Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Saturday Morning News
BP Set to Install Containment Cap at Gulf Oil Leak; Mel Gibson's Latest Rant?; U.S. Navy Blimp Will Be Used to Survey Oil in Gulf; What Americans Think About Arizona's Immigration Law
Aired July 10, 2010 - 08:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
T.J. HOLMES, CNN ANCHOR: Hey there everybody, from the CNN center in Atlanta, Georgia, this is CNN SATURDAY MORNING for this July 10th. Glad you could be here. I'm T.J. Holmes.
KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, exactly. You are.
HOLMES: That's who I am. Do you know who you are this morning? You had a rough time getting here, late night because of flight issues.
BOLDUAN: It was OK.
HOLMES: You're OK.
BOLDUAN: We're awake. That's what a gallon of coffee can do for you, and a team of makeup and hair. Anyway, I'm Kate Bolduan. Thanks so much for starting your day with us. It is -- what time is it right now? 8:00 a.m. here in Atlanta. It's 7:00 a.m. in New Orleans.
HOLMES: Yes.
BOLDUAN: And that means it's also day 82 of the oil disaster, a big day today, a big weekend ahead really on trying to stop this oil gusher. They're going to work on replacing a containment cap with another one. At the same time another recovery vessel is on its ways to the Gulf. That could have a big impact. We'll take you there live.
HOLMES: Also this morning, Mel Gibson, the actor has been accused in the past of going on a rant or two but now accused of going on another one. This one caught on audio tape allegedly the voice of Mel Gibson. And on this one, using racial slurs and also going off on his girlfriend, now ex-girlfriend. We will let you listen. That's coming up. Meanwhile, let me give you a look at some of the stories that are making headlines today.
First, the U.S. Justice Department confirming the well publicized swap of U.S. and Russian espionage agents has in fact been completed. The exchange happened yesterday afternoon in Vienna, Austria. The Russians get 10 alleged spies returned to them for four Russian nationals who are convicted of working for western intelligence agencies.
Also, a brutal story out of Brazil. A soccer player, a soccer star, named by police in the disappearance and murder of a woman said to be his former girlfriend. He is refusing to answer questions right now, according to police. His name is Bruno Sousa (ph) and he is one of seven people arrested in the case. But some of the details brutal, accused of killing this woman and also feeding her dismembered body to dogs. More detail on this story ahead.
Also, we are following Thursday's heavy rains and flash flooding in Oklahoma City. Take a look at the pictures here, a new threat today. More storms are possible in that region. State of emergency has been declared in 63 Oklahoma counties after several days of heavy rain -- Kate?
BOLDUAN: It's really hard to believe but we are almost three months into the Gulf oil disaster. Today the Coast Guard MVP wants to start a two-pronged plan to shut down that runaway well. First, replace the containment cap with a new one which has a tighter fit and would cut off nearly all of the oil. Then get a second oil recovery ship, the helix producer, on line. Experts say the relief wells are still the final solution.
Appearing on CNN's "SITUATION ROOM" with Wolf Blitzer last night, Admiral Thad Allen says the time is right.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VOICE OF ADM. THAD ALLEN, NATIONAL INCIDENT COMMANDER: Given the weather window we've got right now between tropical depressions, it was decided by the scientific team working with BP in Houston after consultation with senior leadership in Washington, that we will go ahead and proceed based on a time line to be provided by BP to change out the current containment cap with one that would completely shut in the well.
Subject to a time line that BP has presented, that means this afternoon it is currently under review. It is possible this week we could move to start removing the current cap and put the new containment cap in place.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: How long does that operation take?
ALLEN: Well, it would involve removing the current cap it and then unbolting that stub of pipe that was cut off, the marine riser pipe and then putting into place a new containment cap. That could take three to four days. But at the end of that if we are successful, then we have the potential to shut in the well and achieve containment of the oil.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: Well, BP at this point now and the government confident that they can stop this gusher. The company is revealing a new time line to do this. Let me walk you through it now. BP will begin removing the current containment cap as you heard Thad Allen talking about there, as early as today. It's not bolted down like he's explaining there so it's just sitting on top. So they can remove it fairly quickly. After that cap is removed, oil for a time is going to be flowing freely from the well. This work is going on, they're going to be trying to put the other cap in place, another more secure cap. Meanwhile, another vessel, another recovery vessel is going to be out there. It's going to be moved into the Gulf to help collect more oil. It could be fully operational by tomorrow. It can process as much as 25,000 gallons of oil every single day.
On Tuesday, BP will begin to lower that long-term containment cap. It could take three or four days to get this permanent seal in place to get it locked down. If all of this works the way it's supposed to work, the well will be essentially contained, meaning all the oil that's coming out for the most part is going to be collected and not going into the Gulf.
That will give BP a better chance of killing the gusher using the bottom kill method. Bp says the permanent solution to this whole disaster is still going to be the completion of those relief wells -- Kate?
BOLDUAN: Federal responders, they now have a new aerial weapon in their arsenal to battle the Gulf oil disaster. It's a U.S. Navy blimp. The aircraft will be used to survey the site of the oil and our Reynolds Wolf is live in New Orleans.
Reynolds, it's hard to believe that something so high in the sky is going to be a tool in the arsenal of fixing this horrible problem. How is this going to work?
REYNOLDS WOLF, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's going to be basically a floating observation platform. It's a platform, the MZA-3 that made the trip over from Yuma, Arizona. It's going to be going right along parts of the Gulf coast, mainly from Mobile Bay, Alabama, back over to New Orleans.
It's going to do a couple of things. One, it's going to observe the oil and the placement of the skimmers. Where they happen to be deployed and to keeping the oil away from the coastline. That's one thing they're going to do.
But they're also going to observe a lot of the pristine wetlands where you have the grand pelicans, where you have other variety of sea life, a lot of the mammals like pods of dolphins and see what animals that may be in distress and so then they can send crews to these areas where they can certainly help those animals accordingly.
The thing about it, though, Kate, is you have to have pristine weather conditions. You have pop-up thunderstorms. You have, say, a tropical system that moves in the area. They have to bring the blimp down. But in pristine conditions when things are working fine, it should be very effective. In fact, it uses less fuel than many of the helicopters or the fixed wing craft that's going to go out over the oil slick.
They could be up instead of just a few hours, but at 12 hours at a time, so certainly a tremendous tool in the arsenal. No question about it. They've been in service since about 2006. It is a dirigible. It's a airship that's about 178 feet long and certainly, as you mentioned, a huge weapon in the arsenal -- Kate?
BOLDUAN: And real quickly another huge weapon in the arsenal, you were telling us about a whale of a boat, a massive boat that they're trying to get to help with this effort as well?
