Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Tonight
Cost of Health Care; Cancer Controversy; Junk Food Lobby; What's Next?; Fort Hood Shooting Suspect
Aired November 18, 2009 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, the numbers are in, the massive Senate health care bill, a 10-year almost $850 billion price tag, 31 million more people covered. Is it worth the money? How will we pay for it? Can it ever become law?
Also, President Obama on the verge of a new war plan for Afghanistan. A decision on troop surge is imminent but what about the exit strategy? If we send more soldiers in, what's the plan to get them out?
And damming evidence, a memo on the suspected Fort Hood shooter has been found. Officials had serious concerns about Major Nidal Hasan. They say he was pushing Islam on his patients. Why wasn't anything done? Could the attack have been prevented?
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN TONIGHT. Live from New York, here now, John Roberts.
ROBERTS: And good evening, thanks for joining us.
The cost of care, the long-awaited price tag for the Senate health care bill came in late today and it's big. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the measure will cost $849 billion over 10 years and cut the deficit by almost 130 billion. The Democratic bill would make it mandatory for most Americans to have insurance. And 31 million people who currently are not covered would get insurance.
But there are serious questions tonight over how all of this would be paid for. Our senior congressional correspondent Dana Bash broke the news today. She's on Capitol Hill with the very latest -- hi, Dana.
DANA BASH, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi there, John. Well, the Democratic leadership literally moments ago just wrapped up a press conference talking about this bill, as you can imagine, extolling the virtues of this bill, talking about how they believe it is fiscally responsible and will go a long way to covering millions of Americans who don't have coverage.
But you know we do want to break down a little bit more of what we know because it is important to note that even at this hour, we are still waiting for the details of this bill. They are supposed to release it on the Web. It is not there yet, but let me go through a little bit of what we know.
First in the cost, you mentioned some of that, John. The estimated cost, we were told by Democratic -- by several Democratic sources at this point is $849 billion, they say, according to a preliminary estimate by the Congressional Budget Office it would reduce the deficit by $127 billion. Cover 94 percent of Americans and that would include 31 million people who are currently uninsured.
Let's go through some of the details of what we do know. And this is from senators who are coming out of a briefing that happened this evening and other sources. First of all, public option -- it would have a public option in it and would allow states to opt out of that public option. As you mentioned earlier there would be a mandate, individuals would have to get insurance coverage and face a penalty if they don't get it, most Americans, that is.
How would it be paid for? Well, in part a tax on high-cost insurance plans and also a little bit of new information on how this bill would be paid for, a new idea, I should say, it would increase the Medicare payroll tax for people who make over $250,000. Increase it just a little bit. But they believe that that would go a long way to raising revenue to pay for this bill.
So that's what we know right now. But it is very interesting, even at this late hour, 7:00 Eastern, we still do not have the actual bill. We're waiting for that to go on the Web any minute.
ROBERTS: On that Medicare payroll tax, I think 1.95 percent is the amount of increase. But they're staying away from any large income tax increase which is what the House has been considering.
BASH: Yes.
ROBERTS: Does Senator Reid have the 60 votes he needs here even to bring this to the floor for debate?
BASH: That is the open question because what that means, as you know, is that every single one of the senators who caucus with the Democrats who consider themselves effectively Democrats, they're going to have to vote yes. And there are three conservative Democrats, moderate Democrats from conservative states probably the best way to describe them -- Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Ben nelson of Nebraska and there you see Mary Landrieu in the middle there.
All of three of them have been reluctant to say that they will vote yes for various reasons even to start debate, so what happened earlier today was the Senate majority leader summoned all of them into his office before he briefed the broader Democratic caucus and tried to convince them that this is the right way to go. They came out of the caucus. They spoke to our own Ted Barrett (ph) and sounded positive. But it's still not entirely clear whether they will vote yes. If any one of them votes no, this whole bill could be sunk even before it starts -- John.
ROBERTS: So you can bet they will be the most popular people on Capitol Hill over the next couple of weeks... BASH: They already are, exactly.
ROBERTS: Dana Bash for us tonight -- Dana thanks so much.
BASH: Thank you.
ROBERTS: The Obama administration is disputing new controversial breast cancer guidelines to help clear up widespread confusion. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is telling women to keep doing what you're doing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, HHS SECRETARY: We want women to have a doctor, take the information but then have that conversation about your own health history what the risks are of having a mammogram versus the benefits. And make a determination based on an informed decision.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTS: Republicans wasted no time in blasting new guidelines for mammography and the administration as well, tying the controversy to the Democrats' health care plans.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MARSHA BLACKBURN (R), TENNESSEE: This is how rationing begins. This is the little toe in the edge of the water. And this is where you start getting a bureaucrat between you and your physician, and as we have gone through this health care debate over the past several months this is what we have warned about is once you get on that slippery slope.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTS: Let's run all this past our senior political correspondent Candy Crowley -- she is here with us now. And Candy, this tank force report with the new mammography guidelines seems to have blown up in the administration's face?
