests in the market place right now, point of case test, but they're not the tests that consumers want. Consumers want a test that can give you a rapid result be easily performed inside the home and don't necessarily require the result to be reported, that they give you discretion to report the results or manage the results of the tests and they're not overnight tests, so things like the Binax test from Abbott.

I think the administration could be doing more to subsidize the provision of these tests, particularly the lower income communities, people who work in essential jobs who might not be able to afford repeated tests. Right now Binax is $25 for a package of two tests. If you're going to be using that to do serial testing, testing yourself two, three times a well, that's still unaffordable to a lot of Americans.

And so I think people who are in more vulnerable groups, who are more likely to come into contact with the virus or have people at home that they want to protect, we could be doing a much better job of making those available.

[18:25:02]

England is making tests available. They're literally shipping tests directly to consumers. I think in certain programs like Medicaid, we could be doing that.

BROWN: And one last viewer question for you, can I get a booster and a flu shot at the same time?

GOTTLIEB: There is data looking at co-administration. Right now they're recommending to space those apart, but there are studies underway looking at co-administration of those vaccines and also looking at co-administration of the COVID vaccine with the pneumonia vaccine.

BROWN: All right. Dr. Scott Gottlieb, thank you so much for your time tonight. We really appreciate it. Great conversation.

GOTTLIEB: Thanks a lot.

BROWN: Two big questions on Capitol Hill this week, will President Biden's economic agenda move forward in Congress, and will there be any movement in the January 6th investigation?

A critical voice on both topics, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren is our guest, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:21]

BROWN: Federal transportation investigators are now on the scene of a deadly Amtrak derailment in north-central Montana. And they're looking for what caused eight cars of the passenger train to leave the tracks. Look at this video. Three people were killed, seven others hospitalized tonight. This woman was traveling in the second car.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANDERVEST: It was probably 10 or 15 seconds of rocking back and forth and tons of noise, and then we came to a stop. It was kind of like extreme turbulence on an airplane, but like louder, and there was kind of a lot of smoke smell.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Amtrak released a statement today on behalf of its CEO, while saying they're fully cooperating with the investigation, the statement added, quote, "We have no words that can adequately express our sorrow for those who lost a loved one or who were hurt in this horrible event. They are in our thoughts and prayers."

Well, Nancy Pelosi blinks, Joe Biden bluster. Just minutes ago, the president voiced confidence in his infrastructure bill passing despite infighting among his fellow Democrats.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'm optimistic about this week. It's going to take the better part of the week, I think.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Earlier, the House speaker backed off her vow to hold a vote tomorrow on the president's massive infrastructure bill. The reason it would almost certainly fail because of progressive lawmakers in her own party. Their demands tied to the president's larger $3.5 trillion signature spending package. And the bottom line of the Democrats infighting, both bills are now in danger of collapsing, and that would push the nation closer to a government shutdown and potential economic crisis.

Melanie Zanona joins us from Capitol Hill.

Top Democrats have spent this weekend trying to broker a compromise to win enough votes for both bills. Where do things stand right now, Melanie?

MELANIE ZANONA, CNN CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT: Well, as for this evening, Pam, Democrats do not have the votes for either the bipartisan infrastructure bill or their massive economic bill. Just take a listen to what some of the key players had to say earlier this morning about that bipartisan infrastructure bill.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): Let me just say we're going to pass the bill this week. I promised that we would bring the bill to the floor that was according to the language that those who wanted this to brought to the floor tomorrow wrote into the rule, we'll bring the bill to the floor tomorrow for consideration. But, you know, I'm never bringing a bill to the floor that doesn't have the votes.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: But Pelosi says that she's bringing the infrastructure bill, the bipartisan bill, to the floor of the House tomorrow for consideration. Are you going to vote for it or against it?

REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): I don't believe there will be a vote. I mean, the speaker --

TAPPER: You don't think there's going to be a vote tomorrow?

JAYAPAL: I mean, the speaker is an incredibly good vote counter, and she knows exactly where her caucus stands. And we've been really clear on that, too.

TAPPER: The votes aren't there? She's not going to get --

JAYAPAL: The votes aren't there.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

ZANONA: So, look, Democratic leaders are clearly trying to show a sense of confidence, they're trying to show progress on this bill. They are insistent that they are going to be able to muscle both of these bills through the House this week, but the reality is there are still a host of unresolved issues on the economic bill, from price tag to policy, and another complicating factor is that House Democrats don't want to put a bill on the floor that's ultimately going to be pared back or dramatically changed once it gets to the Senate.

So they're trying to pre-negotiate all of these issues, and Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are in no rush to negotiate, so it's very hard that that economic bill is going to be ready for a floor vote this week.

