Return to Transcripts main page
Rick's List
Will Job Bills Work?; Bipartisanship Making a Comeback on Capitol Hill; Reid Warns Women: Unemployed Men Are Abusive
Aired February 23, 2010 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Here is what is on THE LIST -- completely unspeakable.
BEAU BIDEN, DELAWARE ATTORNEY GENERAL: They were crimes committed by someone with whom an entire community and parents had placed their trusts.
SANCHEZ: The man parents trusted their children to, a pediatrician accused of molesting more than 100 patients -- children.
ERIC HOLDER, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: This attempted attack on our homeland was real. It was in motion, and it would have been deadly.
SANCHEZ: The attorney general says the system worked. Does the subway bomb plotter's guilty plea prove our civilian courts can handle terror suspects, or not?
Five Republicans say yes to the jobs bill. What is it? But then Harry Reid says this:
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: Men, when they are out of work, tend to become abusive.
SANCHEZ: Is he out of line or right on the money?
And check out this act. Don't get too close. Don't get too close. I told you.
The lists you need to know about. Who is "Today's Most Intriguing Person"? Who is on "The List You Don't Want To Be On"? You will find out as our national conversation on Twitter, on the air starts right now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: And hello again, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez.
Making THE LIST right now on your national conversation, just when you least expect it, some Republicans or Democrats are working together, getting along, trying to see if they can possibly even get a bill passed. It looks like this jobs bill, all $15 billion of it, is going to be voted on and will, well, in all likelihood, pass, according to some of the folks who are watching it, with the help of five Republicans, by the way, these guys right there, including, you see that fellow in that middle?
That is Scott Brown of Massachusetts. And he is essentially voting with the Dems in this case, and he is not making a lot of friends among certain members of the GOP as well. So, we are going to get into all of this.
It's not -- look, let me explain this to you as well, because I think this is important. This is not about the government hiring workers. This is about the government cutting taxes on businesses every time one of those businesses goes out and hires a worker.
In other words, they are saying, we as the United States government will give you a tax break when you hire someone. It is an important distinction. And let's get through this and try and find out as much as we can, rather than just argue on the politics from the left or from the right.
So, before we do anything else, I want to bring in my colleague Ali Velshi. He has been watching this with us.
And before I even go to you, I want you and I to watch something. Let me give it a good setup. I think you've seen this before.
(CROSSTALK)
ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Yes.
SANCHEZ: This is a map that has been created that shows how many Americans have lost their jobs between 2007 and 2009. Watch this, folks. It is pretty amazing.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: All right. Ali, let's talk -- do you like that?
VELSHI: It is incredible. You can see that sort of swathe of yellow in the middle. That's where unemployment is the latest, but everywhere else, it has increased. This is a national problem.
SANCHEZ: In fact, let me just explain to the folks just so we can color-code that. I think you just saw that a moment ago.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Yes.
SANCHEZ: Everywhere where it is dark, that means there's more people that are going through unemployment.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: All right, explain this bill to us. Tell us if you think it's effective. Tell us if you think, from what you have been able to read talk to, if it is the effective way of getting Americans working again.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Well, two different problems. One is, it is effective insofar as those five Republicans actually broke ranks and we have actually got something representing bipartisanship.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: I don't want you to talk politics.
VELSHI: All right. So, let's talk about what it is.
SANCHEZ: All right.
VELSHI: It is a $15 billion bill with four prongs in it. The only one that matters is the first one, which is $13 billion. And what it is doing cutting the payroll tax that you pay for Social Security -- 6.2 percent of what you pay someone goes to Social Security.
The government is saying if you employ someone who has been unemployed for at least two months, basically, you are employing an unemployed person, you will get a discount on what you pay. You won't pay that 6.2 percent. You keep them employed for a year, you get an extra bonus $1,000.
SANCHEZ: So, let's make sure our viewers understand this, because I think this is very clear if you put it in these terms.
VELSHI: Right.
SANCHEZ: Essentially, they are saying to the employer, you don't have to pay that much tax on that person which you normally would.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Right.
SANCHEZ: But it still means the rest of us will have to pick up the difference.
VELSHI: Well, yes. The bottom line is, we have got to encourage businesses to hire people. As you pointed out very clearly when you went into this, this jobs bill is not about government hiring people. It never works in a good advanced society when the government is the biggest job creator.
SANCHEZ: Right.