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SR. POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: It is. Suddenly it's quite toxic. And they're trying to get away from it. Why -- because they're in the middle of a health care battle, the end of which is by no means determined and what is one of the main things that Americans fear as they look to Washington to try to figure out what's going on -- is that there is going to be, quote, "a bureaucrat between you and your doctor", that somehow the doctor will have some interference in what he actually wants to do, so this fits into the whole narrative of the Republicans.
And it's also a problem because there is some call for one of these panels it has to do with Medicare, and it's not specifically on mammograms that it's written -- it was written into the Senate bills so we'll see if that survives. But it is the whole notion that there will be these panels that sort of say here is how we should treat this disease, and here is how we should treat that disease.
Now this is something that obviously they sent the HHS secretary out here today to say that's not what it is. You need to go. You need to go talk to your doctor. You need to keep doing what you're doing. And so it was very definitely a way for the administration to push back because it's very harmful for there to be anything out that would suggest to Americans that in fact these panels will set up sort of standards of care.
ROBERTS: You know, the administration today, trying to push back against all of this, said hey, that task force, that's not a White House task force. That's an independent task force, we had nothing to do with it...
CROWLEY: That's right. That's right. George Bush appointed all of those people. We don't know anything about that.
(CROSSTALK)
ROBERTS: But appearing today, Candy, with Wolf Blitzer, the secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius didn't exactly say we disagree with the recommendations.
CROWLEY: Exactly, she said in fact listen, you should do what you've been doing and you should talk this over with your doctor and see what your risks are, maybe you know suggesting that well maybe this would be good for some people and not good for other people. So they didn't say listen, this is just absolute not -- she said this is not federal policy. But federal policy basically right now is about Social Security.
I mean there certainly are no guidelines but they come from panels like this. So and they said this isn't a government entity, and it's not, but it's certainly under the umbrella of the government. And it is outside experts, doctors and such who are looking at these things and looking at some of the material they got from investigators.
And so nonetheless, it was set up by the government. It is something that they look to for guidance on these medical matters, and boy, they're trying to get as far away from this as they possibly can. And as I say, one of the things that the secretary said was well we didn't even -- we didn't appoint this panel, George Bush appointed this panel so they were backing up.
ROBERTS: And now some states are rushing to reassure women saying in our state it's law that you can have a mammogram at the age of 40, so...
CROWLEY: Right.
ROBERTS: ... creating a whole lot of confusion. Candy Crowley with us tonight -- Candy thanks so much. By the way, Candy is going to be back with us a bit later on for more on Sarah Palin's big kickoff to her book tour tonight and what Palin had to say to the crowds who were waiting for her. Well last night we reported on a deal the Obama administration made with the drug industry. Drug companies promised to keep drug costs down after the new health care legislation took effect. But in fact, before health care has even been passed, the industry is actually raising prices and raising them at an alarming rate.
Today, Senator Bill Nelson who represents a lot of seniors in the state of Florida called on the Department of Health and Human Services to investigate the situation and will offer an amendment that would force the drug industry to pay more of the bill.
Well the money being spent to influence the health care debate could make it the single most expensive legislative lobbying effort ever. Over $600 million so far, that's according to the Center for Responsive Politics which tracks all of this -- the big money has been spent on direct lobbying -- over $400 million -- a necessary evil, according to the health care industry.
Television advertising by health care interests is the next major chunk. That's almost $170 million. And political donations are also spiking. Health care companies have given $38 million to fund candidates in the midterm elections next year.
Well here's a question to ponder in all of this. What do Burger King and McDonald's have to do with the debate over health care? Lawmakers have been considering taxing some junk foods as a way to offset the cost of health care reform, so the fast food industry is spending big, almost $25 million lobbying to make sure that hamburgers, French fries and sodas stay nice and cheap. Louise Schiavone has that story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Thirsty? Have a soda, that's what your brain is telling you, says former Food and Drug Commissioner David Kessler.
DAVID KESSLER, FORMER FDA COMMISSIONER: The fact is that our brains, not only our brains but our children's brains are being hijacked. Our behavior is becoming conditioned and driven by all the fat, sugar and salt that's been put on every corner made available 24- 7 by the food industry.
SCHIAVONE: And that's why there are growing calls for taxation on foods that lead to obesity starting with sweet drinks. There's currently no such provision in the House or Senate health care reform bills and at Yale University, Kelly Brownell says 33 states tax soft drinks with little impact on consumption. He recommends a federal tax on sugar-sweetened drinks of a penny an ounce to deliver $15 billion in the first year alone which he says should be targeted to health programs.
KELLY BROWNELL, YALE UNIVERSITY RUDD CENTER: If there's any evidence to suggest that a tax would work it's how hard the soft drink industry is fighting this. They're lobbying extremely hard. SCHIAVONE: The food and beverage industry has spent $26.4 million on lobbying for the first three quarters of this year. The figure is from the Center for Responsive Politics. It's a significant increase from the roughly 21 million in lobbying dollars spent last year and about 15 million spent in 2007.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now we're hearing about a new tax on juice drinks and sodas. It's a tax that hurts families that can least afford it and it comes at the worst possible time.