I think the big question comes down to whether progressives are convinced enough that there is progress, that they will be willing to vote for the infrastructure bill. Pelosi is going to meet with her caucus in person at 5:30 p.m. tomorrow to try to make her pitch in person, and some moderates do believe that when push comes to shove, these progressives are not going to be willing to tank a key Biden priority on the floor, but all of that remains to be seen, not to mention Congress is also trying to fund the government by Thursday at midnight and avoid a default on the nation's debt by sometime mid- October.

So it is going to be a jampacked week on Capitol Hill and one that is going to test the leadership of both Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden -- Pam.

BROWN: A high stakes week no doubt on Capitol Hill. I know you'll be following all of this for us. Melanie Zanona, thank you so much.

And now I want to bring in Democratic Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren of California. She's a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Speaker Pelosi clearly got the message that House Progressives are not bluffing, Congresswoman. Are you willing to let both bills fail this week?

REP. ZOE LOFGREN (D-CA): No, personally I'm not.

[18:35:01]

Both bills are part of President Biden's vision for the United States, and I would say almost all of the Democrats share that vision. You're seeing the sausage making now. We have to reach compromise. I've been in Congress quite some time now and I'm used to this fact. I don't get my way 100 percent of the time. We have to compromise and move forward for the good of the country and I'm confident we'll do that.

BROWN: So if the House Speaker Pelosi brings the infrastructure bill forward for a vote tomorrow, would you vote for it, in favor of it?

LOFGREN: I would vote for it. And I will also vote for the second infrastructure bill. They're both essential. I mean, when you think about the deteriorating bridges, that's important. But when you think about the childcare system where huge segments of the providers have simply disappeared, mothers can't go back to work. I mean, we have to address the entire picture in order to have a prosperous, successful country. We need both bills.

BROWN: So let's talk about, then, the second one, the $3.5 trillion one as it stands now. Moderates say they will only support the spending bill if the price tag is reduced. Progressives have said that's a nonstarter, yet Speaker Pelosi said this morning that it is, quote, self-evident that the final bill will be smaller than $3.5 trillion. Would you vote for a smaller reconciliation bill?

LOFGREN: Well, obviously I need to know what would be in it. But, again, this is a matter of compromise. What elements do so-called conservative Dems want to take out of it? Do they want to take out the childcare funding? Do they want to take out pre-kindergarten? I mean, what is it that they would like to remove? And I think if we stop talking just about the dollar amounts, because we can fully pay for this. It doesn't have to -- I mean, this is $3.5 trillion over 10 years, and when you think about it --

BROWN: But it's the largest spending package in history, right?

LOFGREN: It's big. It's transformational but when you think that we spent $5.3 trillion on COVID in the last three months, that does put this in some kind of perspective. So we'll move forward on this, and I think it will make a big difference in the lives for regular Americans. It's going to be a big deal.

BROWN: So how worried are you, then? Because we have these bills and then this looming government shutdown. How worried are you about a government shutdown this week and the much more serious threat of a federal debt default if congressional action isn't taken?

LOFGREN: Well, obviously, we need to fund the government. The House already approved a measure last week to keep the government going and to suspend the debt ceiling, which is a phony thing. We should just get rid of it. I mean, it's about living up to what the Constitution requires us to do, which is have the debts -- have a full faith in credit of the United States.

We need to do that, and the Republicans in the Senate need to at least let the Democrats vote to do that. If they try -- if Mitch McConnell thinks defaulting on the debt is something that is going to bring him accolades, he's very mistaken. I think Democrats are very prepared to cast the responsible vote, but the Republicans at least have to let them do that.

BROWN: Just very quickly before I switch to another topic. You said that you would vote for the infrastructure bill if House Speaker Pelosi brings it to the floor tomorrow. Given what you know from talking to other progressives, do you think she has enough votes right now if she brought it to the House floor tomorrow that it would pass?

LOFGREN: Well, she's the best vote counter in the Capitol, so I'll trust her judgment on that.

BROWN: OK. Congresswoman, I do want to talk about the fact that you're a member of the select committee investigating the January 6th attack on the Capitol. And is -- the question is, is that panel prepared to go to the Justice Department seeking criminal charges when the inevitable, the former Trump advisers being subpoenaed refused to testify?

LOFGREN: Well, first, we want to give them the benefit of the doubt that they will respond as they should to this subpoena. They're required to respond, and let's assume that they do. If they don't, I think we're prepared to take all of the steps available to us, which include civil action and criminal action. So we need --

BROWN: There is a possibility you would go to DOJ if they didn't show up?