VELSHI: You need businesses to do it. So, let me just give you an example.
On a $50,000 salary, typically speaking, it would cost you $3,100 extra for Social Security. It would cost the employer $3,100 extra. There are other taxes, too. That $3,100, you are not paying if you hire somebody who is unemployed.
SANCHEZ: Do that number again. If I'm paying -- if I hired you and I'm paying you $50,000, I would have to pay the government $3,100?
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Thirty-two hundred dollars.
SANCHEZ: Thirty-two hundred dollars.
VELSHI: I'm sorry, yes, $3,100 is correct.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Thirty-one. And now so they are saying, we're going to eliminate that or bring it down significantly.
VELSHI: Initially. For a year, they're going to eliminate it. You don't have to pay that. And if you keep this person employed in the second year, you just pay $1,000.
SANCHEZ: This is important, because what you're doing is, you are clarifying it for us.
And one more thing I have to ask you. I understood that there was a provision within this bill to also pay for people who are unemployed. Go ahead.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Extension of unemployment benefits is not in this bill.
SANCHEZ: Not?
VELSHI: They may tackle that separately to extend unemployment benefits for those who have been on it and who are about to run out.
SANCHEZ: The Republicans are saying they don't want the unemployment benefits extended. And I could see where a lot of economists would look at that and say, they are right. Why would I want to pay someone to sit at home and not work?
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Because they don't -- because, at the moment, there are not enough jobs for them to get. So, you might say that if there were jobs available.
When we look at the want ads column, they are not there.
SANCHEZ: But, Ali, no, it doesn't matter.
VELSHI: But there isn't a job.
SANCHEZ: Get them a job with a pick and an axe and help them rebuild or clean the infrastructure of the United States.
VELSHI: Well, but we have seen how that works. We're a year into the stimulus bill, and it didn't -- that's not the role that it had, because we needed find shovel-ready projects, and some of them were efficient. Some of them were not.
The bottom line is, we don't have that kind of stuff.
But what I'm telling you is, it would seem somewhat irresponsible to come up with government money taken from me and from you to pay someone to sit at home because they're unemployed. Find something they can do.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Right. But, at the moment, they don't have that. So, people are running out of their unemployment benefits, and we don't have something for them to do at the moment.
So, I agree with you. I would love that there was something for them to do, and so would they. But, at the moment, they are going to not be able to pay their bills. And then what happens? They lose their home, and your home value, my home value continues to go down because more homes are in foreclosure. It's a bad scene.
SANCHEZ: So it's a moot point right now anyway, because, essentially, it's not in this bill right now, and they may try and get it in later on. We will see.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Right. Yes.
SANCHEZ: Thanks so much.
Let's bring in Jessica Yellin into the picture.
Jessica, you heard that conversation. I want to talk you now about the politics of this, what my friend Ali Velshi tried to get into at the outset of this conversation.
VELSHI: But you stopped me.
SANCHEZ: I did.
(LAUGHTER)
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Look, this is your -- this is Jessica's turf, OK?
VELSHI: That is her turf.
SANCHEZ: Can the Dems no longer call the GOP the party of no after what these five Republicans did last night, including Scott Brown?
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Look, Rick, I would not say that this is ushering in the new era of cooperation on Capitol Hill.
The jobs bill was something that both Democrats and Republicans fundamentally agreed on, and so they felt that, and all politicians in Washington feel enormous pressure to act on it. I would say that this is an exception to the rule on partisanship right now. It's not a model of what I expect to come.
SANCHEZ: Is it true that Scott Brown is getting pummeled in some conservative circles, on talk radio, for example?
YELLIN: Absolutely. On Twitter, on Facebook, he's being called a traitor by -- now, this is by conservatives who believe that -- one person who wrote in said, Scott Brown, you were not elected for bipartisanship.
So, this is a specific point of view. These are not centrist moderates. They're certainly not independents, but he is being called a traitor by some, a Republican in name only. He's under enormous pressure.
But, remember, Rick, this is a man who was elected on a promise to get jobs for the people of Massachusetts. And he is up for reelection in two years, so he is among those people under enormous pressure to act.
SANCHEZ: Ali can't help himself. He wants to get in with a comment...
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: Yes, I wrote it on a note because Rick wouldn't let me get in in.
(LAUGHTER)
VELSHI: And it says here on people, I said, cutting taxes is what the GOP wants. Who has the nerve to criticize Scott Brown for supporting a measure that is exactly what conservatives want, cutting taxes?
