Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Alabama's GOP Governor Says, it's Time to Start Blaming the Unvaccinated; NFL Threatens Teams, Forfeit Games if Unvaccinated Outbreaks; Would GOP Ditch the Filibuster if Party Regains Senate Control. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired July 23, 2021 - 07:00   ET

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

PETE MUNTEAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): The other end of the country, the concern is over the heat that melted some of Seattle's I- 5 last month.

[07:00:06]

Shane Underwood researchers asphalt at North Carolina State. He says, with the world getting hotter, road crews should start laying down asphalt that is more heat resistant.

SHANE UNDERWOOD, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR CIVIL ENGINEERING, NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY: If temperatures are greater than we presume they would exist when the pavement was designed, this can happen more frequently.

MUNTEAN: All of this comes at a cost. The port authority spent $2 billion recovering from Hurricane Sandy alone. A new study says climate change intensified the storm, increasing damage costs by an extra $8 billion.

PETE BUTTIGIEG, TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: We need to have more climate-resilient infrastructure and we need to stop climate change from getting any worse.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MUNTEAN (on camera): Even airlines say this is something they're dealing with. United Airlines Scott Kirby says the entire industry needs to get better at reacting to extreme weather. The airlines hoping at new ways to detect lightning, the goal is to avoid stopping operations on the ground and avoid delays.

Pete Muntean, CNN, Silver Spring, Maryland.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN NEW DAY: Hello, I'm Brianna Keilar alongside John Avlon on this New Day.

JOHN AVLON, CNN NEW DAY: Good morning.

KEILAR: Good morning.

The pandemic of the unvaccinated, an urgent call from one Republican governor in the face of rising cases and low vaccination rates.

AVLON: And the NFL threatening big punishments for teams with unvaccinated players as they head into the new season.

KEILAR: And President Biden says eliminating the filibuster would throw the Senate into chaos. Would a Republican-led Senate and White House go the same way?

AVLON: And Hunter Biden meeting with potential buyers at his upcoming art shows, raising ethics concerns for the White House.

KEILAR: Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. It is Friday. Here we are, at the end of the week.

AVLON: Here we are, finally.

KEILAR: All right. It is July 23rd and we are 18 months now into the pandemic. More than 600,000 Americans have died so far, even with a safe and effective vaccine available. And we find ourselves entering this new deadly phase of a crisis that is now being fueled by the unvaccinated.

Half of the states in the country are falling behind the national average for vaccinations. Alabama is at the bottom of this list, just a third of its residents are fully vaccinated, prompting this blunt assessment from Republican Governor Kay Ivey.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. KAY IVEY (R-AL): Folks supposed to have common sense but it's time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks. It's the unvaccinated folks that are letting us down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: That is blunt talk. But this pandemic was all but suppressed 30 days ago. And without vaccine hesitancy, it could be crushed today.

So what's behind this vaccination gap? Let's bring in CNN Senior Data Reporter Harry Enten to answer all our questions. Harry, good to see you, as always, my friend.

What's the big picture view on what we're seeing play out in areas of the country where people are vaccinated versus not vaccinated?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: John, it's a pretty simple picture as far as I'm concerned. So this is the new coronavirus cases seven-day average. Look at this, in the top 25 most vaccinated states, we have seven new cases per 100,000 residents on average. Look at the bottom 25 most vaccinated states, look at that, 16 new cases per 100,000. So double the new cases in the bottom 25 vaccinated states versus the top 25 vaccinated states.

So if you're looking for one number that gives you an indication that the vaccines are working, this clearly shows that the most vaccinated states having half the cases than the bottom 25 most vaccinated states.

AVLON: And then there's the additional factor of severity. So, does the same pattern apply to those who contract the virus requiring hospitalization?

ENTEN: It absolutely does, John. So, look here, again, this is the U.S. coronavirus current hospitalizations. Look at that. The top 25 most vaccinated states, just 5 per 100,000. The bottom 25, look at that, more than double that, at 11 per 100,000. So, again, you see in the hospitalizations when you look at the state level, but we can also zoom in on the individual level. And I think this gives you a very good understanding of what's going on.

So this is the current coronavirus hospitalizations by vaccination status. And look at that. In the share, look at this, 3 percent vaccinated at the hospitalizations versus 97 percent of them are unvaccinated. So we see it on the state level with the states that are most vaccinated having lower hospitalizations and we see it on the individual level as well with most of the people in the hospital being unvaccinated at this point, John.

AVLON: That's the key stat.

