Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Vaccine Rollout Strategy; Democrats Under Pressure on Capitol Hill. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired September 29, 2021 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. Thanks for joining me on NEWSROOM. I'm Alisyn Camerota. Victor is off today.

Neither side wants to blink. A source tells CNN that is the state of negotiations on Capitol Hill right now. Democrats are trying to make progress on those two major bills, one on infrastructure, the other on the social safety net.

But neither side seems willing to bend. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she plans to hold a vote for that bipartisan infrastructure package tomorrow, and she says she will do it even if the larger bill to expand the social safety net is not fully buttoned up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I think that, if we come to a place where we have agreement in legislative language, not just principle, in legislative language, that the president supports, has to meet his standard, because that's what we are supporting, then that I think we will come together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: OK, but here is key moderate Senator Joe Manchin just a couple of hours ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And she said that they need by tomorrow legislative language agreed to. That means...

SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): That won't happen. That won't happen.

RAJU: That won't happen? Why is that?

MANCHIN: Well, listen, we're not -- we haven't been negotiating in good faith. No one has been negotiating along those lines with the other party to see what would be acceptable.

(CROSSTALK)

MANCHIN: All we need to do is pass the bipartisan infrastructure bill, sit down and start negotiating in good faith. That's it. (END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Now, progressive Democrats are warning they will vote against that bipartisan infrastructure deal unless they get that bigger social spending package. Moderate Democrats want those two things done separately.

With us now to make sense of all of this, CNN congressional correspondent Ryan Nobles and CNN chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins.

Ryan, will this vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill really happen tomorrow?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's becoming increasingly unlikely, Alisyn. And that's just based on the people that we're talking to up here on Capitol Hill and the parameters that they are laying out in order to make it happen.

And you heard the House speaker earlier today say that she would need to see some specific legislative language that the president himself has bought into. House progressives are taking it even a step further. They actually want to see the bill passed in the United States Senate, which certainly isn't going to happen before tomorrow.

In fact, just a few minutes ago, I caught up with Pramila Jayapal, she of course, the chair of the Progressive Caucus. That's that band of progressive lawmakers that have held firm on their desire not to vote for the bipartisan bill until they get that broader social safety net spending.

This is what she told me just a few minutes ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): There's always enough time on Capitol Hill. You know how it goes here. I mean, things get to this point. And I'm pretty calm and sanguine about it because I have seen it happen over and over again, where things get to a point and then, all of a sudden, things become possible that no one thought was possible.

That said, I think it's pretty difficult, because what we have called for is a vote in the Senate. And I have spoken to the speaker about this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOBLES: So you heard Jayapal say that anything's possible on Capitol Hill, and there could be some sort of a breakthrough.

But she made it very clear that it's going to be difficult. And she took it even a step further and said the reasons behind why she thinks a vote in the Senate is necessary. She feels in many ways that moderates were the first ones to break this deal of passing both of these pieces of legislation at the same time. Therefore, her progressive colleagues can't trust that, if they do

have some sort of a deal, that it will actually come to fruition. At this point. Alisyn, they are holding firm. And that's one of the big reasons it seems unlikely at this point that we will see a vote on that bipartisan bill as soon as tomorrow -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK, Kaitlan, meanwhile, the other key moderate, Kyrsten Sinema, just wrapped up her fourth, I believe, meeting at the White House in the space of two days.

What's coming out of these meetings?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Alisyn, this meeting actually happened on the hill.

But, yes, you're right. This is the fourth meeting the White House has held with her, which, of course, obviously speaks to the level of importance that they're applying to these conversations, because they know what she will support is going to come down to a lot of how all of this shakes out, in addition, of course, to Senator Manchin, who you heard there rejecting what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called for, which is to get that legislative agreement by tomorrow.

And that legislative agreement would obviously include a top-line number. And that has been what President Biden and his aides have been talking about as they are negotiating with Senator Sinema with Senator Manchin, these two key moderate holdouts.

And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has indicated to her caucus that Biden is the one taking the lead when it comes to negotiating that top-line number. But, so far, he is not convinced either Manchin or Sinema to come out and say publicly what's the number that they're going to get behind.

And I think to speak to the level of the White House saying that progress is being made in these many meetings that they are happy having with Manchin and with Sinema is that neither of them have said that publicly when you ask them and they get back to Capitol Hill about what kind of progress was made.

[14:05:08]

President Biden even canceled a planned trip that he had to Chicago right now because they felt like he needed to stay back here, given the level of sensitivity around these discussions.