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: I think there was a question in there somewhere, Jessica.
(LAUGHTER)
YELLIN: Yes.
So, the Republican position, opposition here, is that, first of all, they object to the way the Democrats have carried this bill forward. There is a procedural issue. And so some people voted no against the procedural motion just on the -- because they were so offended by the way the Democrats handled this.
The other piece of it is, there are a lot of Republicans who object to the Democrats' what they consider their unwillingness to cooperate or compromise. There's a sense that the Democrats have been very, very partisan in the ideas they put forward. And that's why the Republicans are saying, we are not being a party of no. We're doing what the Senate is supposed to do, which is to block action that seems too extreme.
So, it is a very different point of view from what you guys are putting forward. They think they are doing a good job to block extreme measures.
Now, tax breaks, you're right, Ali, that is a Republican measure, and that's why you saw such bipartisanship on this.
SANCHEZ: We are going to have the leave it at that, ladies and gentlemen.
VELSHI: Thanks for letting me into the conversation.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: No, it's everybody's. That is why it is called...
(CROSSTALK)
YELLIN: Next time, I will write a note, a good tactic.
SANCHEZ: This is called the national conversation. Everyone is allowed in. We have got 130,000 people who join us every day as well. And then there's the elected officials.
Thanks, Ali.
VELSHI: All right.
SANCHEZ: We are also going to bring you this in just a moment.
A lot of folks lost their trust in government after Hurricane Katrina. Well, now billions of dollars are supposed to be going toward the new levee system to make sure what happened there with Katrina does not happen again. So, why do some people say that the government has not learned its lesson? What haven't they done? We know, and we will tell you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: Our domestic crisis shelters in Nevada are jammed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Why is the Senate majority leader saying there is a new reason for American women to fear abuse, unemployment?
Also, what does that have to do with the jobs crisis? We are going to get into those and put it all together for you in just a little bit.
And, by the way, have you heard the story about the pediatrician, the one who may have molested as many as 100 kids? Yes, it has got us all shaking our heads here today in the newsroom.
Stay right there. THE LIST continues. I'm Rick Sanchez.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
Speaking of the jobs bill, did you hear what Harry Reid said? He said something on the Senate floor that is getting an awful lot of play. I'm going to throw it out there just to see what you think, because, by the way, it is being criticized and it is being defended.
Here it is. This is a comment he made, and it concerns domestic abuse.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REID: I have met with some people while I was home dealing with domestic abuse. It has gotten out of hand. Why? Men don't have jobs. Women don't have jobs either, but women are not abusive most of the time.
Men, when they are out of work, tend to become abusive. Our domestic crisis shelters in Nevada are jammed. It's the way it is all over the country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Harry Reid speaking yesterday on the House floor.
By the way, here's what else we're going to be following for you in just a little bit. I want to tell you about a story that has got most of us, well, at least somewhat shaken up as we read the information.
It is hard to even read the accusations against this person without feeling sick. This is a doctor. He is accused of sexually abusing more than 100 of his patients, little children, some of them very little. If you are asking yourself, how was he able to do such awful things that he is charged with, well, that is the same question that we asked ourselves, so we started looking into it, and we have the answers for you.
And there is a warning here for all of us who have small children. There is a warning for all of us as parents.
Also this, New Orleans flooded during Hurricane Katrina because its levees gave way. Now, almost five years later, where have all the federal funds gone for flood control? Is the area better protected? It was supposed to be better protected before Katrina. Is it now? It is a heck of a question, isn't it? And I'm to ask it and I'm going to try and answer it for you when we come back. We're talking to some experts.
Stay there. THE LIST is scrolling on, folks.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CALLER: Hey, Rick. This is Janet (ph) from Clearwater, Florida.
No, I think that's a silly comment about men being abusive out of work. I have got a man next to me who is out of work, and he is not abusive at all. I think, if men are weak, and they have a tendency to be abusive before, they will be so when they are out of work. He is only abusive towards his gym shoes. That is all.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: And welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
I want to share an opinion poll with you. It is our newest CNN/Opinion Research poll. It is just -- it's showing that just about one in four Americans trust the federal government. One in four Americans seem to feel that the system is somehow broken. But how is it broken?
What I want to do is to define this down for you. Ryan Alexander is the president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, and Michael Scherer is a political correspondent with "TIME" magazine. You can also find him, by the way, blogging on Swampland.