[07:05:00]

Now, the grim reality is that death is a lagging indicator. So, are we also seeing more deaths among the unvaccinated?

ENTEN: Yes. You know, this is exactly true. Look at this. This is the June coronavirus deaths. This was a stat from Anthony Fauci. Look at that, the share by vaccination status. Less than 1 percent of the deaths in June were among the vaccinated. More than 99 percent -- I'm going to underline this number because it's so important, more than 99 percent of the coronavirus deaths were among the unvaccinated. So, we see it in cases, we see it in hospitalizations and we see it in deaths. If you get vaccinated your chance of having a case, hospitalization or most severe outcome a death significantly lower if you're vaccinated versus unvaccinated.

AVLON: This isn't complicated at the end of the day. It is clear. But, lastly, what is the impact of the political divide that permeates everything, unfortunately, on all of this?

ENTEN: Sure. So, I think this also is key. Look at this. One of the most blue states in the nation, Maryland. One of the most red states in the nation, Tennessee. Look at this. The vaccines work no matter where you are in the country. This is coronavirus deaths. In June, in Maryland, 100 percent were among the unvaccinated. In Tennessee, from mid-May to mid-June, look at that, 98 percent of the deaths were among the unvaccinated. So red state or blue state, get your vaccines because it works throughout the country. It works. It just works, John. Get a vaccine. It could save your life.

AVLON: It sure could, and the data don't lie. Harry Enten, thank you very much.

ENTEN: Data never lies, my friend.

KEILAR: As variant cases rise, sources are telling CNN that the White House and the CDC are considering revising mask recommendations for vaccinated Americans.

Let's talk about this with former acting director of the CDC Dr. Richard Besser, he is the president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Doctor, thank you so much for being with us to talk about what I think is on so many people's minds today.

Do you think the CDC should bring back masking guidance for vaccinated Americans?

DR. RICHARD BESSER, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR, CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION: Well, what I think, Brianna, We're hearing from CDC and we've heard it throughout is that local conditions need to drive a lot of what's going on. As you just saw in that data, in areas where vaccination rates are low, in area where disease is on the rise and is quite high, local officials may want to put in place different guidance and you'll see in a place where the opposite, where there's high vaccination coverage rates and transmission is low.

And the reason for that is that, you know, if you're a business and you have people coming into your business, you don't know who is coming into that business, whether they're vaccinated or not. And while a person who is fully vaccinated, as we just heard in all that data, has great protection, those who aren't vaccinated, those who can't be vaccinated, whether they're children or people with immune problems, they are at risk being around people who are unvaccinated.

So you may see some changes there. What I think you're going to see is a call for people to respond locally because we have already seen a number of states put in place prohibitions around masking. And that's something that should never be in place. Local officials should be able to respond based on the local conditions.

KEILAR: So, it sounds like you're saying that localities should be more nimble about issuing guidance when it comes to masks and vaccinated Americans. So then we're still talking about cases where vaccinated Americans who have been enjoying not wearing masks may be told that they should put them back on in certain situations? Sorry. Go on.

BESSER: And I think with that, Brianna, we have to be honest that we're asking people who are fully vaccinated basically to sacrifice because it's so hard to enforce vaccination -- mask wearing based on vaccination status.

You do get some additional protection and we have seen some mild breakthrough cases, so that's some added benefit. But if we had a fully vaccinated population or highly vaccinated population, we wouldn't be talking about needs for putting in place mask mandates again.

KEILAR: I mean, look, you know there are going to be a lot of vaccinated people and we've heard from them, you know what, if I need to I'll wear a mask but give me a break. I have to wear a mask when someone who is unvaccinated won't get a vaccination. Is that really fair?

BESSER: Yes, and I hear that. I hear that. And I think it's why we have to really double and triple down on the efforts to get people vaccinated.

And one of the things that is proving to be very effective is if you've been vaccinated, talk to your friends and family members who haven't and explain why. What pushed you to make that decision to get vaccinated? Who did you talk to? Encourage people to talk to their doctors. Those trusted sources are proving to be very effective at increasing vaccination rates.

[07:10:00]

And in those states with the highest number of cases right now, we're also seeing now -- starting to see an uptick in the highest vaccination -- new vaccination rates, so people are responding to what's going on in their community.

KEILAR: We're seeing people also, quite frankly, who are not. For instance, CBS interviewed a Louisiana man who got COVID, and he wound up in the hospital with pneumonia. And he said that he would rather be ill than get vaccinated. Let's listen to him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Here I am recovering, getting out of here finally tomorrow. Am I going to get a vaccine? No.