And so it's not maintaining the moderates. It's also talking about -- talking to the progressives about what their concerns are, given they are the ones who are threatening to tank the bill if it comes for a vote tomorrow, that bipartisan infrastructure bill, because they want these commitments from Sinema and from Manchin first.

So we are waiting to hear from the press secretary, Jen Psaki, in just a few moments. We will see if she has an update on the status of these talks. But, right now, President Biden is really just trying to keep it together when it comes to his economic agenda, at the chance that these warring factions in his own party could threaten him.

CAMEROTA: And then, Ryan, all of this, of course, is set against the backdrop of a potential government shutdown tomorrow night.

Is there progress being made on that?

NOBLES: Yes, there really is. Alisyn. At this point, it seems as though the fact that they have separated those two big deadlines that are appear on Capitol Hill, the government spending portion and the debt ceiling, those are now two separate pieces of legislation, it seems as though they have enough time between now and midnight on Thursday to extend a continuing resolution that will keep the government open.

The debt ceiling is a bigger fight that they're essentially going to kick down the road until the middle of October. The House will vote on a debt ceiling piece of legislation earlier today. But all of the legislative leaders here, both Republican and Democrat, seem pretty confident that they will be able to keep the government open ahead of that deadline Thursday night.

CAMEROTA: OK, Ryan Nobles, Kaitlan Collins, we know things change by the hour. Thank you very much for the latest.

With us now to discuss, CNN political analyst Seung Min Kim. She's a White House reporter for "The Washington Post." And CNN White House correspondent John Harwood.

Great to have both of you.

Seung Min, just explain, how is it possible that senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, or Manchema, as is their new pet name, according to Politico, how are they negotiating if they won't articulate their terms, if they won't give a number that they're comfortable with or what they want in or out of this bigger $3.5 trillion spending reconciliation package? How is that a negotiation?

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, you have just expressed some of the frustrations that are coming out of a lot of the corners in the Democratic Party right now, because while progressives may not see eye to eye on policy with senators Manchin and Sinema, they at least want the two moderates to give them something, give them a framework, so the moderate -- or so the progressives can say, OK, we can work with this, we can actually start this negotiation in public to try to get to a place where everybody in the party is in a good place.

But a lot of these discussions or most of these really important discussions are being done in private. You have Senator Sinema, meeting with key White House officials in her office this morning, Senator Manchin and Sinema meeting with President Biden yesterday at the White House, and they're being very mum about what exactly their asks are, what their concerns are, and yes, certainly what their top lines are.

And the issue with -- one of the issues overall is that, at least on that broader $3.5 trillion reconciliation package, Senators Manchin and Sinema don't feel any urgency to get that done timing-wise, as of this point.

You hear a lot of progressives, Senator Bernie Sanders, expressing some frustration to us this morning about the need to get that legislation done as expeditiously as possible. But for those two moderate holdouts, time is not of the urgency right now. And they want to take their time. They want to pore over the details and study the rationale for these policies before they commit to an overall agreement in public.

CAMEROTA: So, John, is that the sticking point? I mean, do they just need more time? Would they be able to reach some sort of agreement with the progressives if they just had more time? And is Nancy Pelosi rushing this too much?

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I'm not sure it's a matter of time. Alisyn.

I think it's more a matter of finally getting in a room and getting pretty specific. Now, as Seung Min indicated, reporters, those of us covering this, do not know what their top line is. Other Democrats on the Hill don't know what their top line is. But President Biden probably knows a little bit more about where they're headed than we do.

You don't have five meetings with senators over the course of a couple of days if you don't think you have got some chance of making progress. And senior administration officials are telling me, we do think we have a shot, even more than a shot perhaps, at, by the end of the week, getting an understanding with Manchin and Sinema that we can use to bridge these gaps between moderates and progressives in the House on the infrastructure bill.

Don't know what the timing of all that will be in terms of a vote. As Ryan indicated in the segment before us, it's not likely that that vote is going to happen tomorrow, but it's a matter of finally forcing these senators to provide some information that would allow a deal to be struck.

[14:10:02]

Don't know if that is going to be struck by the end of the week or even next week, but they do seem to be moving forward incrementally.

CAMEROTA: Seung Min, one of the things that progressives feel is that they have been fooled before, that they have negotiated in good faith on things that they think the public really wants and needs, voting rights, police reform, only to have it all fall apart at the end.