MICHAEL SCHERER, "TIME": That's right.
SANCHEZ: That's a catchy title.
Michael, you what is interesting. After you and I and Ryan had a conversation yesterday, I finished the newscast and I started reading all the tweets that I was getting from people, and there were hundreds and hundreds of them, as well as e-mails that we got and information sent to audience research here at CNN.
You know what people are upset about? They are upset that we are calling this broken government. They say the government is fine. What our forefathers gave us is good. It is the political system that is broken. In other words, the guys and gals up there running the system, that is what is broken.
Are they right?
SCHERER: We have a system designed so that those two parts basically go together. The government is on a daily basis directed by the executive branch and on a regular basis directed by the legislative branch.
The extent to which it has been frustrated in doing what the people want, like getting jobs bill through, is the fault of the elected officials. I don't know. There is a difference.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
YELLIN: I don't think -- I think you should be clear, though, that we are not saying the American system is broken and irretrievable. We are saying that the current...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Political system
SCHERER: Yes -- is not working. I think that is a good point.
SANCHEZ: It's almost like the political system is broken.
Ryan, let me bring you into this, because I grew up in South Florida, always been around hurricanes. And I knew 10, 20 years before Katrina came about, I knew that the city of New Orleans or parts of it was below sea level, and if those levees weren't strong enough, a hurricane was going to go in there and essentially flood the city.
Anybody who knows anything about meteorology, about floods knows that, and yet it happened, because the levees weren't strong enough. And now I understand the government has paid millions of millions of dollars to make sure those levees are strong enough and are bolstered. Is that what is happening?
RYAN ALEXANDER, PRESIDENT, TAXPAYERS FOR COMMON SENSE: The government has put another $12 billion into refortifying New Orleans, but, again, we have real concerns, and, again, that it won't work.
Essentially, the Army Corps of Engineers is going back to kind of the same old drawing board and not thinking in a much broader, more protective way. What happened, leading up to Katrina, they built faulty levees that were designed to -- were supposed to be designed to protect against a Cat 3 storm and could not even protect against a Cat 2 storm, let alone something like Katrina, which was Cat 5.
So, as we look at what they're doing going ahead, it is kind of the same old, same old. They are looking to build levees in places where we know there are going to be big floods.
SANCHEZ: You are telling me that after everything we went through with Katrina, our resources have still not been put on shoring up those levees and bolstering the area, so that something like that can't happen again? Then I am left to wonder, where is the money going?
ALEXANDER: It is a big question. It's kind of, why are they making the same kinds of decisions again? They're going to for kind of low-level flood protection. Before Katrina, they built levees that didn't work in places where people weren't and encouraged development that just made the devastation even worse than it needed to be.
So, now, as they rebuild, we want them to kind of refortify the places where there are the most people, and it doesn't look like that is where the money is going to go.
SANCHEZ: Do -- and this comes back to the conversation we had yesterday, and when we talk about broken government, I'm always interested in what the needs of the people who are in the ruling class, the people who make the decisions.
So, Michael, let me ask you, if certain parts of the Katrina recovery involved industry or a corporation or a government agency which had specific ties to any one elected official, is that elected official more apt to make sure that is where the money goes?
SCHERER: Yes, and that is what happened up to Katrina. It's been happening since the Corps of Engineers is a government agency that's largely funded through earmarks. So, they basically have to win favor from specific members of Congress to get projects funded.
Those members of Congress are listening to the most powerful, influential money-giving interests in whatever district. And so if the decision is between building something that will help a port near New Orleans, but might destroy wetlands that would protect the city in case of a hurricane, historically, the Corps has done the project that helps the port and makes the city less safe.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: So listen to what -- just on the record, listen to what my expert just said, if you are sitting at home listening to this conversation.
What you essentially just said is that if the needs of the people or the city in general doesn't fit the needs of a particular company that happens to be greasing a particular elected official, then the needs of the citizens will not be met?
SCHERER: Yes. And it is very well documented after Katrina there were a number of projects that the Corps of Engineers built because they were earmarked by politicians in Louisiana...
SANCHEZ: Wow.
SCHERER: ... that made the city less safe, that made the levee system less rigorous.
SANCHEZ: Well, it is always good to have this conversation. We will do it again tomorrow.
Our thanks to you for joining us this week on what we're calling our special investigative series on broken government. Or maybe we should call it the broken political system.