SCHIAVONE: This ad comes from a coalition of beverage, food and agricultural industries among others who have tried to get ahead of the conversation before it becomes policy.
SUSAN NEELY, PRES., AMERICAN BEVERAGE ASSN.: And people don't want to pay one penny more on anything right now, particularly what they put in their grocery carts, so we're for solutions that will really work.
SCHIAVONE: People who care about their health, says the coalition should understand that calories consumed and calories burned in exercise need to cancel each other out.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: It's a touchy subject, and although President Obama told one interviewer earlier this year that a sin tax on soda should be explored. The White House says this is not a notion that the administration is currently pursuing -- John.
ROBERTS: Louise Schiavone for us tonight -- Louise thanks so much.
And we couldn't let this go unnoticed, we all know how expensive popcorn and soda is at the movie theater but you may not know the cost to your waistline. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (ph) tonight says it has the answer. The group analyzed how much fat and calories are in a medium sized popcorn from Regal, which is the country's largest movie chain. The results, an astonishing 1,160 calories and 60 grams of fat -- that is three days worth. Add a soda to the fix, and the combination is equal to eating three McDonald's quarter pounders plus 12 pats of butter. The calorie and fat count was far more than claimed by the movie theater company.
Coming up, what's next for Afghanistan? President Obama says his long-awaited new war plan will help us win the war but what is the exit strategy?
And were serious warnings about the suspected Fort Hood shooter ignored? A newly discovered Army memo reveals disturbing red flags raised about Major Nidal Hasan long before that massacre.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Hillary Clinton today made her first visit to Afghanistan as secretary of state. The secretary is there to attend the inauguration of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Clinton said that this is a critical moment for Karzai to demonstrate what kind of government he will lead. Karzai is under intense international pressure to clean up corruption in his government.
Well, a stable government in Afghanistan is critical for President Obama as he considers plans for U.S. forces there. And tonight, President Obama tells CNN he is close to a decision on troop levels. The president made the remarks on his Far East trip where he sat down with our senior White House correspondent Ed Henry.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ED HENRY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In the first hint of a timetable for U.S. troops in Afghanistan, the president told CNN, he wants most of them home before the end of his presidency.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My preference would be not to hand off anything to the next president. One of the things I'd like is the next president to be able to come in and say I've got a clean slate.
HENRY: On the firestorm over 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed being sent from Guantanamo to New York City, the president revealed he did not personally sign off on it.
OBAMA: I said to the attorney general make a decision based on the law. I think this notion that somehow we have to be fearful that these terrorists possess some special powers that prevent us from presenting evidence against them, locking them up and, you know, exacting swift justice, I think that has been a fundamental mistake.
HENRY (on camera): So that was his decision, but you'll take responsibility if it goes wrong?
OBAMA: I always have to take responsibility. That's my job.
HENRY (voice-over): The president also took responsibility for the sluggish economy when asked a CNN IReporter's question about why bailed out banks have not helped more small businesses and foreclosed families.
OBAMA: Look, I understand people's frustrations. The American people have gone through a very tough year. And you know and my job as president is to help navigate through this tough year. And, you know, people who don't have a job right now, people who have lost their home, you know, I'd be mad, too. And they expect me to do something about it.
HENRY: As for Sarah Palin's book...
(on camera): Are you going to read it?
OBAMA: You know, I probably won't.
HENRY (voice-over): Mr. Obama ducked a question about whether he thinks he and Palin will be candidates for president in 2012. When pressed, the president suggested he could live without running again.
(on camera): Do you envision a scenario where you don't run for reelection?
OBAMA: If I feel like I've made the very best decisions for the American people and three years from now I look at it and my poll numbers are in the tank and you know because we've gone through these wrenching changes, you know, politically I'm in a tough spot, I'll feel all right about myself.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HENRY: But in the next breath, the president sounded like someone who would relish taking his case to the American people in 2012, saying that he is taking on big issues like health care and Iran that have not borne fruit yet but he believes eventually they will and he'll be rewarded for that down the road. For now, the president is here in Seoul for a working lunch with President Li (ph), then they'll have a brief news conference before the president heads home. He's hoping to get some momentum here on the ground to restart those six- party talks to stop North Korea's nuclear program -- John.
ROBERTS: Ed Henry for us tonight -- Ed, thanks so much. We're going to have much more on the president and U.S. policy in Afghanistan, two leading experts on U.S./Afghan relations will join me here later on in the broadcast.
President Obama's Afghanistan policies is having an impact on his public approval ratings. Two new polls show a dip in the public's confidence over the war. Forty-three percent disapprove of the president's handling of the war according to a CBS News poll. That's a nine-point jump from just last month. A new "Washington Post"/ABC News poll also finds the public is apprehensive, 52 percent believe the war in Afghanistan is not worth fighting, but a majority do believe the president will ultimately choose a successful policy for Afghanistan.