So now they think they have leverage and they don't want to give up on it. But one of the moderates, Congressman Josh Gottheimer, was on with our friend John Berman on "NEW DAY," and he was explaining what he thinks is the sort of that foolhardy position.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. JOSH GOTTHEIMER (D-NJ): You don't hold up and not vote for an infrastructure package that's historic, once-in-a-century, that will help fix everything from water to broadband to fighting climate change to the Gateway tunnel between New York and New Jersey, you don't hold that up and hold it hostage while we're working on another piece of legislation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: So that raises the question, if this falls apart, will progressives be blamed?

KIM: It's hard to see. Well, it's hard to see right now who will get the blame at the end of the day, because a lot of this, remember, just stems from a simple fact that members of the own party -- members of the same party, moderates and progressives, do not trust each other.

This is why progressives felt that they had to use that bipartisan infrastructure package as basically leverage to get their broader $3.5 trillion package done, and how moderates are -- had to force Speaker Pelosi into setting a deadline of this week to vote on the infrastructure package.

So there's a lot of distrust right now in the Democratic Caucus. If this does fall apart, I think blame will be on many corners of the Democratic Party. But you're right. There is so much frustration right now with a lot of President Biden and the party's priorities basically being foiled, primarily in the Senate, because of that filibuster, because of the 60 votes that are needed to pass any major legislation.

And that's why, with this infrastructure package, progressives felt they at least had a little bit of leverage by holding back that bipartisan package. But we see a lot of the problems that are causing the Democratic Party right now because of that agreement.

CAMEROTA: So, John, what exactly is President Biden doing now? Is he listening? Is he actually actively negotiating? What's his role in this?

HARWOOD: I think what he's trying to do is draw out these two senators to figure out, OK, here's the package we have laid out, here's how much it costs, here's how he would we would raise the money to pay for it. Let's talk piece by piece about what you have an objection to and what you don't.

And as you tease that out, you can, over time, if you get to enough specifics, you can create a top line. Seung Min is right. There's a lot of mistrust within factions of the party. However, keep in mind that the binding agent that -- in the end that the White House is counting on and that Democratic leaders are counting on is, we have a very polarized political system with two parties.

All these Democrats, the people who are negotiating, are all part of the same party. If they have a shared interest, a common interest in terms of their values, the things that they're for, in terms of their electoral fortunes, that is what the argument that ultimately will rule the day or not rule the day.

That is, are we all in this together? Are we all going to go down in the 2022 elections? Are we going to get something done that we all believe in? If you're a member of that team, at the end of the day, they're going to count on you to be with them.

What we don't know yet is to what degree Manchin and Sinema actually consider themselves part of that team. Joe Manchin is a Democrat from a state that Trump won by 40 points. So he's got particular ideological concerns. Kyrsten Sinema is a state Biden carried. Does she really want to be on this team? We're going to find out.

CAMEROTA: Seung Min Kim, John Harwood, thank you both very much for the analysis.

OK, now to this. A new study calls into question the strategy behind the coronavirus vaccination rollout.

Plus, the NBA gives unvaccinated players an ultimatum: Get the shot or pay a price.

And could today finally be the day that Britney Spears is freed from her conservatorship? She is hours away from that consequential court hearing. We will tell you some of the possible outcomes next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:18:37]

CAMEROTA: For the first time since June, the CDC predicts that the number of new COVID-19 deaths are likely to decrease over the next four weeks.

And a new study just out moments ago is highlighting racial and ethnic disparities in deaths that may have been exacerbated by that age-based rollout of the coronavirus vaccine. Researchers found that people who are 65 and older have about the same COVID mortality risk as people of color who are 10 to 15 years younger.

Joining us now to break all this down is CNN senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen.

So what does this mean, Elizabeth?

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Alisyn, when you think back to the vaccine rollout at the beginning of this year, priority was given to certain groups, certain groups that were at higher risk for getting COVID-19 and having terrible complications, getting very sick or dying from COVID-19.

So, age in many ways made sense. What these researchers are pointing out, though, is that race also matters. A black person, for example, who is much younger could have a similar risk of a white person who is much older, because, as we know, COVID-19 disproportionately affected people of color. So these researchers took a look at California and Minnesota. And they

thought, gee, what would have happened if everyone over age 75 had been vaccinated? How would that have helped white people? How would that have helped black people?

So let's take a look at the numbers for California. So, what the researcher said is that, if everyone 75 years of age and older in California had been vaccinated, that would have prevented 65 percent of deaths for white people. For black people, it only would have prevented 33 percent of deaths.