WOLF: That's right. Hopefully it's going to be -- some testing goes well, it will be able to be used in possibly the coming weeks. The EPA is testing it because the way the "A Whale" (ph) works, think of it almost like a giant fish. As a fish Kate, brings in the water and then pushes it out through its gills, it's how it obtains the oxygen.
In this situation, what it's going to do is actually going to bring in some of the oil/water mix, skim it through the ship and then it's going to release a lot of the freshwater but it's going to keep the oil on board. When it's effective, if working properly, it could possibly clean out, get this, half a million barrels, not gallons but barrels per day. So definitely could be a game changer.
To give you an idea of how huge this happens to be, we throw out a number like, say, it's 1100 feet long. A lot of people think, what does that mean? Think of this. You know the Nimitz class of aircraft carriers, the Nimitz class, the biggest aircraft carriers the Navy has, these are even bigger. They're actually bigger than the largest aircraft carrier the United States Navy has deployed. It's an amazingly huge ship and hopefully will be in service quite soon.
BOLDUAN: Soon and for a while. Absolutely. Thank you, Reynolds, as always doing amazing work down in the Gulf. We'll talk to you soon. T.J..
HOLMES: Kate, over here with Bonnie Schneider who is holding things down here while Reynolds is out in the Gulf and where he is now right now in New Orleans. They're going to see a hot time. It's always hot down there, it seems.
(WEATHER REPORT)
BOLDUAN: And straight ahead, what Americans think of Arizona's new immigration law. We'll tell you what a new poll shows and what the White House is saying about the law.
HOLMES: Also, everybody it seems right now talking about Mel Gibson once again but for the wrong reasons. What the actor allegedly said in details on who he was talking to at the time. Ten minutes past the hour here on the CNN SATURDAY MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLDUAN: Welcome back. So we've been talking about today is day 82 of the Gulf oil disaster. And we are talking about this new two- pronged approach that BP and the government are trying to put into place. I want to bring in a marine biologist, Richard Charter joining us now on the phone to talk about really what is in store, especially this weekend, Richard, thanks so much for joining us this morning.
RICHARD CHARTER, MARINE BIOLOGIST (via telephone): Thank you for having me.
BOLDUAN: Let's just talk about this. We're seeing some of the video on that live streaming video from BP just this morning looking at some robotic arms moving around, moving things into place. What are we talking about here? Really, what are they trying to accomplish this morning?
CHARTER: Well, the objective today, as it appears, as the process beginning right now, is to stop the uncontrolled flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico from the runaway macondo (ph) well. That's been the objective obviously as you point out for the last 82 days. This particular device that they're going to install, I understand, is called top hat number 10.
Not that it's the tenth thing they've tried. But they've tried quite a few things, as we all know. This is a sealing cap that will replace the existing cap. And the existing cap, as we know, can recover about 23,000 barrels a day. The new cap would increase that to about 50,000 barrels a day, they hope.
BOLDUAN: So put that in perspective a little bit for our viewers, especially with your background as a marine biologist. What is the potential of this increase in containment? What does this mean for the marine life, for trying to finally get through this and stop this so people can try to start to recover and salvage what's in the Gulf? What does this mean, this increase in production from 23,000 to 50,000?
CHARTER: Well, hopefully after an interim period of at least 48 hours up to three or four days of totally uncontrolled flow from the well as they bring the new cap into place and get it sealed down, then we would not have additional oil flowing into the Gulf of Mexico.
That's really an important biological accomplishment, in that this event has now, in total, exceeded the volume of the 1979 (INAUDIBLE) blowout in Mexican waters, making it the largest human caused peace time oil spill on the planet ever. The only exception would be the wartime Kuwaiti oil fires which, of course, released oil mostly on land.
So this is the largest oil spill of all time on the planet and in peace time. And so for the marine life, it means that then you do not have a new tanker spill equivalent every single day happening in the Gulf of Mexico and you can begin to try to capture and contain and eventually over the course of months or years clean up the tremendous volume of oil that now has spread throughout the Gulf of Mexico.
BOLDUAN: Absolutely and one thing that I have found as I talked to like yourself and other scientists is we truly don't know the full impact of what this oil is having on marine life, on the surface as well as everything below the surface. That, I guess, today, this weekend is a huge step in the direction of at least being able to stop it, to begin the long process of recovery. Richard Charter, thank you so much for joining us. We know it's very early in California so thanks so much for joining us today.
CHARTER: Thank you for having me.
HOLMES: A national poll suggests the majority of Americans support Arizona's immigration law. But the Obama administration says the law violates the constitution and the administration has now filed a lawsuit challenging the law. They did that on Tuesday of this week.
Nicole Collins in Washington has reaction from all sides.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
NICOLE COLLINS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The battle over Arizona's tough new immigration law heads to court. The Justice Department filed suit, claiming the law preempts Federal authority.
REP. RAUL GRIJALVA, (D) ARIZONA: I think the Justice Department is absolutely correct in challenging this law on its constitutionality.
COLLINS: The Federal government wants to overturn the law that requires immigrants to carry their immigration documents at all times and allows police to question a person's residency status while enforcing of other laws.
The move brought swift criticism from Arizona's Republican senators, John McCain and Jon Kyl, who said in a statement, the American people must wonder whether the Obama administration is really committed to securing the border when it sues a state that is simply trying to protect its people by enforcing immigration law. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer stands by the law she signed in April and has vowed to fight.
GOV. JAN BREWER, (R) ARIZONA: We need the Federal government to do their job and if they don't do it, then Arizona will.
COLLINS: The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee also ripped the Federal effort, saying it shows contempt for the majority of the American people who he says support Arizona's law. A CNN/Opinion Research poll taken after the law passed does show 57 percent of Americans support the Arizona law while just 37 percent are opposed.
The legal battle comes at a politically charged time. Mid-term elections are just four months away. And some Republicans criticize the administration for focusing on immigration as a way to gain support from the Hispanic voting bloc.
In Washington, I'm Nicole Collins.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HOLMES: Also, you will want to be around for the top of the hour. 9:00 Eastern time. We are taking on what may be the next contentious fight in this immigration battle, birthright citizenship. Going to be talking to a former Republican congressman who is now a candidate for governor of the state of Georgia. Nathan Deal is his name.
When he was in Congress he sponsored the birthright citizenship act. It would essentially stop what the 14th amendment guarantees, citizenship for anyone born on American soil. Immigration under the spotlight again, special half hour, 9:00 Eastern right here on CNN SATURDAY MORNING.
What do you put out there on the Internet may cause you more trouble than you can imagine. Coming up, our expert tells us how you can take back your reputation online. It's 20 minutes past the hour here on this CNN SATURDAY MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: At 23 minutes past the hour, taking a look at some of the stories making headlines. This out of California. You're seeing up there on the screen that is a handwritten apology from the bay area rapid transit officer convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the shooting death of an unarmed man.