Ryan Alexander, Michael Scherer, my thanks to both of you.
SCHERER: Thank you.
ALEXANDER: Thank you.
Soldiers and kids are clashing in the West Bank today. Why did they gas the kids? That story is coming up in just a little bit.
Also, "TIME" magazine is calling her one of the brightest minds of her generation. And she is one of our most intriguing. So, who is the most intriguing in the news today? Well, we have a committee that helps pick them, and then we share them with you. And that is what we are going to do on THE LIST as it scrolls on.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
Time to list who is the most intriguing person in the news today.
Born in Ohio, raised in Tennessee, first ever female president of the U.T. student body, went to Harvard Law School, was a Rhodes Scholar. She oversaw Medicare and Medicaid and is now running President Obama's Office of Health Reform. "TIME" magazine says this of her, "universally known in health care policy circles as one of the brightest minds of her generation, and once highlighted as one of America's most promising leaders under 40.
Who is she? Nancy-Ann DeParle will be very visible Thursday, when the president holds his health care meeting with Republicans. But, today, today, she is our most intriguing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER (R), CALIFORNIA: Any Republican that says that we should start from scratch, I think that is bogus talk and it's partisan talk.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Is this party of no really the party of no, now that five Republicans say yes to the jobs bill? We are going to drill down on that. It's coming up in just a little bit.
Also, this. Ouch. That wrestler got a little too close to the show. Did he really think he was going to go up in flames? Well, this is embarrassing, folks. We will share it with you.
And also remember that you can join the national conversation whenever you visit Atlanta. We would love having you here on the set with us. Here is what you have got to do. Just call 1-877-4CNN-TOUR, 877-4CNN-TOUR.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Let's do a little something with pro wrestling, shall we? Everyone seems to talk about pro wrestling. Everyone seems to have an opinion about pro wrestling. Here is "Fotos."
This dude is a WWE bad guy called "The Undertaker." And watch as he come dangerously close to his own funeral. That is his costume going up in flames when pyrotechnics went off too early as he entered the ring. But he is a trooper, took the fireball to the face, and then he just walked right off.
Here is a different angle, by the way. He just stopped in the wrong spot. The Undertaker, as he is called, finished his match despite second and third degree burns to the arms, chest and face. Don't worry, he is going to be OK, but you know, you know that has to smart. The Undertaker as he makes his entrance.
All right, now I'll show you this. Surveillance tape -- watch the circle highlight. All right, police say that is a woman teaching her kid to steal wallets and purses as a pizza place in Indianapolis. That's right, she is teaching them to steal wallets and purses.
Watch her point to an unintended purse, and the little girl goes for it. They got away with at least one pocketbook at least, we understand. And yes, police are looking for them.
Tensions running high on the streets of the West Bank, young Palestinians with rocks squaring off against Israeli soldiers with very real guns and tear gas. Today, the Palestinians are angry because Israeli is adding a few West Bank holy bank places to the list of Israeli national sites. Nobody was badly hurt in this fight.
Hebron, by the way, is the only place in the West Bank where Jews and Palestinians live together in large numbers. And as we see in today's "Fotos," not always very peacefully.
This is by far the story of the day. This doctor allegedly broke every bond imaginable with parents and children. He is accused of molesting more than 100 children who were in his care, a pediatrician, folks. What a story.
And then later, what does the subway bomber's guilty plea say about our court system? Better yet, does it mean that it works as opposed to other methods that have been used? We will talk about that. Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: OK. I have been telling you about this story for quite some time now, and it is probably as amazing a news story as we have come across in some time.
Who is the last person that you would ever think would want to do harm to your children? Your doctor, right? More specifically, your kids' doctor, their pediatrician. You trust them and you love them when they help your kid to be well, because there is nothing worse than waking up in the middle of the night with a kid suffering from fever.
So we come to trust these doctors. This guy that we are about to tell you about, maybe he shouldn't have been trusted. He is accused, get this, he is accused of having his way with more than 100 children, some of them very small, many of them while they were right there in the doctor's office and the parents weren't looking.
How did the parents -- look, let's get into the whole conversation by having Brooke Baldwin joining us. And let me take you through a series of questions. The first is, who is this guy?
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Who is he? With stories that we try to be impartial, but it is difficult when you read this is just the beginning of 160-page indictment. We are talking about 471 felony counts of sex crimes.