[14:20:18]

In other words, prioritizing by age, they said, disproportionately helped white people and it actually harmed black people. It didn't help black people as much. So, their thought is maybe there ought to be other factors taken into account here, factors, for example, that account for race -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK, Elizabeth Cohen, thank you for that.

Joining us now, public health specialists and primary care physician Dr. Saju Mathew.

Doctor, thanks so much for being here.

Let's just talk about that for a second. I mean, does that mean that the age-based rollout, which I think was trying to get as many people vaccinated as possible as quickly as possible, does that -- was that a mistake?

DR. SAJU MATHEW, PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIAN AND PUBLIC HEALTH SPECIALIST: Yes, hi, Alisyn.

No, actually, I don't think it was a mistake. I mean, we're learning more and more about this virus as we continue to kind of get into the midst of this pandemic. Listen, age is such a huge basis for us in medicine. When we look at a patient's risk factor for heart disease, for cancer, we always look at your age.

And the older you are, unfortunately, yes, the truth is, your risk for disease and even COVID becomes more severe. I think what the study shows is what we have known all along. Alisyn, I did a fellowship at the CDC eight years ago. And we looked at health disparities in African-Americans compared to the white population.

And to begin with, there's always been a health disparity. It's just that now COVID has unmasked that health disparity to show that, if you're African-American, you're three times as likely to be hospitalized and at least twice as likely to die.

So, we need to look at more than age. We need to look at racial factors and demographics.

CAMEROTA: You brought up the CDC. And I want to go to some new polling that shows that trust in the CDC and the information that it's putting out there, as well as trust in what President Biden is putting out there, is going down.

But let me just show you the CDC first. This says, do you trust the CDC to provide accurate COVID-19 info? Back in December of 2020, 74 percent of respondents in this Axios/Ipsos poll said yes. Now it's 64 percent. In terms of President Biden, in January of this year, 58 percent trusted him. Now it's down to 45 percent.

Is that just because what we know about COVID-19 and the vaccine keeps changing, or do they have a messaging problem?

MATHEW: I mean, I think it's both.

Unfortunately, this pandemic, from the very beginning, Alisyn, has been politicized. And I think that's really what has introduced this whole toxic nature into the pandemic. If you really break it down to the basics, there's nothing political about this virus.

We have one enemy, and that is COVID-19. Democrats, Republicans, really the entire U.S. is really fighting against one enemy. And, of course, the guidelines change. This virus evolves. And as this virus evolves, we have to evolve.

What we knew two weeks ago may not necessarily be the truth next week. And I also think that people expect science to be all or nothing, black or white. And that's not true. As we get more information, the guidelines might change.

CAMEROTA: I want to bring up this Oxford University study about what we now know about so-called long COVID.

This is not a disease that you get it, like the flu, and four days later, you feel better, it turns out. One out of every three COVID-19 survivors experiences symptoms for three to six months after their infection, some much longer, as you know. And that includes breathing problems, abdominal symptoms, fatigue, anxiety, depression.

This is worse than we knew.

MATHEW: Yes, exactly.

And I think the take-home point from that particular study, which, by the way, included over 270,000 participants -- it's a large study -- it really shows what I see at work, which is, number one, long COVID is not only a problem in older people or people with severe COVID illness, people that have been hospitalized.

I am seeing young people. I just referred a 30-year-old to see a pulmonologist, a gastroenterologist and a psychiatrist. I have another 25-year-old healthy female, Alisyn, no medical problems at all. She is still suffering from COVID eight months later and is teaching herself how to use a fork and has difficulty articulating words.

So the bottom line is, you really need to get vaccinated because you don't want to get this virus in the first place.

CAMEROTA: Oh, it's -- what a story. I mean, and you cannot count on your age protecting you against this virus.

[14:25:03]

Dr. Saju Mathew, thank you very much.

MATHEW: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Well, the NBA has just announced that unvaccinated players on teams in cities with vaccine mandates will not be paid for games they are forced to miss because of those mandates.

Players on the New York Knicks, Brooklyn Nets and Golden State Warriors will be impacted by this. New York and San Francisco's vaccine policies do not apply to players from visiting teams competing in each city.

A source tells CNN that around 90 percent of all NBA players, though, are vaccinated.

Well, former President Trump repeatedly claimed that no president had been tougher on Russia than him, but details in a new tell-all book by former Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham reveal what he said secretly to Vladimir Putin.

We have the stunning details.

Plus, OK, a hearing on Britney Spears' conservatorship case is set to take place very soon. After 13 years, could this be the day it finally ends?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:30:00]