Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Three Days Until $85 Billion in Spending Cuts; Trayvon Martin: What Have We Learned?; Is Yahoo! Wrong to End Telecommuting?

Aired February 26, 2013 - 10:30   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to our new half our show "Talk Back", three hot topics, great guests, your comments. First "Talk Back" question, "Who do you believe when it comes to forced budget cuts?"

Just minutes ago House Speaker John Boehner held a news conference and he had some choice and quite color words for the Senate.

CNN's Dana Bash was front and center. Tell us what he's done Dana?

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, at this point it is all about what they call here in Washington messaging. And that's why this card was handed out to members of the House Republican caucus. Going through some of the bullet points they think is going to be the most powerful. Not if these forced spending cuts go into effect, but when. And when it comes to messaging, as you said, the Speaker did have some colorful words for the Senate.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: For 16 months, the President has been traveling all over the country holding rallies instead of sitting down with Senate leaders in order to try to forge an agreement over there in order to move the bill. We have moved the bill in the House twice. We should not have to move a third bill before the Senate gets off their ass and begins to do something.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Wow. When I first heard that Dana, I said did he really say that? So I guess the next logical question, and I don't want to repeat the word, but is the Senate getting off their duffs and doing something, anything?

BASH: Well, they're going to have movement. Let's just put it that way this -- this week. The plan is for Senate Democrats to have a vote on their plan which Republicans reject because it would replace the -- for spending cuts with a mix of tax increases and other spending cuts.

And what we're watching for today Carol is what the Senate Republicans are going to have as their plan. Our understanding is that they're going to talk about some kind of measure to give the President flexibility in how he has cuts. The question is whether it would just be across board or just in Defense.

And that is really significant because if they would give the President across the board flexibility in this cuts they could lure some conservative Democrats and it might -- might, change the dynamic and change the way that this is going to go down on Friday.

COSTELLO: Well, we've got a couple more days. We'll see. Dana Bash thanks so much.

Playing with us today, Donna Brazile, a democratic political strategist and CNN contributor; Jason Johnson, political science professor at Hiram College and chief political correspondent for Politics365; Ross Douthat, conservative New York Times columnist and CNN contributor; and Amy Kremer, chairwoman of the Tea Party Express. Thanks to all of you for being with us today.

JASON JOHNSON, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, POLITICS365: It's good to be here.

AMY KREMER, CHAIRWOMAN, TEA PARTY EXPRESS: Thank you for having us.

ROSS DOUTHAT, COLUMNIST, NEW YORK TIMES: It's good to be here.

COSTELLO: Oh thank you for being here.

Ok. Donna, I'm going to start with you because you can sort of give us the Democratic response to what John Boehner said today, that the President is just playing politics, he's still campaigning, he's not sitting down with the Senate, he's doing nothing to overt these forced spending cuts.

DONNA BRAZILE, DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL STRATEGIST: Well, first of all, Mr. Boehner is just coming back from recess. He took a vacation. And right now on the day the sequester is supposed to happen on March 1st, Mr. Boehner is going to allow the Congress, the House to go back home.

So before he begins to spot off and use the but word, perhaps the House Republicans need to sit down with the House Democrats and hammer out a balanced plan. That the Senate can take up and pass. Now the Senate is going to take up a balanced plan, balanced meaning cuts as well as revenues. We cannot simply cut our way out of this problem. We've already done more than $2.5 trillion signed into law.

It's time that we get serious about these problems, stop kicking it down the road and come up with a plan that will grow the economy so that the American people can feel comfortable and confident that their lawmakers are doing everything to put people back to work.

COSTELLO: Here's the thing Ross, like the Republicans say you know no more tax hikes. We've already been there, we've done that. We've give the President some of what he wanted stop but the President, he's not exactly talking about major reforms to entitlement programs.

So it's just the same old stuff.

DOUTHAT: Yes, it's the cycle of sort of essentially pointless arguing in terms of what our long term fiscal picture looks like and I think the Republican view is you know they listen to Donna say we've already had you know $1.5 trillion in cuts and they say, well, look, most of those were phantom cuts. There were cases where you would count the winding down of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan as cuts even though that was going to happen anyway. Or it was you know the series of cuts that we had during the government shutdown debate a year ago.

The "Washington Post" went in and did an investigation and it turned out you had agencies counting programs they were already going to cancel and so on. So the Republicans do have a point in that sense. The problem is that the Republican strategy is basically they can't decide whether they want to take the sequester or not. And whether they take it or not, it doesn't actually get them to where they should want to go, which is as you say entitlement reform.

So it's -- it's not a winning proposition for the Republicans even though I think they're right that a lot of the cuts the Democrats have claimed to have made aren't that real.

COSTELLO: Well, if you belong to the Tea Party part of the Republican Party Amy and correct me if I'm wrong, Tea Party Republicans say go for the sequester. Just go for it.