Who is he? He is 56 year old Earl Bradley. Here he is, no longer a doctor, no longer a pediatrician. That license was revoked last week. Possibly, according to documents, possibly the worst serial molester in the nation's history.
Here is what we know. He had a private practice for about 10 years in Louis, Delaware called BayBee's Pediatrics. Monday's indictment accuses Bradley of victimizing 103 kids, all girls but one. Initially, he was arrested and charged in last December of raping nine children, the ages between 13 and as young adds three months of age.
SANCHEZ: What did he actually do? I am not sure I quite understand. I don't mean from a graphic standpoint, but he is a pediatrician, how was he able to do this, and fake out parents for example.
BALDWIN: Two questions there. Let me address what he did first of all, and a lot of we can't talk about on TV. But when you read the indictment, it is very graphic, and so the charges range from rape, sexual exploitation, violating kids sexually, orally fondling them. And what is interesting and awful to read at once, is he was very violent.
And according to the attorney general, and this is in Sussex County in Delaware, he had 7,000 patients, so it would be easy possibly to prey on multiple victims each and every day.
How did he get away with it?
SANCHEZ: Hold on. You are saying that a woman or a dad would bring their child to this man --
BALDWIN: Right.
SANCHEZ: -- and he would take the child in one of the rooms and have his way with the child while the parent was somewhere else?
BALDWIN: Right, because you think as a parent, wait a second, shouldn't I stay in the room with my child? But here is not what he did. He not only seduced the children with candy, he had this Disney- themed office, but he seduced the parents.
How? Let me toss to the sound bite. This is one of the reporters in Delaware who broke the story from the news journal and he really walks us through what this doctor would do.
SANCHEZ: All right.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS BARRISH, REPORTER, "THE NEWS JOURNAL": He set up a Disney- themed office with all of the special rooms with treats. And what he would do is to seduce the parents by playing with the children. And if say a mother had another child and had to change the diaper, he would say change the diaper and I will take Amanda to the, you know, to the playroom and get her a toy and piece of candy while you are doing that.
He may be gone for five minutes or two minutes, and what he would do is to seduce them like that. If a parent, say, a parent said, no, I will not do that, he would just go on to the next one. He had hundreds of dozens of kids coming in each day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: So we are not talking here about improper touching. We're talking about something, and a I guess that the viewers can use their own imagination.
BALDWIN: We don't need to go there.
SANCHEZ: But this is way beyond improper touching.
BALDWIN: Way beyond. And here is how they know. They finally were able to catch him and arrest him in December, but they found videos, something like a dozen-plus videos. He is accused of violating these children and taping these children. They also found videos in his home, and they were very violent. And the videos is what led to this indictment Monday.
SANCHEZ: Could there be others?
BALDWIN: There could be others. The D.A. --
SANCHEZ: I mean, children by the way.
BALDWIN: Yes. The D.A., his verbiage was I expect additional charges, meaning Dr. Bradley had a medical license in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Florida, so as more victims come forward, this story is far from over.
SANCHEZ: Wow. How did he not get ratted out by his nurses for example, which I know that usually know more about a doctor and the patients than the practice than anybody else?
BALDWIN: Absolutely. The nurses, the doctors, the sister who worked in the office, she -- there were red flags that date back as far as 2004, but nothing finally happened until December of last year.
SANCHEZ: Unbelievable.
BALDWIN: It makes your skin crawl.
SANCHEZ: Coming up in just a little bit, Elizabeth Cohen will be joining us as well. She has new details on the story and the possibility that this is not the only doctor doing this with children in the United States, if you can believe that. I know, as a parent, it scares the hell out of you. Thank you for the information.
Also, this -- (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RHONDA SMITH, TESTIFIED ABOUT LEXUS SUDDEN ACCELERATION: The results have been tragic. And today, I must say, shame on you, Toyota, for being so greedy, and shame on you NHTSA for not doing your job.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: All right, you will watch this for yourself. It is pretty amazing to watch, listen to that testimony. That woman says she almost died after her Lexus sped up to 100 miles per hour, and she threw it in reverse, and even that didn't work. That story is ahead.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: I notice that you wanted to say, no, no, I am a progressive. What's the difference? Why don't you call yourself a liberal?