Johannes Mehserle (ph) says he is truly sorry for shooting Oscar Grant back in New Year's Day of last year. The incident was caught on tape by a passerby with a cell phone camera. Mehserle now faces sentencing August 6th.
A little more trouble here possibly for the 54-year old actor Mel Gibson. Police now investigating domestic violence allegations against him and the allegations come from Gibson's former girlfriend. You will see her on the video (INAUDIBLE) in a second.
An audio tape has also surfaced, reportedly capturing a heated argument between the two with sexist and racist rants attributed to Gibson. Let me play you just a snippet.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't walk around in tight clothes. I stay home for most of the time.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're an embarrassment to me. You look like a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) on heat and if you get raped by a pack of (EXPLETIVE DELETED), it's your fault, all right? Because you provoked it. You are provocatively dressed all the time, with your fake boobs you feel you have to show off.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
HOLMES: CNN has yet to be able to confirm the authenticity of that tape and the voices heard on it. Kate?
BOLDUAN: So have you Googled yourself recently? What if you see something about yourself online that is less than flattering, shall we say? A bad reputation online can cost you a job, a friend, a relationship maybe? So what should you do?
Our tech guru Mario Armstrong is here to help you out with that and help you take back control of your reputation online. So, Mario, can you really control this stuff? If so, what are the first steps to get rid of bad information about you online?
MARIO ARMSTRONG, DIGITAL LIFESTYLE EXPERT: Kate, you're absolutely right. I mean this is a big, big issue. You can take some steps on your own to really try to reclaim back your identity. The bottom like is you said it at the top, job recruiters, college recruiters, they're all going online and searching places like Google and other sites before they even really read your resume or your application. So this is very serious.
The first thing that people can do is they can create their own blog. In other words, I call this the thick-skinned strategy. And when you do a search on Google, if your results come up pretty high and you want those with inappropriate content that comes up pretty high, in order to get that pushed down, you have to create more content or more content has to be created about you online.
So the first step is, to create your own blog. You can use a website like blogger.com or wordpress.org and create your own blog and thereby up loading that fresh content, Google loves fresh content. The search engines love fresh content. That will help to push down the remaining content that was at the top that you don't want there anymore.
BOLDUAN: So one of the big things is always photos. Photos can be incriminating, obviously. If you're doing something dumb or you're caught -- who knows, right?
ARMSTRONG: Right.
BOLDUAN: People have a problem with Facebook photos like that as well. Can you scrub photos to get those off line as well?
ARMSTRONG: So the easy one, right, is if you see the photos that are inappropriate that you don't like, that your friends have posted up on Facebook, just ask them to simply remove that. The hard stuff is what about photos that you can't do anything about? Who do you call? How do you remove those photos? That becomes a lot more trickier.
So here's one work around, a free way to try to beat this is to upload images using free photo sharing websites like flicker, flickr.com. If you use a photo sharing website like flickr you can upload constant photos of yourself that paints you in a good light or at least more appropriate.
The key is to make sure that when you label the file name of those photos that you name -- that you put your own first and last name in the text of the description and in the title of that file because that's how Google will find that or other search engines will find that and bring that image to the front and put the other inappropriate images down. BOLDUAN: Real quickly because we are always running overtime. I want to ask you more questions. Are there companies that can help you do this because it sounds like a big undertaking. Can you tick those off for me?
ARMSTRONG: Yeah. So real quickly, there are two companies and I've spoken with the CEO of reputationdefender.com. His name is Michael (INAUDIBLE) and this company has been around since 2006 so they've been doing this for quite some time. There's a $9.95 fee and then there's some other fees for depending on how far you want to go with this removal.
If you're really, really concerned and you don't feel tech savvy enough to do this on your own and maybe several people that you want to do or maybe even a business that you want to clean up the reputation because maybe some things that are happening online, then you want to look at companies like reputationdefender or reputationmanagementconsultants.com. Those are two good sites.
And then the last quick one, is to do something with Google they call Google alert. This is free for you to sign up for. You can plug in your name as a key word. Any time your name slows up on a blog or on the Internet, you will get an e-mail letting you know. So at least you're aware of when you're being mentioned or when your name is putting out there online.
BOLDUAN: Prepare yourself. As always, our tech guru, Mario Armstrong. So much information. We'll talk to you soon. Every Saturday, talk to you soon Mario.
ARMSTRONG: OK, Kate. Thanks again.
BOLDUAN: We'll be back after break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: Well, we are keeping an eye on the Gulf today. It could be a big day, even though that picture you see lets us know it continues, oil continues to gush into the Gulf as we speak on this day 82.
But some major developments happening this weekend; they're going to be putting a new cap on that's supposed to be able to collect more oil. Another ship is going to be going out there to collect more oil as well. So some major developments in the Gulf oil disaster this weekend.
Hello to you all. Bottom of the hour here 8:30 Eastern time where we sit in Atlanta, Georgia, 7:30 in New Orleans and 5:30 out in California, wherever you may be, glad you're right here.
I'm T.J. Holmes.
BOLDUAN: And I'm Kate Bolduan. Thank you for starting your day with us. HOLMES: Well, starting off today in Kansas City the NAACP open its 101st convention taking place this morning in Kansas City, Missouri, with a long to do list over the days of this convention.
And the man with the list in his hand is that guy, Ben Jealous, organization president and chief executive officer. Good morning to you.
BENJAMIN JEALOUS, PRESIDENT & CEO, NAACP: Good morning T.J.
HOLMES: Thanks for being here with us as always -- always a long to do list at your convention. What's at the top of the list this year?
JEALOUS: Yes, the top -- the top for us is to ensure that all people in this country who want a job can get a job. Job creations got to be job one for our Senate, for our Congress, and for the entire country.
HOLMES: Would you say right now that it's not enough of the focus of the Senate, of the Congress, of the White House?
JEALOUS: Congress went home; the Senate went home and let unemployment insurance expire. And they literally took a -- let them eat hotdogs approach to the July 4th weekend as if a family that was surviving on $300 bucks a week could afford to even by a firecracker, when just they cut them off simply because they don't have the will to debate it.
You look just a few weeks before that, the Congress said we can't afford $23 billion to save hundreds of thousands of teachers' jobs, but we can afford $32 billion of war. But then maybe we can't afford to extend unemployment insurance.
We have got to remember that the -- what makes this country work is its people and we have to invest in them and we've got to make sure that the job creation is job one. Not just some after thought that we can deal with either before the holiday or after.
HOLMES: Well, Ben it sounds like you kind of blame both sides. They couldn't come to an agreement. You talk about not having the will affair but some had the reasoning that they -- we didn't want to pass these extended benefits because it had so much -- other money in there that should have been cut, need to cut spending a little. As you know a lot of money have been -- have been spent.
So would you say all sides are to blame?