LOFGREN: All of the available options will be ones that we will consider.

[18:40:00]

BROWN: And do you expect to issue more subpoenas in the near future, including for White House records?

LOFGREN: That is possible. As you know, the archives have a process. We sent a request for quite a large amount of documents and material, and they're in the middle of that process now. We have more requests pending. We have a lot of requests out, and so, yes, this is a very active investigation.

BROWN: Just very quickly, can you give us a window into those other requests that will be going out?

LOFGREN: Not at this point. We have people who want to come in and talk to us, people who want to come in but they would prefer to be subpoenaed, people who may be a little bit recalcitrant that may need a subpoena. It's all over the board, and we have already received a very large amount of documents that we're vigorously sifting through. So there is a lot going on.

BROWN: OK. Well, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, I hope that you will continue to come on the show and keep us updated on what is going on with that select committee. Thank you so much for your time tonight.

LOFGREN: Any time.

BROWN: And tonight, the memorial for Gabby Petito and the hunt for her fiance. We are live at both scenes up next. The search for Brian Laundrie continues as the Petito family mourns.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETITO: The entire planet knows this woman's name. She's inspired a lot of women and a lot of men to do what's best for them first. Put yourself first. And do it now while you have the time. I couldn't be more proud as a father.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [18:46:15]

BROWN: And Gabby Petito's loved ones gathered this afternoon in New York today to say goodbye as the search for her fiance continues. A long procession of mourners entered the public memorial service near the town of Blue Point where she grew up. This comes exactly one week after her remains were found near a campground in Wyoming. As law enforcement search for her fiance, $30,000 in rewards are being offered for tips to his whereabouts.

CNN's Nadia Romero is following the search in Florida and Alison Kosik is in the Holbrook, New York, where the memorial service for Petito just ended.

Alison, tell us about the service.

ALISON KOSIK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Pamela, an emotional day for hundreds who came out today to Gabby Petito's memorial and really the outpouring shows just how much the 22-year-old's story has resonated not just here in this community of Holbrook on Long Island, but across the country and around the world.

This memorial lasted five hours and there was always a line. In fact, at one point the line snaked around the building and some people had to wait more than an hour just to go through, and see inside, and many people didn't even know Gabby personally. Her father and her stepfather both gave -- each gave moving eulogies today. I spoke with some mourners who talked about the heartbreak.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LIZ, GABBY PETITO'S GREAT AUNT: It's just so heartbreaking what happened to her, and we loved her and we know that she's at peace right now. She's a beautiful, beautiful soul. You could see it. Why do you think all of this is happening? She was a beautiful soul, she's a beautiful person.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want to show the Petito family lots of love and let them know they're surrounded by people who love them and care for Gabby.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

KOSIK: The funeral home even broadcast a livestream of the memorial where people from all around the world said their condolences, from the U.K. to Germany to Australia, and the funeral director tell me that even people from Texas, California and Florida came here because they felt connected to Gabby's story -- Pamela.

BROWN: Thank you so much, Alison. And let's go now to Nadia Romero and the search for Petito's fiance.

Nadia, what's the latest?

NADIA ROMERO, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Pamela, perhaps the most active we've seen throughout the entire weekend happened earlier today right in front of Brian Laundrie's family right on the doorstep. Two FBI agents came, gathered something and put it away in a paper bag. And it looked a lot like the evidence bags that they used during that second search warrant a week ago.

So this is something that we've seen over the past couple of days, FBI agents or police officers on the street and interacting with the family. And they've done so a few times now. Not too far from here is the Carlton Reserve, and that's where Brian Laundrie's family says he went last Tuesday and they haven't seen or heard from him since, but we didn't see too much activity outside of the reserve over the past two days.

There was supposed to be a resumed search for Brian Laundrie there. We're talking about 25,000 acres of swampland full of alligators and snakes, so that would be a treacherous search effort that was supposed to resume over the weekend. You obviously heard about the memorial from Alison that happened in New York, and for the first time in about two weeks, we heard from Gabby Petito's mother saying thank you to all of the people who reached out to her.

This is what she posted on Facebook. She says, "As I scroll through all the posts, my heart is full of love. I wish I could reach out and hug each and every one of you. Your support has been so overwhelming and we are so filled with gratitude."

And Pamela, we know that Gabby Petito's family, they believe that Brian Laundrie has the answers to all of their questions -- Pamela.

BROWN: All right. Nadia Romero, Alison Kosik, thank you both.