New developments tonight in the investigation of Major Nidal Malik Hasan, the alleged gunman in the Fort Hood massacre -- National Public Radio has obtained an Army document from 2007 that is harshly critical of the major. The major's supervisor wrote in 2007 that Hasan showed a quote, "pattern of poor judgment and a lack of professionalism".
The memo, the very first evaluation from Hasan's record to surface was obtained by NPR correspondent Daniel Zwerdling. He's done extensive research into Major Hasan's background. And Daniel joins us now from our bureau in Washington. This Army memo, this evaluation of Hasan's performance, Daniel, it's quite damming?
DANIEL ZWERDLING, NPR CORRESPONDENT: And here's two things about that are especially striking. First of all, as you said, this is the first memo, the first thing we've had in writing that proves what reports have been saying based on anonymous sources over the past week. That Hasan's supervisors felt he was a terrible and reckless psychiatrist. But number two, this shows that the military kept pushing him on, kept promoting him and in fact you know here are soldiers coming back from the wars to Fort Hood. These are among the most vulnerable and fragile people in the military. They desperately need psychiatric help, yet, the Army knowingly sent Hasan to Fort Hood to treat these soldiers when this memo was in his personnel file. In fact I've been told by my sources that Walter Reed sent a copy of this exact memo to Fort Hood in July when Hasan was heading there so they would know what they were getting into.
ROBERTS: All right, so with that let's take a look at the contents of this memo. It's written by his supervisor Major Scott Moran (ph), whom CNN contacted after the shootings at Fort Hood. He refused to comment on Major Hasan...
(CROSSTALK)
ZWERDLING: ... done with me.
(CROSSTALK)
ZWERDLING: Everybody refuses to comment.
ROBERTS: He said that he had serious concerns, harshly criticized his professionalism and work ethic. Here's the quote. He said that quote, "Major Hasan demonstrates a pattern of poor judgment and a lack of professionalism." What led him to that conclusion?
ZWERDLING: Ever since Hasan showed up at Walter Reed for training there was a series of incidents. And in this memo it lists maybe eight or nine of them. I'll just list a few. He would be the guy on call and so doctors would call him in an emergency and he wouldn't answer the telephone. He mishandled a homicidal patient in the emergency room and essentially allowed her to escape so nobody knew where she was.
He -- it turns out that Hasan actually was seeing fewer patients. He was doing less work than just about any psychiatrist in the Army. At a time when Walter Reed and every Army hospital was overwhelmed with people coming back from the war, Hasan was seeing about one patient per week. Now I don't know if you know any psychiatrists, but I don't know anybody who sees that little case load.
(CROSSTALK)
ROBERTS: In the memo, it says yes, he saw 30 patients in 38 weeks. The usual number -- the usual case load is 10 times that many, so he was seeing, as you said, fewer than one a week.
ZWERDLING: And so what's interesting about this is here's a guy who just, you know, keeps getting these bad evaluations. The supervisors said -- I showed this memo to several leading psychiatrists around the country today. And I said, put aside what we know about Hasan now. Put aside that he allegedly shot people in Fort Hood and all of that. Put aside what we know about his apparently extremist Islamic beliefs. Just tell me if you got an application from a psychiatrist that had this evaluation in the credentials file, what would you do about it? And these psychiatrists said this guy would never even get in the door for an interview. We would never, ever hire a psychiatrist this bad. The gentleman who runs the Shepherd Pratt Psychiatric Hospital (ph) near Baltimore, Maryland -- it's one of the premiere psychiatric institutions in America -- said even if we were desperate to fill a psychiatric position, we would never hire somebody with an evaluation like Nidal Hasan.
ROBERTS: And Daniel, here is the kicker in all of this, in the memo as well -- after going through a litany of things that Hasan is doing wrong, talking about his lack of professionalism, poor judgment, the few patients that he's seeing, the fact that he's not responding to emergency calls and mistreated a homicidal patient. Major Scott Moran (ph) concludes, quote, "in spite of all of this, I am not able to say he is not competent to graduate nor do I think a period of academic probation now at the end of his training will be beneficial. He would be able to contain his behavior enough to complete any period of probation successfully." What does that say?
ZWERDLING: Very interesting. I spent a lot of time talking to psychiatrists at Walter Reed and other military institutions about this language and they say what's happening here is that in the military there's a phrase -- I don't know if it's in the dictionary -- but there's a phrase, is the officer non-remedial (ph)?
In other words, if you yell at the guy and say you better shape up or else can he follow instructions and do a little better or is he hopeless? And psychiatrists at Walter Reed and at the medical fellowship where he went say that if they breathe down his neck, if they gave him super close supervision, if they really you know came down on him like a ton of bricks, he would get just enough better that they would have to say to their commanders, sir, he does seem capable of remediating (ph).