REPORTER: Why not?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Because there's too many issues with these vaccines.

REPORTER: If you would have had a chance to get the vaccine and prevent this, would you have taken the vaccine?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nope.

REPORTER: So you would have gone through this?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I would have gone through this, yes, sir. Don't shove it down my throat.

That's what's local, state, federal administration is trying to do is shove it down your throat.

REPORTER: What are they shoving, the science?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. They're shoving the fact that that's their agenda. Their agenda is to get you vaccinated.

(END VIDEO CLIP) KEILAR: We also heard from my colleague, Elle Reeve, who interviewed a woman who said that her daughter had been sick from COVID, her young daughter, and continues to be sick, right? It sounds like her daughter has some long haul symptoms and yet she, the women, will not get vaccinated.

So, beyond doctors encouraging people to get vaccinated, is it time to require vaccines in business settings and other settings?

BESSER: Well, one thing I think it's really important is to not paint all of the people who have been -- who have not gotten vaccinated with the same brush. There are a lot of different factors here. You know, here in New Jersey, we have a very high overall vaccine coverage rate. In the town I'm in Princeton, 76 percent of adults are fully vaccinated. The next town over, Trenton, it's closer to 45 percent. And that's not based on the sense of politics and it being shoved down people's throat, it has to do with long histories of mistrust and disrespect by the healthcare system.

And in those settings, reaching people with trusted voices, you're seeing an increase among Latino populations, when you bring vaccine to people, people who may have distrust in coming forward to the healthcare system. You see uptake. And there are people with disabilities who are homebound. If you reach them at home, they'll get vaccinated.

But as your report said, there's some people you won't reach and you have to just recognize that. But if we can get those people who are still movable, we are going to see slow, steady uptake. And what we do this summer, will determine what this fall and winter looks like, whether it's going to be like for kids going back to school and what it's going to be like this winter when there are other viruses circulating.

So, I wouldn't give up on the efforts to encourage vaccination. And I do believe there are certain settings, colleges, universities, where you should require vaccination per attendance.

KEILAR: Federal employees?

BESSER: Well, federal employees, you know, there I think you need to look at some of the legal issues and see what you are able to do. Healthcare settings, I think it should be required. At our foundation, to come to work in the building, we're requiring vaccination. It is an important thing to look at.

And what we have seen with childhood immunization, I'm a pediatrician, is that when a vaccine is required, a lot of people who have been on the fence, really don't want to get it, but they don't care that passionately, they bring their children in and they get vaccinated. And so you do see an increase in vaccination rates.

KEILAR: All right. We will be watching. We'll be watching this especially come fall with school. Dr. Richard Besser, thank you.

AVLON: This whole debate is playing out in the NFL, which is now doing its part to encourage vaccinations among players by rolling out new penalties for teams with COVID outbreaks this season.

Commissioner Roger Goodell issuing a new memo saying if a team cannot play a game because of an outbreak among unvaccinated players or staff, that team will have to forfeit. The game can't be rescheduled. Players from both teams will also forfeit their salaries. The team responsible for the outbreak will also face further financial penalties.

To date, 78 percent of NFL players received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and 14 of the 32 NFL teams have reached the 85 percent vaccination threshold.

Joining us now to discuss is George Martin, Super Bowl XXI champion and the former president of the NFL Players Association. It is good to see you, sir.

So, what's your reaction to this NFL policy? Do you think it's appropriate or too harsh?

GEORGE MARTIN, FORMER DEFENSIVE END, NEW YORK GIANTS: Well, John, I think on the surface, I totally agree with it. I think there should be some penalty for those will not conform and there should be some overt protection for those people who have conformed. Where I do disagree, John, is that I don't think that the teams that who are affected by those who break the rules should be penalized equally. I don't think that's fair.

AVLON: So, what you're saying is the secondary measure, you know, where you're punishing the other teams, that's too much, even though the team that has the outbreak would get additional penalties.

[07:15:05]

But isn't this a step in -- perhaps a necessary step to avoiding those canceling of games as well as additional outbreaks that we saw last season.

MARTIN: Yes. I think it's an affirmative step. I think it's something that should be implemented. And I think it should be supported strongly by the ownership as well as the union. But I think that there is some conflict there and I think that therein lies a problem because if there's a way for guys to wiggle out of this and exercise their individual freedom yet infringe upon those people who are conforming, I don't think that's fair at all.

AVLON: That's the issue, right? But many issues have come out criticizing the NFL. Cardinals Wide Receiver DeAndre Hopkins in a now deleted tweet went to far as to request his future with the league around this.