JEALOUS: Yes and no. I mean, you know with regards to the Democrats, I think there's been a tremendous lack of leadership in the Senate. With regards to the Republicans there's sort of a dilettante mist -- way too many of them that somehow this is not the burning issue that it is.
People in this country have lost eight million jobs since the beginning of the recession -- more than that, as you know. They want their jobs back. And the reality is that nothing else will work until we get people back to work again.
HOLMES: Jobs are starting to be lost, as we know. People are losing work in the Gulf in particular. A lot of folks have been there lately. How much discussion will there be? I know that -- maybe people have heard a lot about but there are plenty of African-American fishermen.
And certainly Vietnamese fishermen down there -- a part of the -- a part of the Gulf that whole industry, seafood industry. How much focus and what can you do when it comes to making sure their voices are heard and not lost in this whole Gulf oil disaster?
JEALOUS: We have sent a letter to BP seeking to sit down and talk face to face about what's going on. For weeks we've been down there monitoring the issue. Of course, we have units around the Gulf Coast who live there and have been fully engaged.
And what's clear is that from the tourism industry, which weeks ago was down 45 percent, you know, right at the beginning of the peak season, the time when people make their tips on what you know their long hours, what they make their money for the year, to the fishing industry where, as you said, it's black fishermen, it's Native American fishermen, it's Vietnamese shrimpers, it's poor white, basically tenant famer fishermen.
I mean, these -- these folks, so people understand, they borrow $50,000, the small fishermen, at the beginning of the season, hoping to gross $80,000 for the whole season. And this comes right in the middle of it. Folks living at that little of a margin will never make this get up unless the country has a vision for how we rebuild the Gulf in a way that includes everyone. And so that's what we are pushing for.
We're also gravely concerned, quite frankly, that people of color once again, the deep south, are being used in a way that it's disposable. That -- that they're being pushed, we're being pushed disproportionately to the most dangerous jobs and with the most toxic substances and being left out of jobs further upstream.
HOLMES: Now, where have you seen that? Now, I'm going to jump on that point there. You have -- I mean, you're making an assertion here that, in fact, minorities are not getting the, quite frankly, if there are better jobs, but not getting better jobs, if you will?
JEALOUS: They're not getting the -- the vending contracts, for instance. They're -- and that's the concern. Yes, it's great. Look, we need to be involved at each level. And folks who are only qualified for low-wage work should have full access to low-wage work, absolutely.
But at the same time, if we're going to be taking the risk, we also need to be involved in the reward. And the reality is that this clean-up, the Katrina clean-up, but this one is better but there's still a long way to go to make sure that the -- that all elements of the business community down south are engaged. And quite frankly, that the business community down south -- on the Gulf Coast, is first and foremost who benefits because they're the ones who get hurt the most.
HOLMES: All right, last couple of things here and switching gears from the convention and switching from the Gulf, but Arizona, I know the NAACP ...
JEALOUS: Yes.
HOLMES: ... has been a part of the challenge going on out there to the Arizona law.
JEALOUS: Yes.
HOLMES: What do you hope to come from this in that you're challenging the law before it's even implemented, and also, do you wish that the Obama administration had challenged the law on some of these merits and on the discrimination stance versus, of course, the administration just saying it violates the federal -- the federal law that you can't step on federal law is what they went by.
JEALOUS: Sure.
First of all, we are very pleased that DOJ has gotten involved and the course that they're taking is a course that has been successful in the past. They have some brilliant lawyers there who are very committed to making sure that "show me your papers" does not become the state motto for states across this country. That racial profiling is not institutionalized in a way that this law seeks to institutionalize it.
We brought the lawsuit before the law had a chance to go into effect because we want to stop the law. This law is an outrage. It will make it difficult to enforce the law and to protect people because it will drive folks into the shadows and make them fear talking to the cops.
I mean, it is somewhat in jest, but even the governor of California said because of his accent he felt uncomfortable traveling to that state. This is a law that encourages the cops to focus on what people look like, what they sound like rather than what they do.
And what we need law enforcement to focus on is what people do. If you're doing something wrong, lock them up. If they just look brown or they sound like they might be from a foreign country, let them be. After all, that's the majority of the southwest.
And that's, you know, quite frankly, the majority of all the people in the country. Our history is we come from people who didn't sound like they came from here when they first showed up here.
HOLMES: And last thing, I have to get you on the record on because we have seen this story pop up out of California. I know you are the head of the national -- the national organization but you have plenty of satellite offices and branches all around the country, in every state.
But out in California the head of the NAACP has came out in support of legalizing marijuana calling it an issue of civil rights. Now, what as the national organization, your stance, on what California, the California NACCP has come out and said?
JEALOUS: We don't have a stand on the issue nationally. It is clear that our states, where there is no national policy, have the right to create policy within the association.
With that said, she's absolutely right that this is a civil rights issue. It's worthy of much debate and discussion, and focus on. And that's been lost. It's not about whether or not you can smoke pot. We don't care about that.
What we are focused on is the enforcement strategies here. And the reality is -- yes, you take a state like New York for instance.
HOLMES: Yes.
JEALOUS: Black kids are 20 percent less likely to be found with drugs in the pockets when the cops stop them but they're five times more likely to be stopped by the cops. And what -- what we know, you know, is a possibility that kids use drugs, they may end up using other drugs.
That's a very serious concern. What we know as a certainty if ever a young kid is taken down and locked up, thrown in jail, given a felony record; that they are extremely more likely to end up in prison for the rest of their life.
This is a drug that most of the past presidents have used. It's a drug that 76 percent of the adults in this country claim to have used at some point in their life.
HOLMES: But ...
JEALOUS: And -- and we would not have an issue if our kids were treated the same. But when you tell us our kids are 20 percent less likely to have drugs in their pockets but five times more likely to be stopped and searched, then you push us into a situation where what was not a civil rights issue to start with becomes a civil rights issue.
They are fundamentally questioning the enforcement strategies of saying you can't treat us fairly, then let's go back to the drawing board.
HOLMES: But -- but again, just the real issue she was getting at is that you just legalize marijuana and you could solve part of the problem with a lot of these young people who are locked up. But you are, again, you're saying that's the wrong way to go?
JEALOUS: What I'm saying is that this is a suitable question for civil rights group to take up because of the enforcement strategy.
HOLMES: Ok. JEALOUS: When kids are -- when you have a group of kids who are 20 percent less likely to have drugs in their pockets, when the cops stop them but they're five times more likely to be stopped by the cops, then the cops are not focused on what those kids are doing, they're focused on what they're look like. They're focused on them because they're black or perhaps they're working class, and so their parents are less likely to protest.
What -- whatever they're focused on, the reality is that our kids are being accelerated towards the prison system because the cops have decided to focus on black and brown kids, even when they're less likely to be carrying drugs in the first place.
HOLMES: Well, Ben I -- again, I appreciate you coming in. I know this is a big day for you all; 101st anniversary kicking off. I know you had the president doing your key note last year and also in the 90 year -- 99 year as well.