(CROSSTALK)
ROBERTS: So here's the question so many people might have right now and I heard you talking about this last week on NPR, Daniel, and that is with this record, with this evaluation, how did he end up at Fort Hood?
ZWERDLING: It turns out that some of his supervisors and associates sat around actually earlier this year saying what can we do about Nidal Hasan? I mean one supervisor amused (ph) allowed to colleagues do we think he's the kind of guy who could actually leak secrets to Islamic radicals? And another supervisor amused (ph) to some of his colleagues do you think he could actually commit fratricide, you know that's killing fellow American soldiers?
But just -- so they got together and they thought what can we do with him? And the solution was -- this was the Army solution -- let's send him to a medical center that has a pretty good mental health staff. Fort Hood actually has more mental health specialists than most Army bases. And the thinking was if he improves, then Hasan will be helpful, and if he doesn't improve, at least we have a bunch of therapists there who can monitor him and make sure he doesn't do too much damage. May I just add one thing though?
ROBERTS: Yes, go ahead.
ZWERDLING: I think -- I have interviewed dozens and dozens of soldiers and Marines all across the country over the past few years who have complained bitterly in many cases about how hard it's been for them to get adequate mental health care even when they're desperate, when they're feeling suicidal. If somebody like Nidal Hasan with a memo like this in his files and many other documents which I haven't gotten yet, is saying that this guy is a bad and potentially dangerous therapist, if he can go to Fort Hood, how many other therapists are there around in country in military hospitals who also have (INAUDIBLE) evaluations who we have never heard of?
ROBERTS: And that is a troubling thought -- Daniel Zwerdling, great reporting on this -- thanks so much for joining us tonight.
(CROSSTALK)
ROBERTS: Really appreciate it.
Here next, could the travel ban to Cuba continue or could it be lifted? We'll discuss hearings that could end the 60-year-old travel restriction.
And Sarah Palin's book hits shelves across the nation. She promises a view unfiltered by the media. Does she have 2012 on her mind?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Former Alaska governor and former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is making the media rounds. She's promoting her new book "Going Rogue." Candy Crowley is back with us.
Candy, Sarah Palin proving once again that she can certainly draw a crowd.
CROWLEY: In the right places, she certainly can. She's starting off in Grand Rapids, Michigan. We have pictures there. We saw thousands of people literally who lined up to catch a glimpse of her. She rolled in her big bus that has a picture of her that's on the front of her book "Going Rogue." We are told in fact that some of these people think rock star, rock concert, stayed overnight so they could get the wristbands that would allow her to sign two copies of her book. She did make some remarks while she was out there and as always the remarks aren't distinctly political, but enough of a hint that makes you think what's Sarah Palin doing in Michigan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SARAH PALIN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF ALASKA: There's something about Michigan, I couldn't wait to get back to Michigan. Alaska and Michigan have so much in common with the hunting and it's fishing and the hockey moms and the hard-working patriotic Americans who are here. This is the heart of industry in our country. And I would like to see more of this hat of industry for you all to see a revitalization of your economy and to be able to see really some miraculous things happen in this part of our land.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CROWLEY: So was that political? Or was that merely someone who is coming to sell a book? And I mean, that's sort of the beauty of this tour, John. It looks so much like a political stop there with the bus. The places that she's going are places that mirror where she went in 2008. It's heartland, small towns where she's going to be popular. It's Iowa, it's Michigan. It's Ohio. It's Pennsylvania, do any of those states sound familiar? It's a great talking point because anytime she rolls in, what's she doing here? Does this mean she wants to run again? It keeps buzz going which is helpful if you want to run but it's really helpful if you want to sell books. It's that kind of tour.
ROBERTS: She was upset that the McCain campaign pulled out of Michigan and she said that as well.
CROWLEY: Yes.
ROBERTS: There are plenty of people, Candy, who can draw a crowd; there are plenty of rock stars in the United States. There aren't a lot of them who can run for president in 2012. Can she make that leap?
CROWLEY: That's what Republicans asking themselves. I have talked to so many people the past couple of weeks during the whole rollout of the book. Most of them whether they think she wants to run, whether they want her to run or not say there's a corner that she has to turn here. She cannot stay a celebrity. She cannot stay just a rock star. They point to the polls that say 70% of Americans don't think she has the credentials to be president. Well, if you want to run for president, you need to do something about that number. And they think that would mean serious speeches. Well, how did she come to her energy policy? It means less about that the father of her grandson, less about the drama between her and McCain aides. They don't think that's kind of the presidential thing you want to be doing. On the other hand as you know and I know, the first thing you want to do when you run is get your name out there and you cannot falter on that.
ROBERTS: Exactly. Name recognition is a big part of the game. No question. Candy Crowley, thanks very much.
And coming up next, President Obama says he is near a decision on Afghanistan. We'll be joined by two of the country's best military experts on that.