KREMER: Well I do say go for it. And the reason is because at the end of the day it's only 2.3 percent of what we're spending this year. You cannot tell me that every department in Washington, of every department that is part of our federal government, cannot find 2.3 percent to cut. When American families and businesses are having to cut back, Washington should have to do the same.

Carol, $85 billion, which it's not even technically going to be $85 billion, but $85 billion is only 25 percent more than we just doled out for Sandy relieve and it's only 47 percent of what we spent to bail out AIG. The problem is Washington thinks they can spend our money better than we can. Washington doesn't have any money. They collect our money and spend it. There is no accountability.

But you know what, it's all of their faults. Just as Donna said you know that John Boehner just came back from a vacation, I mean, the President has been on vacation. He was in Hawaii and then came back and then he went back to Hawaii. He was in West Palm Beach golfing. I mean, they're all responsible and they need to rein in the spending.

And the fact of the matter is we cannot balance our U.S. budget by only cutting discretionary spending. We've got to look at entitlement reform.

COSTELLO: Yes but -- but these cuts -- these cuts are across the board. And I think, Jason, that that's what's confusing the American public because they don't know whether to believe Republicans on this point or Democrats on this point. Like will these cuts mean devastating effects for everyone across the country? Won't they? I think that's tragic. People really don't understand this.

JOHNSON: I think it's a shame. And here's the thing. I don't believe Barack Obama because he's the one who partially negotiated this idiotic deal two years ago. I certainly don't believe the Republicans who refuse to pay attention to economic common sense which says that you have to cut spending and raise revenues. The people who I believe are the government workers. The regular people out there who are about to lose their jobs because members of Congress can't do their job. Because everybody spent the last year and a half campaigning trying to figure out who was going to be President rather than actually doing their job.

So all the border patrol people who are going to lose their jobs, all the TSA people, I have a flight next week and I'm not look forward to this. All the school employees who are going to be furloughed, that's who I believe they want this to get fixed. The solutions are out there and neither side is really serious about getting something done more so the Republicans.

KREMER: Carol, can I say something real quick here? I just want to say, what is the most horrible thing about all of this is they've known 15 to 18 months that this was coming. These agencies should have had contingency plans in place in case it was not resolved and they didn't. It's never good policy to do across the board cuts.

(CROSSTALK)

COSTELLO: Well if they do they have furloughs we've got to wrap --

BRAZILE: Well, the sequester -- the sequester was supposed to bring both sides together for a grand bargain as you know the super committee failed to do its job. So it is true that both -- both sides share some of the responsibility for fixing this problem, but you got to have one side of the table willing to negotiate and compromise.

JOHNSON: Right.

(CROSSTALK)

KREMER: Harry Reid hasn't passed a budget in almost four years. It's coming up on four years.

DOUTHAT: The reason -- can I just make a pitch for blaming the American people?

COSTELLO: Sure, go ahead Ross button this up for us.

DOUTHAT: I mean, just -- just to wrap up, I mean, the reason that we have these divisions in Washington in part is because the American people really, really, really want spending cuts right up until they see what the spending cuts actually are. And you know, so it's not just that our politicians are letting us down, it's that they're sort of you know their responsive to public opinion and public opinion likes fiscal discipline more in theory than in practice.

COSTELLO: All right, we're going to button up this segment by --

DOUTHAT: Blaming Americans.

COSTELLO: Blaming Americans. No, we want to go to our Facebook page and our Twitter account and we want to ask this question again. "Who do you believe when it comes to forced spending cuts?"

This from Jackie, "The budget needs to be cut and the billions of forced cuts are a pittance compared to the trillions in debt. Completely absurd arguments and threats from the Democrats and President."

This from Lee, "It's time for Republicans to admit they are obstructing. Hoping to put the blame on the President, but this time it's not working because of Americans, they understand."

Next "Talk Back" question, "Is it wrong to end telecommuting?"

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: Next up "Talk Back" question, "Is Yahoo wrong to end telecommuting?" Yahoo's new executive are shaking things up. I'm sure you've heard, Marissa Mayor has ordered telecommuters back to the office.

In a memo obtained by a tech blog, "All things D" Yahoo's HR Chief writes in part to become the absolute best place to work, we need to be working side-by-side. That's why it's critical that we are all present in our offices. The thinking here, that the best ideas come from face-to-face conversations with your co-workers.

But working moms and other Yahoo! employees may think the switch to a cubicle from the comforts of home has little impact on their creativity and a great big impact on their attempts at a work/life balance.

So the "Talk Back" question today, "Is Yahoo! wrong to end telecommuting?" I want to bring in Professor Gaye Theresa Johnson and her husband, Chuck D. They're going to be talking about the Trayvon Martin segment after a break but I wanted to bring you in Gaye, because you have a baby, a 1-year-old. And telecommuting's probably pretty important to you.

So do you think Yahoo! is right to end telecommuting?