Now, what's fascinating, I understand, you used to be a vaccine skeptic, now you're not. But what would you say? What do you say to those players that are still holding out, still unvaccinated?

MARTIN: Well, I think -- first of all, I think you have to look at -- it's a life or death measure. It's that important. And to go without the vaccine risks everything that you have. I think it's better to ere on the side of caution than not. To me, it's an act of lunacy that here we have an answer to the greatest scourge that we know in our lifetime and yet people are afraid or refuse to participate and take the vaccine. That to me is insanity.

AVLON: Indeed. One of the definitions is doing the same thing regardless of changing facts. We have changing facts.

Now, you are a former president of the players association, which negotiated with the league that vaccinations would be up to individual players. So, do you think the league can and should mandate, just straight out mandate, that staff and players be vaccinated?

MARTIN: Unequivocally, yes. I think that it's something that should be mandated across the board. And even though my former position was as the president of the NFL Players Association, I disagree with what they've negotiated with the league on that point. I think that it should be something that should be mandated. It should be mandatory across the board to include both coaches and administration and certainly the players.

AVLON: George Martin, thank you very much for joining us on New Day.

MARTIN: It's my pleasure.

AVLON: All right. Right now, Republicans are all about preserving the filibuster, but if they regain control of the Senate next year, might Mitch McConnell pull a 180 and ditch it?

KEILAR: And a growing number of U.S. diplomats are falling victim to Havana Syndrome-like attacks. And now the inspector general for the CIA is stepping in.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:20:00]

AVLON: President Biden is holding firm on his support of the Senate filibuster, despite Republicans wielding the filibuster to block much of his domestic agenda. Here is what he said at this week's CNN town hall.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: If it's a relic of Jim Crow, it's been used to fight against civil rights legislation historically. Why protect it?

JOE BIDEN, U.S. PRESIDENT: There's no reason to protect it other than you're going to throw the entire Congress into chaos and nothing won't get done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: But what happens if Republicans regain control of the Senate in the midterm elections or beyond? Well, joining us now, CNN Senior Political Analyst Kirsten Powers and CNN Political Commentator Scott Jennings. And Scott served as an adviser for several of Senator Mitch McConnell's re-election campaigns. It's great to have you both.

Kristen, you believe that Republicans gain control of the Senate, that Mitch McConnell might all of a sudden sow some situational ethics and end the filibuster. That's a big statement. Tell us why you think of that.

KIRSTEN POWERS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes. I think he would do it if it was to his benefit. The only reason that he wouldn't do it if it wasn't to his benefit. And, look, Republicans, they already have -- we already have judicial nominations which is what's most important to Mitch McConnell. Republicans, they don't pass as much legislation as Democrats do, so I think that that would be the only reason he wouldn't do it.

But my point is, if it was good for him, as it would be good for the Democrats to do right now, he would do it in a second. He wouldn't think twice about it.

This idea also that Joe Biden has that it would throw things into chaos, like, we're in chaos right now. Nothing is getting done. Nothing has gotten done in a long time, and so on very critical issues that the Democrats need to move on like voting rights. And so I think that if it was Mitch McConnell, he would do it in a second.

KEILAR: Scott, do you think he would?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No. And anyone suggesting otherwise, with all due respect, has no idea what they're talking about. I've known the man 25 years. I've communicated with him frequently. I know his views on this very well. He is steadfast supporter of the legislative filibuster. And if he was going to get rid of it, when would it have been good for him?

They just had the majority. They had Donald Trump as the president, who was beating on Mitch McConnell and the Republicans to get rid of it every single day, publicly and privately, and they never did it. It would have been good for them. It would have been easy for them to do it then, to give into Donald Trump. They would have faced no political repercussions, whatsoever. And yet it's still here.

The hypocrisy on this issue is on the Democratic side. 30-plus Democrats who sit in the Senate today signed a letter during the Trump years saying we have to have the filibuster, preserve it at all costs. And now you see them on T.V. and on the weekends saying how we have to get rid of it.

And, by the way, the idea that nothing is getting done, how many trillions of dollars have we spent in the last several months? Plenty is getting done in Washington, D.C. This is a totally, terribly wrong- headed idea. And let me be straight with you guys, I'm the one who knows him, he will never bend on this, he will never break, he will never get rid of the legislative filibuster. [07:25:04]

AVLON: I want to give you a lot of credit for a lot of what you just. So, first of all, you do know McConnell very well. He did resist direct pressure from Donald Trump to get rid of the filibuster when they briefly had full control of Washington. But, you know, McConnell is an institutionalist but he's also can be an opportunistic.