And a mysterious death in Chicago did the head of the city school board kill himself or was it something far more sinister? We'll have that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: President Obama now says he is near a decision about U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan. Two of the nation's leading experts on the region join me now. Brett McGurk is a fellow at the Institute of Politics at Harvard University. Brett served on the national security staffs of George W. Bush and President Obama where he handled matters relating to U.S. policy in both Iraq and Afghanistan. In Washington, Alexander Thier is a director for Afghanistan and Pakistan at the U.S. Institute of Peace, and he's testifying about Afghanistan tomorrow on Capitol Hill.
Gentlemen, good of you to join us tonight. Let me start off by playing a little bit of the interview that Ed Henry did with President Obama in Seoul in which -- I think it was in Beijing, in which he said that before he puts troops in, he wants to make sure that he may be able to get them out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: My preference would be not to hand off anything to the next president. One of the things I'd like is the next president to be able to come in and say, I've got a clean slate, and I can put my vision forward. But I present it to the American people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTS: So Brett, the president indicating there, before he puts troops in, he'd probably like to have an exit strategy. Is that what's holding up this announcement about whether or not the president will surge forces in Afghanistan?
BRETT MCGURK, THE INSTITUTE OF POLITICS: Well, John, I think it's interesting. I think what we're seeing is a strategy being conceptualized not as a surge, but as a bridge. It's similar to the Iraq strategy. The Iraq surge was designed to increase the capacity of the Iraqi security forces so we could then set the conditions to pull out with the security forces able to hold the line against the extremists on the Shia and Sunni side. That's what actually happened. Over the course two years, with the surge, we negotiated a security agreement with an actual withdrawal time line to get the troops out of Iraq and they're out of the cities now and overriding logistics and over watch support for Iraqi forces. I think a five-year time line is similar to what the administration is thinking about now in Afghanistan.
ROBERTS: If he wants to get them out by the end of his second term if he gets re-elected, he has a maximum of seven years. Alex, you're testifying on Capitol Hill tomorrow. You've come up with a five-step approach in Afghanistan in order to rebalance the situation. Let's put it on the screen here so folks at home can follow along. You want to, A, radically prioritize our needs there. Two, improve governance, three, decentralize our efforts, four, support reconciliation and reintegration to get insurgents off the battlefield. And five, include international coordination and effectiveness. That's a lot of reworking the situation there. After eight years of being in Afghanistan, is that possible? J. ALEXANDER THIER, U.S. INSTITUTE OF PEACE: Well, I do think it's possible. We've lost an enormous amount of ground, what was feasible seven, eight years ago is much more difficult to achieve today. But I believe that we still have a fundamental priority in the stabilization of Afghanistan. I think that the new Afghan government, or the Afghan government that's being reconfirmed tomorrow with President Karzai's inauguration needs to be a partner in this process. But we also need to change the way we approach Afghanistan if we're going to succeed. This is a laundry list. There are a number of things that we need to do simultaneously, which means that I do still hold out some hope for our ability to succeed there. But at the same time, it means that we have to get serious in a way that we simply haven't been for the last seven years, in part, because we were distracted by Iraq and didn't take these steps when it would have been easier and cheaper and more effective.
ROBERTS: One of the big hurdles, of course, is the Afghan government which is just riddled with corruption. As you've said, Alex, President Karzai will be inaugurated for the second time tomorrow. The secretary of state Hillary Clinton is over there, met with President Karzai, urged him to do something about corruption. She said that this is a critical moment for Afghanistan. Brett McGurk, do you think this is a turning point particularly on this issue of corruption?
MCGURK: But it's a turning point overall. The McChrystal report said we have about a year to regain the momentum that we lost. I think that's right. Yes the inauguration is will be important. It will be important to listen to what President Karzai says. It will be important to hold him to his commitments but you know successful governance and effective governance is not a precondition to a successful counter-surgency. It is a goal. Again, we face the same problem in Iraq at the end of 2006 in Iraq with Prime Minister Maliki and we really had no effective governance in Iraq. About 14 months into the surge, the Iraqi units which weren't able to move around the country suddenly were able to move and force into Basra while the government was getting on its feet. It's going to take time. But we have an effective 12-month critical window here where we have to regain momentum and have a real holistic strategy like the other guest said, it's absolutely right.
ROBERTS: Alex Thier, people at home say Afghanistan is a place that hasn't seen stability since 1979. Is there really a way out of there?
THIER: Well, I think there is. I mean, when you look historically at Afghanistan, Afghanistan has enjoyed long periods of stability, as well as instability. So we know it's possible, but it's not just Afghanistan we need to focus on, it's also the broader region. I just came back this week from touring both Afghanistan and Pakistan. And we're facing a crisis of confidence. Pakistan is now at war with its own people over extremists in tribal areas and Afghans are fighting insurgency as well. We need to approach this issue nature just in terms of mechanically with troops, but more broadly thinking about embedding Afghanistan in its region with its stability and positive growth. That means we have to reach outside of Afghanistan to its neighbors and other powers in the region to find a long-term solution.