[18:50:01]

Well, tonight, a brand-new documentary premiers right here on CNN. It's called "TOXIC: BRITNEY SPEARS' FIGHT FOR FREEDOM." And the film dives into Britney's decades-long conservatorship battle and includes new revelations about how the arrangement controlled nearly every aspect of her life.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: There were reports that on the Circus tour she couldn't read certain books. She couldn't have a cell phone. Is that true?

DAN GEORGE, SPEARS' PROMOTIONAL TOUR MANAGER 2008-2009: Yes. Yes.

CAMEROTA: What books couldn't she read?

GEORGE: She could only read Christian books.

CAMEROTA: Says who?

GEORGE: Her father.

CAMEROTA: She couldn't have a cell phone. GEORGE: At times she did have a cell phone. Her phone was monitored.

The text messages were read. The call logs were there. I don't know whether or not calls were recorded. But the use of a phone was very tightly controlled.

CAMEROTA: CNN cannot independently confirm these allegations. Britney says her doctors and therapists were also carefully controlled.

GEORGE: The conservatorship dictated to her who her doctors were going to be, which doctors she was going to see, how often she was going to see them. How long those sessions would be. Every aspect of her medical care, and not just her medical care was extremely, extremely controlled.

CAMEROTA: As was who she could see.

GEORGE: Who she could date, who she could be friends with was very, very tightly controlled.

CAMEROTA: The conservatorship told her who she could be friends with.

GEORGE: Yes.

CAMEROTA: Why?

GEORGE: I think there was a concern that a third party might introduce something to the mix that without be detrimental to the overall structure that was restoring order in her life. And I think the conservatorship did a good job of doing that in the beginning.

CAMEROTA: Meaning, they were trying to keep out the rift raft or they were trying to make sure they were protecting the bottom line, and this commodity could keep performing.

GEORGE: Yes. Well, she was treated as more of an object than a human.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Tonight's premiere is days ahead of Britney's big day in court when her conservatorship could be terminated for good after 13 years.

CNN's Chloe Melas is one of the reporters behind tonight's special.

Chloe, what's the most shocking thing you learned through this?

CHLOE MELAS, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Pamela. Thanks for having me. Well, you know, I think that the most eye-opening part of this entire investigation that Alison Camerota and I did for the last several months was just Britney's life when the conservatorship began and all of the restrictions that have been put into place. You know, the fact that she really -- you know, we heard her in her emotional testimony this summer that she hasn't been able to come and go, she hasn't been able to drive her car.

She says she hasn't been able to travel when she wanted to, get married, have a baby. And we also take you inside the day actually before her June 23rd emotional testimony when she actually called 911 and we have journalist Ronan Farrow talking about that. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RONAN FARROW, CONTRIBUTING REPORTER, THE NEW YORKER: There were frantic texts being exchanged by prominent people within her management and her team debating what was going to happen and what to do about it.

MELAS: Britney actually went to the police station near her house hours before the hearing and spoke to 911 dispatchers from a lobby phone, reporting herself a victim of conservatorship abuse. Shortly after, officers met with Britney at her home.

FARROW: There was a concerted effort to create a record of her complaints and she wanted to begin to establish that she believed that something illegal was happening here and indeed that is what she said the next day that, you know, she felt people involved in maintaining this conservatorship should go to jail.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

MELAS: Pamela, we are going to have people who have never spoken out before, people who used to work with Britney, friends of Britney, and we're also going to speak to members of the Free Britney Movement that are responsible for that hash tag FreeBritney that we all have seen on posters and signs, especially outside not only online but in front of the Los Angeles County Superior Courthouse.

And, you know, we spoke to them about their emotional connection to Britney and why they have, you know, put their own lives on hold while they have been fighting this battle on her behalf, you know, many of them never having met Britney before, the majority of them. They have day jobs, they have kids, they have families.

And then we're also going to show you that this is already made its way to Capitol Hill. There are congressional representatives looking to pass legislation to make sure that there is more oversight over conservatorships.

So, Pamela, in an hour we're going to take you from the beginning and get you to where we are now and hopefully answer a lot of questions.

BROWN: It's insane. It's one of the few issues on Capitol Hill where lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have come together and said they want this to be addressed.

MELAS: Yes.

BROWN: I'm really looking forward to seeing this, Chloe. Thank you so much for bringing us a little sneak peek into it.

MELAS: Thank you.

[18:55:01]

BROWN: And the CNN Special Report "TOXIC: BRITNEY SPEARS' BATTLE FOR FREEDOM" airs tonight at 8:00 Eastern only on CNN.

Well, the government could be days from shutting down and two key parts of President Biden's agenda could fall if divided Democrats don't come together. Congresswoman Debbie Dingell joins me up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: As COVID cases fall are we at the beginning of the end, or just bracing for another winter surge?