And I found this quote from 2005 when McConnell is the Senate majority whip, Democrats were in the Senate, and they were blocking some of then George W. Bush's judicial appointees with a filibuster. McConnell did advocate before Harry Reid the so-called nuclear option, saying this, the majority in the Senate is prepared to restore the Senate's traditions and presence to ensure that regardless of party, any president's judicial nominees after full and fair debate receive a simple up or down vote on the Senate floor, Merrick Garland, it is time to move away from advise and obstruct and get back to advise and consent.

And I mention that only to say there was a time in his career, same man, same senator, when he was, before the escalation that we're currently living with, seemed very open to bending, if not, ending the filibuster.

JENNINGS: He has never been open to ending or mending the legislative filibuster. There were, as you know --

AVLON: The legislative filibuster.

JENNINGS: The legislative filibuster. There were judicial wars going back into the Bush years when the Democrats did start this blockade of Bush's judicial nominees. Then Harry Reid finally tripped the nuclear option and then they, of course, extended it to the Supreme Court. That's all been regarding confirmations on judicial.

But where you've had broad agreement between the parties, Joe Biden, Mitch McConnell, Democrats, Republicans, people who have come and gone, people who are still there, you've had broad agreement that the legislative filibuster is a necessary piece of the Senate. It's part of the way it works. It helps drive bipartisanship and consensus.

And the idea that because we have a different president now that Democrats should trip it, Republicans totally reject and they have credibility on it because they stood up to Donald Trump on this during the Trump years. So to call them opportunists or the idea that they would all of a sudden change their mind, Donald Trump was the biggest mind-changer ever in the Republican Party.

POWERS: I mean, Scott --

JENNINGS: And he couldn't change their mind on this and I can't believe they do it in the future.

POWERS: Scott, setting aside, like you're just -- your absolute, self-righteous little rant now about --

AVLON: Hold up, let's not make it personal.

POWERS: No, hold on -- about how I don't know anything -- anybody who disagrees with you doesn't know anything. The way you're trying to portray Mitch.

JENNINGS: I didn't say that.

POWERS: Yes, you did. You said anybody who says this doesn't know what they're talking about. So, the point is, like anybody who disagrees with you and anybody who doesn't have your view of Mitch McConnell, which, let's be honest, maybe you have a different view of him because of your closeness to him. He is not this paragon of ethics that you are putting forward, that he is unchangeable. He is somebody who understands power and puts power first.

And I don't necessarily mean that in a bad way. Sometimes it's a good thing, if you're for him, that sometimes it would be nice to see Democrats do the same thing. But I just reject the idea that he is somehow not a person that if he was put in the position where it would be good for Republicans that he would completely reject it. If he's rejected it, it's because it's not good for Republican.

JENNINGS: Would it have been good for Republicans under Trump?

POWERS: It's because it's not good for Republicans. That's why he would reject it. I mean, that's my point. He does what's good for Republicans. And if he's not doing it, it's because it's not good for Republicans. He doesn't necessarily put institutionalism above things and we don't have bipartisanship. Just because something gets passed does not mean we have a functional government right now.

JENNINGS: I mean, we had trillions of dollars that have gone out the door. We're on the brink on an infrastructure deal that appears to be attracting some support from Republicans and Democrats.

I mean, the idea that Washington isn't functional when people are getting checks, when money is going out the door, when we --

POWERS: When black people have a hard time voting, for example?

JENNINGS: When we had Operation Warp Speed.

POWERS: What about voting rights?

JENNINGS: Things are happening. It's just not the things that you want.

POWERS: What about basic democracy? What about January 6th?

JENNINGS: Just because what you want isn't happening, it doesn't mean nothing is happening.

POWERS: Okay, fine. Maybe I shouldn't have said nothing. Some things are happening but some very important things aren't happening.

JENNINGS: It's just not what you want. POWERS: Well, yes, it was --

JENNINGS: This is the hypocrisy in the liberal argument.

(CROSSTALKS)

POWERS: I would like January 6th to be investigated. I mean, these are important things.

AVLON: These are important things. Let's ground this conversation. Kristen, he makes a point, which is that Democrats did say you got to protect the filibuster when Donald Trump was president. And so it raises the questions, particularly if it's an end not mend strategy, that Democrats would regret this the next time Republicans control the Senate or president.

[07:30:01]

So, that's just practical.

POWERS: That's always the situation. But the point is right now, the country is on fire.