ROBERTS: We look forward to your testimony tomorrow. Alex Thier, thanks for being with us along with Brett McGurk, really appreciate it.
THIER: My pleasure.
ROBERTS: Just ahead, the travel ban against Cuba, it will be debated on Capitol Hill. Is it time for U.S. policy to change? We'll be joined by two leading experts on this contentious issue.
And it's a mystery in Chicago after a school board president's apparent suicide. Now authorities are taking a closer look at the case. Was it something else? He worst is behind us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Turning now to a murder mystery in Chicago. Police are investigating the death of the city's school board president. Michael Scott's body was found in the Chicago River Monday with a gunshot wound to the head. The Cook County medical examiner ruled the death a suicide. Now, authorities and some Chicago residents aren't so sure about that. Don Lemon now with the very latest.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DON LEMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On the banks of Chicago River, life ended for one of the city's elite. But the mystery of Michael Scott's death is just beginning.
DR. NANCY JONES, COOK COUNTY MEDICAL EXAMINER: The gun was held directly against the head and actually pressed against the head which is something that we see in suicides.
LEMON: Many here, including Alderman Sharon Dixon don't buy it.
SHARON DIXON, ALDERWOMAN 24TH WARD: That doesn't sound like Michael. I don't believe for one moment that Michael took his life.
LEMON: And police?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know what the M.E. ruled but there are still a lot of questions that exist out there.
LEMON: Do you think it's something fishy, something under handed? Something sinister?
DIXON: I don't know, the details have been sketchy, as a matter of fact, very little details given to the public.
LEMON: Scott was a school board president and a longtime player in politics. His body was found early Monday morning partially submerged in muddy waters underneath a deserted railroad bridge, one gunshot to his left temple, a .380 handgun, a smear of blood and his car nearby. Cook County board president Todd Stroger was his friend. TODD STROGER, COOK COUNTY BOARD PRESIDENT: Michael was part of the fabric of our county. Even though he was not an elected official, he was affecting lives in this region.
LEMON (on camera): Was there anything bothering him?
RICHARD DALEY (D), MAYOR OF CHICAGO: No, I just saw him last week, and the week before. He's just such a person that he's always upbeat all the time. Anytime you saw Michael, you knew he was trying to help other people. That's how he tried to help everyone else.
LEMON: But lately, Michael Scott did have troubles. The Chicago Tribune obtained a subpoena from federal investigators ordering Scott to appear whether a grand jury, investigating possible misconduct in placing students in the city's highly competitive magnate program. Scott denied any wrongdoing. Mayor Daley believed him.
(on camera) Nothing with the schools?
DALEY: Nothing at all.
LEMON: The beating death of high school honor student Derrion Albert was another problem. Last week, attorney Chris Cooper filed a lawsuit naming Scott and Chicago public schools for failing to protect students like Albert. On the very morning Scott's body was found, Scott was due to see cooper in court.
CHRISTOPHER COOPER, ATTORNEY SUING SCOTT: I believe that in his role as the school board chief, it doesn't matter what was happening in his life in other realms. He had a responsibility to these children. These children need an education.
LEMON: And then there are these lots. About two dozen or so, right in the shadow of a possible 2016 Olympic venue. If Chicago had won that Olympic bid, this neighborhood and Scott, would have done well. Because Scott had bought land here and was trying to secure more. He was also on the committee bidding for the games. That had raised questions of a conflict of interest. A conflict Scott denied. And no one knows whether any of these issues were worrying him.
DIXON: What we had in common was that he wanted to enhance the community.
LEMON: A community, still questioning the death of one of their own.
HAROLD DAVIS, COMMUNITY ACTIVIST: We believe that somebody hit him in the head. We believe that somebody put his finger on the trigger and pulled it for him.
LEMON (on camera): Murder?
DAVIS: Yes, sir. That's what we believe.
LEMON: An emotional hunch but no evidence as many struggling to make sense of this mystery. (END VIDEOTAPE)
LEMON: And the police superintendent did today clear up some questions for the public. That .380-caliber weapon found near Scott's body did belong to him. They said there's nothing out of the ordinary about the cell phone records they will not confirm the suspicion that it was a suicide. Many people here believe it was not a suicide. John, there are a group here calling for an expanded investigation saying they want to start with the state attorney general and say they are prepared to take it as high as the U.S. Attorney General if they have to Eric Holder. So it's still a mystery, John.
ROBERTS: A lot of new intrigue in this case. Don Lemon in Chicago tonight; Don, thanks.