But this year, a lot would argue you have the big star in that family, Michelle Obama, is going to be speaking there on Monday.
JEALOUS: That's absolutely right. And we're all are very excited.
HOLMES: All right. Ben thanks so much. Good luck with the convention. And we'll certainly be talking with you down the road.
JEALOUS: All right, thank you, T.J.
HOLMES: Well, the largest Latino civil rights organization in the country also has its annual convention this weekend. The group is meeting in San Antonio. I bet immigration is going to be on the agenda coming up, 10:00 Eastern. Just before 10:30, we'll be talking to the president of that group.
A quick break, we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLDUAN: Now, wait a minute. Isn't this -- aren't we still in the summer of 2010, the summer of 2010? Would you believe we're already looking at the race for the White House, the next race for the White House?
Deputy political director Paul Steinhauser joining us live from Washington. I enjoy talking about it all the time, Paul. But why are we talking about the next presidential race so early?
PAUL STEINHAUSER, CNN DEPUTY POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Yes. It's a little crazy, right. We're about four months until the mid-term elections but I tell you, though, we have our eyes on about a dozen or so Republicans who may want to run in 2012 for their party's nomination.
And right now, Kate, they're out there kind of doing a delicate dance. They're out there helping out Republicans who are running this year, but also maybe laying the groundwork for their presidential run if they decide to do it.
Let's start with Newt Gingrich. You know where he was yesterday, South Carolina. The former Republican House Speaker there, helping out fellow Republican candidates. And then Monday he's going to be in Iowa. Kate, what do those two states have in common? They go right at the top of that presidential prime calendar season.
And guess what, New Hampshire is other state that's very early. And guess who is there tomorrow? Tim Pawlenty the Minnesota governor; he will be in New Hampshire helping raise money for that state's Republican Party and then he's going to Iowa as well.
Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, remember he ran last time. He's going to -- he's been in Iowa and he's just helped raise some big bucks for New Hampshire and he's going to be there as well.
So they're all out there; those three and a bunch of others, kind of maybe -- maybe laying the groundwork, Kate.
BOLDUAN: Kind of maybe -- I'll tell you, if you're a politician, if you're in politics and you even drive-thru Iowa, someone is going to be talking about it, no matter what time of year it is. If you're in that state, it's like, primary.
Anyway, also, let's talk campaign -- campaign style ad, campaign style commercial from Sarah Palin. Are people -- people reading the tea leaves a little too much here? What do you think?
STEINHAUSER: She is the big wild card. The former Alaskan governor and of course, John McCain's running mate in 2008. We don't know really what she wants to do.
But just this past week, just in the last couple of days, her PAC, her political action committee called SarahPAC put out their first video. And I tell you, if you look at it, it looks like a campaign commercial in a way. And in it she says this year will be remembered as a year when common sense conservative women gets things done for our country.
But Kate, she's the big question mark. Does she want to run for the White House or does she just want to stay very influential in the party, you know, endorsing candidates and campaign for them and also staying in the media. We don't know -- Kate.
BOLDUAN: I think she likes it that way. She likes to keep people on their toes. She likes to be a question mark.
Deputy political director Paul Steinhauser, thanks so much. We'll talk to you soon.
STEINHAUSER: Thank you.
BOLDUAN: The other big story with just one sentence, LeBron James goes from hero to villain in some places, I guess. HOLMES: Except for Miami. Yes, he's leaving Cleveland to join superstars Dwyane and Chris Bosh. This is a really big deal. A lot of you, I know, have been following. Our Rick Horrow is going to be along here in just a second. He's going to let us know how this all played out. Well, Rick certainly got better looking.
It's 47 past the hour. Oh goodness.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LEBRON JAMES, NBA ALL-STAR: In this fall I'm going to take my talent to South Beach and join the Miami Heat.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Miami Heat? That was the conclusion you woke up with this morning.
JAMES: That was the conclusion I woke up with this morning.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: And there it is. Went from hometown hero to one of the most hated men in the NBA, some would say the. The cheers erupted in Miami, of course, where the Heat played. That is his new team, going to be playing along with Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh who are the other big stars in the league.
Certainly a different story in Cleveland; that's the city he is leaving behind. They are so upset they are actually torching his jersey, as you see there. So the hype is over now. The story's over now.
We look forward to see how these guys play together on the court.
There's some other big sport stories going on out there. You know, World Cup, there's the baseball all-star game coming up.
Let's bring in our business sports analyst, Rick Horrow. He is here.
Rick good morning to you. Good to have you. What does that say? The NBA is in Miami and the best is yet to come.
RICK HORROW, CNN BUSINESS SPORTS ANALYST: Good morning. Twenty- four years ago when the NBA expanded to Miami, I was part of that with the Sports Authority; $32 million. Now they're paying Bosh and Wade and James ten times that, over five years.
It's a big gamble. May win, may lose. We'll just have to see.
HOLMES: Ok. And we talked about how much other cities could benefit. Certainly Cleveland could benefit, some of the, you know -- New Jersey, New York, and so on and so forth.
What kind of impact will his coming to Miami really have and some people even question if Miami is more of an international city. You know, the team hasn't been there that long, as you just described. So will it have that kind of an impact on Miami?
HORROW: The biggest announcement since the 1966 expansion Miami Dolphins, been there for that, too. I'm an old guy, by the way, as you know.
HOLMES: We know.
HORROW: Walking, talking, living, breathing, free throw shooting stimulus plan, five other cities lost, Miami beat them out theoretically; also the connection to central and south America. Remember 2016 the Olympics are in Brazil. There is that culture connection between the two markets.
And if the Heat does as well as everybody says they're going to do it could become kind of a launching pad for a South Florida franchise in the NBA down to South America as well. So there's no glass ceiling in this.
HOLMES: All right. I'm not even going to read part of the statement that the owner of the Cavaliers, Dan Gilbert, but people there are frankly they're upset; they're losing a hometown hero. But they seem hurt by the way he went about handling himself during this free agency period and he had to go online live national television one-hour special to essentially break up with his city.
Does he really -- a lot of people are using that term but did he really go from one of the most loved players in the NBA to one of the most hated literally in a sentence?
HORROW: Here's, you know, here it is; 48 percent of the points last year for the Cavaliers were his. 6,000 jobs indirectly related to his magic around that building. $17.81, that's the number that owner Dan Gilbert is using to sell LeBron jersey. Why -- 1781, Benedict Arnold's year.
HOLMES: Oh, my goodness. This is just ugly.
We will move to something else to something happier right now. I'll skip to baseball for now and I'm going to go straight to the World Cup. Are we watching this thing closely enough? The U.S. isn't in it? But is the U.S. -- are U.S. fans of football -- soccer, are they into this?