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: Invite me back and we will talk about it some other time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: So, we will. You wanted to know, so we are bringing Bernie Sanders back, and he will tell us just what it is that a progressive, whatever, is, and why we should care. Bernie will also talk about the day's news and everything going on in Washington as well. There he is, your friend and mine, Bernie Sanders.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CALLER: Hey, Rick, this is Grammy Karen from Tampa. I'm following the broken government situation, and I feel that if we could do something about it, posing strict term limits on any office run for election in this country, we would do ourselves a big favor in not allow the life-time politicians to get in bed with the wrong people.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
We told Bernie Sanders, Senator Bernie Sanders, that we want him to come back to talk about progressives. Last time he was here, we kind of ended the conversation abruptly there. And we are keeping our word. The independent senator from Vermont and the founder of the Progressive Caucus joins us live from Capitol Hill.
Look, we are doing this thing here at CNN about broken government this week, and I just happen to know you have been screaming about broken government for years now. And we are going to get into that in a minute. But, first of all, welcome, and thank you for being here.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: Good to be with you.
SANCHEZ: Senator, you are for the public option, right?
SANDERS: Yes.
SANCHEZ: You -- would you like it achieved through reconciliation?
SANDERS: Sure. I mean, I would like it achieved, because I think it is important that people have a choice about other than going into other than a private insurance company. I think it will also keep the private insurance companies honest and slow down to escalating cost of health care.
SANCHEZ: What do you make of the fact that Republicans are saying, look, why are you trying to drive something down -- and look at this, while you and I are having this conversation Thad McCotter is sending this. He is an elected Republican government official. "The problem with government takeover of health care is not the GOP. It is the American people do not want it."
He says they don't want it, but every single poll I have seen shows that he is wrong. Am I wrong?
SANDERS: Well, let me tell you, you want to talk about government takeover of health care, go out in your community and ask the veterans if they like the V.A. or not. They love the Veterans' Administration. That happens to be a socialized health care system.
Ask the seniors if they like the private insurance companies or whether they like Medicare. They will tell you that they much prefer Medicare and the reliability of Medicare.
Talk to parents in Vermont and all over this country whether or not they like the S-Chip program where millions of kids have good quality health insurance coming from the government. They will swear by it.
SANCHEZ: OK, good. I understand your passion about this. And I think that most people at home do as well. If you believe in it so much, why the heck can't you get it through?
SANDERS: Well, I happen to believe that we should pass a single payer Medicare for all system. It is the only way that I know that we can join the rest of the industrialized world, guarantee health care to all of our citizens at significantly lower cost per capita than we currently experience.
We are now paying by far the highest cost per person for health care in the industrialized world.
You ask why can't we accomplish it? Well, this is where the government is broken. The government is broken because the private insurance companies and the drug companies and the medical equipment suppliers spend hundreds of millions of dollars making sure that they can gain huge profits out of the health care system rather than having us run a health care system for all people, quality care in the most cost effective way. That is why we don't --
SANCHEZ: What do you make, senator, of the president going to meet with Republicans on Thursday, and before he meets with them, he puts out the plan on a website. He says I am bringing you my plan and I'm anxious to hear what you have to say.
The Republicans aren't trusting this president. They say they think they are set up. What is your take on this whole thing?
SANCHEZ: Not at all. Why don't they put out their plan on the website and let's see what they have to say. In the House, the ranking Republican on the budget committee has a plan. It is called the privatization of Medicare, the privatization of Medicaid, giving people vouchers which will in no way keep up with health care inflation. That is what these guys really believe in.
So I think what the president is saying, and I have to tell you that I think that the president has been much too conservative on this issue, public option and everything else, but what is he saying to the Republicans, look, health care costs are going to double in the next eight years, what are your ideas?
There are 700,000 people in this country going bankrupt because of medically-related bills. What is your plan to control the escalating cost of health care, which will double in eight years if we do nothing? Don't criticize, come up with some ideas.
SANCHEZ: Let's talk about the president's plan. And just before my conversation with you, I went to the White House's website and pulled out the notes that of what they say it will do. It says it will set up new competitive health care markets, set up a new competitive health care market. Those are the words being used by the White House. How?
SANDERS: Well, what is it going to mean is that people will have, looking a website, different private plans and know what the coverage is and the cost is in a way that is not available today.
Now, that is not my preferred option. As I said, I would prefer a Medicare-for-all system so you don't have to go through all of that complicated stuff. But that is what they are pushing.
SANCHEZ: What about the ended of discrimination against preexisting conditions.
SANDERS: Absolutely.