Coming up, Cuba Libre and classic Chevies could Havana be in your travel plans soon. Two lawmakers say it's time to change the policy toward the communist country. We'll talk to leading experts on U.S./Cuba relations coming right up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Tomorrow on Capitol Hill the House Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a hearing about the possibility of lifting U.S. restrictions on travel to Cuba, the whole embargo for that matter. Joining me to talk about this from Washington is Dan Erickson. He is the author of "The Cuba Wars, Fidel Castro, the United States and the Next Revolution." Here in New York City, CNN contributor, Lehman College Professor and syndicated columnist, Miguel Perez. A lot of talk and growing support for lifting the embargo against Cuba saying it has been in place for all these years. It hasn't done a lot to free up that country. Is it time now to lift the embargo and take another approach?
MIGUEL PEREZ, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: It is time only we can get the Castro brothers to budge an inch, at least an inch, John. That's not what happened over the last 50 years. There has been several efforts and by several Americans presidents, to outreach the Cuban government and see if they are willing to give up anything, political prisoners, freedom of expression, free elections, budge in any way, shape or form. What we see is they are still beating up dissidents on the streets of Havana. Political prisoners are still there. Gorbachev went to Cuba, tried to convince them about perestroika. They do not want to give up an inch because they lose the control. They have a very well refined repression machine in Cuba.
ROBERTS: Does have it to be a quid pro quo Dan or could the United States seek to lift the embargo against Cuba, hoping that lifting the embargo will precipitate change in Cuba?
DAN ERICKSON, AUTHOR, "THE CUBA WARS": One argument is to have a quid pro quo and try to use the lifting of the travel ban or embargo to extract concessions from the Castro government in terms of democracy and human rights. But also I think there is a case for making unilateral action by the United States. The fact is that we are more than 28 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, more than 18 years since the dissolution. The cold war ended in every region of the world. We saw President Obama get back from China, another communist country. We still continue to isolate Cuba. I think history indicates that it has not been very successful and indeed it may be time to turn the page. That's something that they will be considering in Congress tomorrow.
ROBERTS: Miguel, Senator Richard Luger and Congressman Howard Berman wrote an op-ed in the Miami Herald which they said, "This ban has prevented contact between Cubans and ordinary Americans who serve as ambassadors for the Democratic values that we hold dear. Such contact would help break Havana's choke hold on information about the outside world." That's the theory you open up Cuba to travel and get exposed to all of these Americans who are coming down there and talk about Democratic values. Things change from the inside.
PEREZ: Yes. I don't understand what makes Americans think that they can do in Cuba what the rest of the world's tourists have not been able to do for all these years. Cuba receives tourists from all over the world. Again, they have a very well refined machine. That does not allow -- they do not take one step further if it allows them to lose control of that repression. What makes us think American tourists can do different?
ROBERTS: On that point, Dan the world's tourists go to China as well. They haven't changed the system of government there. But certainly we have strong relations with China. They are the biggest foreign holders of our debt. The president was over there talking about the partnership. Many people say we are dealing with China. If we are trying to deal with North Korea, dealing with Vietnam, trying to deal with Iran and trying to change the situation in Myanmar, why is Cuba being singled out for an embargo?
ERICKSON: Clearly, remains important domestic pressure for keeping the embargo on Cuba. The time has come for the United States to move towards lifting these restrictions. The fact is that some restrictions have been lifted in the area of trade. Last year, due to all cash agricultural trade from the United States to Cuba, the United States was Cuba's fifth largest trading partner and Cuba buys a wide range of grains, rice, wheat, et cetera, from the United States. As one Congressman pointed out very recently, today it is easier for a U.S. potato to go to Cuba than it is for a U.S. person. He framed it as trying to give people the same rights as potatoes. I think the fact is that -- that whether or not someone wants to travel to Cuba as an American citizen should be an individual choice made by that person and not something that is -- decision of the U.S. government.
ROBERTS: Should be an interesting hearing tomorrow on Capitol Hill the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Dan Erickson and Miguel Perez, good to see you tonight. Thanks.
Coming up at the top of the hour, "Campbell Brown" is just ahead. Hey Campbell.
CAMPBELL BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Hey there, John. Coming up, we are continuing to dig into the latest revelations about Ft. Hood shooting suspect Nidal Hasan. There is a memo from his superiors that raise serious questions about Hasan's judgment and behavior back in 2007. So how did he remain in the army? How did he make his way up the food chain? We are going to talk about that coming up.
Plus, the attorney general tries to convince the senate that it is safe for the U.S. to try the alleged 9/11 mastermind just blocks from ground zero.
Also, the growing political furor over the new recommendations on mammograms. That all coming up at the top of the hour -- John?
ROBERTS: Looking forward to it, Campbell. Thanks so much and we will see you then.
Still ahead, a team of explorers is being assembled to head to Antarctica. Their mission will surprise you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ROBERTS: Explorers in Antarctica are searching for rare scotch whiskey. Crates of McKinley & Company were left there by famous explorer Ernest Shackelton (ph) back in 1909. The new owners of McKinley say they want to replicate the recipe and put McKinley and Company scotch back on sale, which is why they are looking for those hundred year old bottles.
Thanks for being with us tonight. Next on CNN - Campbell Brown.