HORROW: Well, we started by saying 80 million consider themselves avid soccer fans. Then we understand tomorrow's broadcast first one World Cup winner is either going to be the Dutch or Spanish; obviously, a billion fewer. It's now 15 million or so United States viewers. Not a lot.
But when you consider it's more than the masters and the final four and the World Series. We are watching it and we're watching it more than we have been before. And in December when FIFA chooses who the 2018 or '22 World Cup winners for the bidder is going to be, if it's the U.S., we're going to watch even more. HORROW: Always love watching you. I hear that from viewers all the time. Rick good to see you as always, buddy. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. We'll talk to you next weekend.
HORROW: Yes, sir.
HOLMES: All right. Quick break, we're right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLDUAN: Expected rain should pull things off for much of the northeast and southern Gulf today.
HOLMES: Yes. We're talking about record high temperatures and a little severe weather. But Bonnie, I was surprised to hear you say this but it makes sense. Even though it's a little severe, you know what, we can take a little of it ...
BOLDUAN: Right.
HOLMES: ... a little rain coming down.
BOLDUAN: A little but ...
HOLMES: A little; nothing too serious, nothing dangerous.
BOLDUAN: No.
BONNIE SCHNEIDER, AMS METEOROLOGIST: No, don't say the two words I hate.
BOLDUAN: I was just going to say.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHNEIDER: What we're looking at right now is definitely some heavy downpours from Richmond, Virginia straight through Philadelphia and New York City. These are strong thunderstorms that we're monitoring very closely.
And as you can see they are causing some problems. I have one flash flood warning in Maryland right now. So that means we're going to see a lot of water coming through quickly. Be careful out there if you're driving through in Baltimore area this morning.
What if you're flying? Well, I warned you at 6:00 a.m. Look what's going on. We have big-time delays happening this busy Saturday morning in July. LaGuardia, an hour and fifteen minutes; that holds true for JFK as well; in Newark, New Jersey, we're looking at delays; Philadelphia, 45 minutes but increasing in Westchester County; White Plains, hour delays.
So these storms are rolling through. They'll break the heat T.J. and Kate, but they are causing some slow-downs as you well know at the airport.
HOLMES: Yes, yes. Certainly you well know.
BOLDUAN: Exactly. But I'm here.
HOLMES: Glad you made it.
BOLDUAN: The immigration debate rages on. And there is a new angle.
HOLMES: Yes. One man who's running for governor, children born to undocumented immigrants should not be granted citizenship. He's not the only one who has taken this stand. We're going to hear from him and others; a new hot debate, contentious part of the immigration debate. That is coming up.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: Top of the hour here now. It could be the next hot button phase of the immigration debate in this country, do children born to illegal immigrants deserve to be American citizens?
You remember this from your social studies class. It says clearly in the Constitution, American born, if you are born on American soil, simple as that. If you're born here, you are an American citizen, period. But, there is now a debate stirring about whether that should, in fact, be the case.
Hello to you all. I'm T.J. Holmes. We're going to be focusing in on this topic this half hour. Also we want to let you know right now, give you an update of what we're keeping an eye in the gulf. It's day 82 now of this gulf oil disaster. We have seen these live images from below the surface of the water change throughout the morning.
Work is going on today to replace a cap. They're going to remove the cap that's on there, put a new cap that has a better seal on it that will allow them to siphon up more oil. That coupled with the new ship that will be able to take in more oil, and they believe that sometime, maybe early next week, they will, in fact, essentially be collecting just about all of the oil that's coming out and none of it will be going into the gulf.
However, still keep in mind this does not the permanent solution, this is not the relief well. This is just other methods they're going to have in place early next week that essentially will have them collecting essentially all of the oil. So we're keeping an eye on that as we speak. Again, on day 82 of the gulf oil disaster.
Meanwhile, like we do every Saturday morning here at 9:00 Eastern, in this half hour, we focus in on one topic. Today that topic is birthright citizenship. Let me show you what the Constitution says, specifically, the 14th amendment. Here it is. You may remember this in your American History, social studies classes.
What it says, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." Essentially, no matter what, you're born here, you get to be an American citizen.
This hour we'll have live with us the man who drafted legislation in Congress that would do away with birth right citizenship. We'll also be speaking in a moment to someone who says that is a terrible idea.
Meanwhile, an Arizona state lawmaker also expected to introduce similar legislation later this year to deny birth certificates to children born to illegal immigrants. That's coming later.
But right now, Arizona authorities say they have to protect their borders. They say they have the right to protect their borders. But it's the way Arizona right now is going about it that has the White House concerned.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents. Making them subject to possible stops for questioning because of what they look like or how they sound.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: Now, the Obama administration sued Arizona this week over that legislation, but a Tucson police officer beat him to the punch. He was in first in the state to file suit challenging the law.
And our Sandra Endo caught up with him in Arizona.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SANDRA ENDO, CNN national CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For Tucson police officer Martin Escobar, it's personal.
MARTIN ESCOBAR, TUCSON POLICE OFFICER: In grade school, I was stopped by a border patrol agent and asked, you know, if I was here legally and the conversation carried, yes, I'm here. And I was asked for identification. But I don't have any. I was a kid at that time.
ENDO: Escobar legally immigrated to Arizona from Mexico when he was five years old. He was the first person in Arizona to file suit against the state's recently passed immigration law, which he says would promote the racial profiling he says he's faced before.
Now it's for a judge to decide whether his lawsuit and six others filed against the state will make a difference, including the most recent one filed by the federal government.
(on camera): And now with the Department of Justice filing suit against Arizona, what do you think of your chances in terms of making sure this law doesn't take effect?
ESCOBAR: You know, I'm so happy. I was hoping that they would step in. ENDO: Tucson is just 60 miles north of the Mexico border, where 95 percent of illegal immigrants who cross into Arizona are Latino. On the federal level, the Justice Department's lawsuit argues immigration policy should not be set by each state.
(voice-over): In Tuesday's filing of the federal suit, Attorney General Eric Holder said, "seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves." But Arizona officials claim the federal government isn't doing enough. Mr. Escobar, who is a 15-year police veteran, agrees with the federal suit, which also claims Arizona's law would tap already scarce resources from local law enforcement.
ESCOBAR: And now having to enforce a federal law, immigration law, is going to cut back a lot of our resources where we can't do this.
ENDO: Now he's finding himself in a tough position, doing on- line training for the new law, which is set to take effect in a matter of weeks while waiting for his day in court to fight it.
(on camera): So what are you hoping to see come July 29th?
ESCOBAR: I hope that they put a stop to this law. I hope the injunction goes through and the law doesn't go into effect.
ENDO (voice-over): Sandra Endo, CNN, Tucson, Arizona.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HOLMES: And we are also getting reaction from Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce. He is the chief sponsor of that Arizona immigration bill, the controversial one that the government, the Obama administration, has now sued over. He said he's had it with all the controversy now.