SANCHEZ: You think that is a big deal, and you think this will do this, by the way?
SANDERS: Yes, I do. And I think what you are currently seeing, and we hear stories after stories, unbelievable. Imagine people who are suffering with cancer or serious illnesses not being able to get insurance, and the reason is, oh, we can't insure you because you will cost us too many money if you get a recurrence of your cancer or you diabetes or whatever it may be. That is obscene and insane and it has to end.
SANCHEZ: All right, let me tell you what many on the right say is obscene and has to end as well. They are saying they are spending too much, spending our children's money.
And meanwhile the White House came out with a report, and I am taking notes from what the White House is saying, so I want to run it by you. They are saying this reform for health care will reduce the deficit $100 billion for ten years. I ask you, do you buy it, and how?
SANDERS: Yes, because you are spending a lot of money, but you're also raising a lot of money.
But when the Republicans -- by the way, I have to tell you, Rick, I get a little bit resentful when the Republicans are attacking some of us for the very serious national debt and deficit that we have. These are the guys that went to war in Iraq and forgot to pay for it. These are the guys that gave tax breaks to billionaires and forgot to pay for it.
They are the guys that created a private insurance run -- the Medicare Part D program and forgot to pay for it. They bailed out Wall Street and forget to pay for it, and then they criticizing people like me who voted against all of those things for running up the deficit. So I think these guys have to be a little more honest.
Is the national debt a huge issue -- absolutely. What I think we have to do is ask the richest people in this country who have huge tax breaks to start paying their fair share. We ought to look at all of our government agencies, including the Pentagon, and start cutting spending in those areas.
SANCHEZ: Bernie Sanders, the senator who's certainly passionate about what he feels and he'd like to see the direction the United States goes in. Mr. Senator, my thanks to you, sir, for taking time to join us and go through our explanation for our viewers.
SANDERS: Thank you very much.
SANCHEZ: All right.
Boy, Toyota is on the hot seat today. It was getting hammered by politicians about its faulty brakes. Did you see some of this? And then suddenly a woman stood up and started addressing this committee. She's convinced that she was about to die while she was driving her Lexus because of the faulty accelerator problems, and she berates the automaker. I'm going to let you hear some of this, by the way.
And then in our next hour, this is interesting -- the man who almost took down New York city's subway system pleads guilty. Now, remember, there's been a big argument going on between what works best when you take a suspected terrorist in -- the civilian courts or the military tribunals? How was she handled? Did it work? Why did it work?
These are the questions you want answered. We're going to try to provide them for you. Stay right there and we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
A lot of stuff going on today. Did you see this? The head of Toyota says he knows what forced his company to recall millions of cars. Toyota grew too fast, that's what he's going to be telling Congress.
By the way, today Rhonda Smith testified. Her Lexus suddenly accelerated on a Tennessee highway. It went as high as 100 miles an hour without her being able to control it, she says. She then put the car into neutral, and she tried to bang the brakes to see if it would stop. She shifted into reverse and then hit the emergency brake as well.
And then she call her husband. She says she thought she was about to die.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SMITH: I knew he could not help me but I wanted to hear his voice one more time. After six miles, god intervened as the car came very slowly to a stop.
I pulled it to the left median. With the car stopped and both feet still on the brake, the motor still revved up and down at 35 miles an hour. It would not shut off. Finally at 33 miles per hour I was able to turn the engine off.
We've never wavered from our belief that the problem is electronic, not wandering floor mats.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Can you imagine? Smith complained to Toyota and to the federal government at the time. She says neither really took her seriously.
Toyota president Akio Toyoda testifies tomorrow, and we will be all over these hearings. We're going to let you watch this as it happens, so stay tuned to CNN throughout the day tomorrow, right here.
Meanwhile, this -- former New Jersey Nets start Jason Williams, you remember this case. He was just sentenced in the 2002 shooting death of his limo driver. This was a crazy story. After a party, after he had gotten home. Today he was in court. He cried, and that tearful apology is what we're going to bring to you in just a bit.
But next, more on this pediatrician. I know you guys want to know more about this story, and we're going to bring it to you. A pediatrician accused of molesting as many as 100 children who were in his care, young. In some cases, folks, in some cases they were infants -- a pediatrician. How do you trust your child's doctor again? Our Elizabeth Cohen will be joining us in just a little bit to take us through what our role as parents are when dealing with doctors in this kind of situation. Stay right there. We're going to be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