Here's more of what he told us.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUSSELL PEARCE, ARIZONA STATE SENATOR: Our citizens, our neighbors, once they cross that border, it's our health care system, educational system, our criminal justice system, $2.7 billion a year in Arizona to educate, medicate and incarcerate.
When do we stand up? The federal government is wrong. These are the same open border anarchist that have opposed any enforcement efforts and it's about non enforcement issues. They are not worried about profiling. This bill prohibits profiling. 16 percent of Hispanics support it in Arizona. You know, enough is enough.
I mean, I get tired of the controversial comments. This is the most popular bill in America. Americans support it, overwhelmingly they support it. And yet every time, you know, folks get on the air and they talk about Arizona's controversial bill. Controversial with whom? Law breakers versus law keepers? (END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: Again, that's state senator Russell Pearce. Again, the chief sponsor of the Arizona immigration bill that is now in place and is going to go into effect later this month.
But Russell Pearce, that state senator you just heard from is now expected to introduce another bill in Arizona, sometime this fall that would keep birth certificates away from children who are born to illegal immigrants.
So this would fly in the face of birthright citizenship that the 14th amendment of the Constitution guarantees. Let me bring in Ruben Navarrette. He is a columnist for the San Diego "Union Tribune." He's also a contributor to cnn.com. Joining us this morning via Skype, Ruben, we appreciate you being with us this morning.
So let's start at the top. This is a very emotional topic for a lot of people. There's a very simple legal question here, which the Supreme Court has ruled on. You're born here, you are a citizen, period. Let's speak on not a legal question but just a moral and a practical question.
You answer this for a lot of people out there. If two people come to this country illegally and they have a child, why should that child then be granted the rights and privileges of citizenship in this country?
RUBEN NAVARRETTE, COLUMNIST, SAN DIEGO "UNION TRIBUNE": T.J., thanks for having me. It's because it says so in the Constitution. It's the law. And what's interesting about the other side of this debate, people like Russell Pearce will talk your ear off about how we have to respect the law. We have to respect the law.
I'm all for that as a son of a cop I don't need people like Russell Pearce lecturing me on the law. This, in fact, is the law. So they play it fast and loose when the law agrees with them, they say we ought to respect it. When the law disagrees with them, they walk all over it.
HOLMES: Now, Ruben, I ...
NAVARRETTE: It's illegal.
HOLMES: I'm with you there. And a lot of people are. And the Supreme Court has ruled on this very question. We know what the 14th amendment says, we know what the law says. But away from a legal question, a lot of people have a moral and a very practical approach to this. And it's a manner of real world application, why is it that a child born here to parents who are here illegally, why do they deserve, not as a legal question but a practical question, citizenship?
NAVARRETTE: You can flip it around, why don't they deserve that? I would say they deserve it because if they come here and make a contribution, they stay here, they're working here, they're paying taxes, you know, I'm of the opinion that if they're breaking the law, we can't condone that if I find them, they're going to be deported.
But aside from that once the child is born here, they should be allowed as a child to deal with, for hundreds of years, which is to continue to contribute to society as a U.S. citizen. That's always been the way it is.
The moral question is, you do not strip away from children the protective cloak of U.S. citizenship. We learned after 9/11 that if the government can mess with you, it will. One thing that stops the government from messing with you is the protective cloak of being a U.S. citizen. That's what these kids have and that's what people like Russell Pearce want to strip away from them.
HOLMES: And there are a lot of scenarios I can give you. I have a lot of people, while I was preparing for this, giving me different scenarios and examples and hypotheticals. But here is one of recent news. We just had 10 people kicked out of this country for allegedly being agents of the Russian government. Ten spies, they admitted, in fact, being spies.
Some of those people here working against the United States had children here. Why do those children under the law, as well, again, this is a practical argument people are having. So I would like to get your response to it.
NAVARRETTE: Sure.
HOLMES: Why do children of the people here working against this country, why should they be U.S. citizens, those children?
NAVARRETTE: Well, they're exceptions. The idea of a foreign diplomat, we talk about spies. The court case you mentioned before which dealt with the aftermath of the Chinese exclusion act and actually dealt with the Chinese-American makes exceptions for the children of foreign diplomats. It would make sense that wouldn't apply, obviously with the case of spies, it's my understanding maybe these people may have came to the country legally with work visas.
If they come to the country legally then it's not even applicable to the argument because the debate would really be if they came here illegally, what do you do with the children who are here? This has always been the case. The court's never ruled on the idea of having parents who were here illegally. But you know, as I said before, I think the 14th amendment is pretty clear.
It's profoundly un-American to try to pick on these kids and strip them of their citizenship. So you can do the next logical thing, which is to deport them. They want to be able to deport U.S. citizens and there's nothing more objectionable thank that.
Actually, by the way, as popular as Arizona law is, and Russell Pearce mentioned that, this idea is profoundly unpopular with some of those same people, some of those same Republicans have refused over time to pull the trigger on this kind of thing because it realized how unpopular it is. HOLMES: Well, this issue you speak of, the most Rasmussen poll I was able to find says 58 percent of Americans, in fact, were in favor of doing away with birth right citizenship. So I know what you mean, the polls can be all over the place, and opinions and a lot of people just starting to hear about this debate. One more question ...
NAVARRETTE: T.J., for 11 years Republicans in Congress have tried to use this as a chew toy but they've never been able to muzzle support within their own party because the idea of going after kids, Democrats actually would love to see Republican do this. They would love it. They could sit on their hands and watch the destruction. But a lot of smart Republicans out there, (INAUDIBLE) Pence and others have said, "no, thank you, we're not going anywhere near it."
HOLMES: Last thing here. Just what potential does this have? If this debate really ramps up and this happens in Arizona and they introduce legislation there. What can this do? As divisive as the issue of immigration can be sometimes, how much more divisive can it get? How much uglier can it get if we are talking about bringing children into this debate?
NAVARRETTE: It is a lot worse, this is the nuclear option. This is the option that brings people together, puts people on the fence, not really sure and throws them on the side against this kind of movement and this law. Again, there's a reason why this has been so unpopular.
People say this in the abstract and polls and the like but the reasons politicians don't go near it is because it would take a lot of people who haven't made up their mind and actually say, "you know what, I'm all for this but I'm all for securing the borders and I'm all for deporting illegal immigrants and maybe I don't even have a problem with local cops enforcing immigration law but I don't like the idea of punishing the kids for the sins of their parents."
And I think that's really a bridge too far, when they play this card it's going to backfire on them. So again, Democrats are hoping Republicans do what they love nothing better but a lot of us would hate to see it.
HOLMES: Rube, it's good to have you. Always good to talk to you. Thanks for getting up early for us this morning. But again, he's a contributor for us for cnn.com, also worked out there for the San Diego "Union Tribune." Good to see you. Thanks so much for chiming in. We'll talk to you again soon.
NAVARRETTE: Thanks, T.J.
HOLMES: Well, the immigration debate, of course, not ending with the Arizona law. Up next, there was, in fact, and Ruben mentioned it there, some proposed legislation in Congress that would ban citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants. It's still sitting there. It hasn't gone anywhere for quite some time. And one of the sponsors of that bill here with me live, coming up right after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: About a quarter past the hour now and again we're using this special half hour to focus on immigration. Another part, another twist in this whole immigration debate, birthright citizenship. If this were to become law, federal law or in Arizona, like they're expected to introduce legislation later this year. It would eliminate automatic citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants in the U.S..
Now former Republican congressman Nathan Deal introduced the bill when he was in congress. He joins us now. He's here with us. He resigned from Congress. Running for governor for the great state of Georgia here now. Welcome. Thank you for being here and you know, this is a hot topic, hot debate. Fires up a lot of emotion.
So you tell me, if you become the governor of the state of Georgia, will you push for a bill that takes away the birth right citizenship for kids born to illegal immigrants in this state?
NATHAN DEAL, FMR. REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN, GEORGIA: Well, that's unfortunately something that only the federal government can do because in my opinion, in the opinion of many legal scholars, it is a misinterpretation of 14th Amendment.
The 14th Amendment has a little clause in the middle that says, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The legislation that I introduced says that to be subject to the jurisdiction thereof and grant birthright citizenship that at least one of the parents had to have some legal status in this country.
And you know, the United States as a distinct minority in the world community. Not a single European country grants birth right citizenship.
HOLMES: But a lot in the western hemisphere do.
DEAL: Well, only 33 countries nationwide and 122 do not.
We're a distinct minority in the world community. And a lot of people disagree with you about the interpretation of that 14th amendment. They say that -- you say that jurisdiction thereof, does, apply, in fact, to a child who is born here. I know there is a legal debate. I'm certainly not a lawyer here. But still, the Supreme Court has ruled there.
HOLMES: But you tell me your definition, not the legal definition, you tell me what do you believe an American citizen is. What is an American? What does that mean to be an American?
DEAL: It means somebody who comes, their parents come into our country in a legal status. And that's the reason that the law was put there in the first place, was the 14th amendment was designed to define what the status of people who had been born into a slave society and it was after the civil war.
If you look at the debates around the 14th amendment there was never any contemplating that we were going to grant citizenship to people who were illegally in our country. Never even a discussion.
HOLMES: Do you think -- a lot of people and a lot of response I'm getting on line. I'm seeing a lot of folks on Twitter, Facebook, seeing the responses out there. People just think this feels, frankly, un-American. I mean, a child, no matter how your parents came here, you are here on this soil.
You're a citizen of this world, you're a citizen of where you happen to be born. It's the way it always has been. It just seems un- American to take that away from a child, the parents are illegally and maybe they came here for a better life. You know what, we're going to reward you for just being born here.
DEAL: Well, that's why it needs to be clarified. I think that we need a very clear-cut case. We've not ever had one in the Supreme Court.
HOLMES: You don't think it's clarified by the 14th amendment?
DEAL: I don't think it's clarified at all. In fact, I think that is the source of the ambiguity. We need to have it clarified by the courts. We've had cases in the past, for example, an Indian born on an Indian reservation was denied citizenship because he said he wasn't subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
We've had a weird history of court cases but never one that's clearly defined whether or not you have both parents who are illegally violating the laws of the United States, whose child is granted citizenship.
HOLMES: Why do you think it went nowhere when you introduced it in Congress? You did it for years, I think.
DEAL: Well, it's a controversial issue, that's the first thing. And I think that it is something that our country is becoming aware of. Now, there are certainly more important things perhaps on the horizon. Illegal immigration is a huge problem for the state of Georgia. We have had the largest single increase of illegal immigrants of any state in the United States, 115 percent since 2000.
HOLMES: How in the world would you enforce this? If a child -- everyone had to prove citizenship, if they're born in the U.S. hospital, how in the world would you do that? I wouldn't know how to go -- prove I'm a citizen of the country. I had to hunt down my birth certificate. But how in the world would you enforce something like that?
DEAL: The same way every European country does right now.
HOLMES: How do they do it?
DEAL: They do it by insisting that the parents prove that they're legally in their country as a condition for their child to be granted citizenship.
HOLMES: How are you supposed to prove that? Most people walking around right now. How would they -- I mean I got the driver's license but that doesn't prove anything other than I passed the test.
DEAL: Well, just the same way when I was able to get legislation passed to say that if you're going to sign up for Medicaid in this country that you had to prove by documentation that you're a citizen. Up until I passed that law in Congress, you went in and you were asked a question, are you a citizen, you say, "yes, si, wi," anything in the affirmative.
We signed you up for our Medicaid. We required and spelled out the kind of documentation that was allowed. That's the way you would enforce it. But the first step is, let's get some legal premise on which we can act.
HOLMES: All right. Nathan Deal, again, former congressman, now running for governor of the state of Georgia. We appreciate you coming in. Again, it's a hot button topic for a lot of folks. A rot of clarity needs to be had in the whole immigration debate. But this is part of it. We appreciate you coming in.
DEAL: Thank you.
HOLMES: All right We're taking a quick break here. We'll come right back with some of your top stories on the CNN SATURDAY MORNING. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: And again, we're keeping an eye here on day 82 of the gulf oil disaster. You see the live picture behind me. You see there, full screen now of this happening today.
This is still oil gushing into the gulf. But it's a big day and a big weekend. Because they're going to take a different cap on that's currently there and put a new cap on that has a tighter seal, which will allow them to siphon up more oil, they say. And also another ship is going to be brought online that can siphon up oil as well.
When all these things are in place, maybe early next week they do believe they will be collecting just about all of the oil coming out. This is not the permanent solution of the relief wells, but, still, these are major developments that certainly could help the collection of that oil.
Meanwhile, there's a blimp out there that's being helped to spot oil sheen and get skimmers out to places quicker and also the big whale ship, "A Whale," is what it's called, waiting to go online. It can take in some 21 million gallons of water a day and siphon off and skim that oil. All of these things going on in place for some major developments in the gulf oil disaster. Quick break, we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HOLMES: Well, it's a unique view of the gulf oil spill you will only see right here on CNN. It's coming up next hour. Our Amber Lyon, one of our correspondents who is an accomplished diver, she is taking a crew under water, she gets under the spill. A chance to see it up close for yourself and under water, coming up 10:00 -- 10:30 Eastern, I should say, right here on CNN.
Also, I'll be back along with Kate Bolduan at the top of the hour with more live news as CNN SATURDAY MORNING continues. But now, I want to hand it offer to Poppy Harlow and "YOUR BOTTOM LINE."