PROF. GAYE THERESA JOHNSON: No, I don't think they're right at all. It's interesting because nowadays with this advent of new media, I mean, you have a whole different kind of set of social questions. So I mean, is it better for women to be in an office side-by-side with their other co-workers? Probably it's great in terms of inner personal relations and it's probably better for women to be in the office next to co-workers in terms of interpersonal relations, but in terms of not being able on to telecommute when you have a child, that's something that I think really privileges men because women, heterosexual women, don't have -- have wives at home to help them with those children.

COSTELLO: Do you agree with that, Amy?

KREMER: No well, look, I think the reason we're talking about this is because it's an Internet company, it's a technology company, and you certainly wouldn't expect this from a technology company. But look, you know there are -- there are a private business. The government is not involved. So it's not loss it doesn't work, they can change it back.

But you know I think through social media and technology, we have lost some of the interpersonal relationships and relationship building skills. And it sparks creativity when you're with your co-workers and that's why companies do retreats and team building exercises and whatnot.

So they may think that it's what's best for them right now. If it doesn't work, they can change it back. But I'm not really one to decide.

COSTELLO: Well Ross, I think that there are reports out there that some Yahoo! employees were abusing the privilege and they weren't working as hard as one might expect from home. And that's really why the Yahoo! boss called them back into the physical work space.

DOUTHAT: Right. And I mean, look these kinds of decisions obviously do have to vary from company to company and there are undoubtedly situations in which you end up with sort of telecommuting as a license to sort of slack off and so on. With that being said, I mean, personally I'm a big fan of telecommuting. I think it's one of the great gifts that technology offers to working mothers, working fathers, working people of all kinds.

And I also think Yahoo! is you know there a company that's having a difficult time and have had a difficult time for a while figuring out their identity in the marketplace. They're sort of a legacy brand from the first wave of Internet companies that has a big, you know -- a lot of resources because of that but doesn't know exactly what they're doing in the digital space right now. And this sort of seems like the kind of shake things up move that a CEO or COO tends to make when they don't know exactly what they're doing overall.

So that would be the eyebrow I'd raise if I were Yahoo stockholder, I guess.

COSTELLO: Chuck D, you want to say something.

CHUCK D: Yes, because in my business at virtual studio, if you had the same philosophy in tune, you could be in three or four different parts of the country and actually get the job done. So it depends on your productivity.

At the end of the day, your philosophy got to be in contact. But as far as the Yahoo! CEO, that business is so expansive that it might be necessary to get everybody in the room to look at each other because they cover a lot of ground.

In my business, it's really simple. Let's do this, come together, think about this, and you could be in three or four different places across the world. So telecommunications is great. Virtual office is all about what it's all.

(CROSSTALK) COSTELLO: And Jason, you're a professor. You teach young people. Young people might be listening to this Yahoo! decision and saying what is up with that because that's not the way the world is going.

JOHNSON: No it's not and I know Yahoo! wants to take themselves back to the day when they were popular, but we don't need to go back to like 1997 before people get -- this doesn't make any sense.

First and foremost, it's an economic issue. This is going to disrupt a lot of employees' abilities to get child care, they have to completely change how their families are functioning.

And by the way, gas is sometimes $5 a gallon in California. People have to start commuting again. I think there's an economic impact to this decision that doesn't make any sense.

And the reason that Yahoo! has been burning through CEOs, you know, three or four of them over the last two or three years is because everyone tries to come in and radically change the culture around and not pay attention to the employees they have. This is a bad idea and in six months they're going to have to go back on it.

COSTELLO: Ok.

BRAZILE: More than 25 percent of our workforce perform their jobs telecommuting. This is a bad idea by Yahoo! and I like Yahoo! I would hope that once that people see each other face to face, exchange gifts, whatever, give each other a hug, we go back to the policy. Look, have you been on the road lately. I mean to get up in the morning and get on the highway these days and spend an hour and a half stuck in traffic I think telecommunication is a great idea and I hope more companies look forward to it.

COSTELLO: Ok. So what are our friends out there saying about this? Is Yahoo! wrong to end telecommuting?

This from Marquis, "This is a fatal mistake by Yahoo!. Telecommuting gives us a great deal of flexibility and freedom. I work 14 to 16 hours days regularly from home. I would not be in the office 14 to 16 hours a day regularly."

And this from Jack, "They sign your paycheck. If you want to stay home, start your own home business. Until then, do what your boss tells you to do.

Facebook. Com/CarolCNN if you'd like to continue the conversation or tweet me @CAROLCNN.

Next talk back question, Trayvon Martin, one year later. What have we learned?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: "Talk Back". Trayvon Martin, one year later. What have we learned. One year ago today, two strangers meet for the first and only time. An unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin, and George Zimmerman, a Hispanic neighborhood watch volunteer patrolling with a gun. Martin just 17 was killed. Their families, of course, see things very differently.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SYBRINA FULTON, MOTHER OF TRAYVON MARTIN: We just want to have the trial and let the jury decide and whatever decision comes out of that, we're going to accept that. We may not like it, but we're going to accept it.

PIERS MORGAN, CNN HOST: If your brother had not gone out with a gun that night, you must surely accept that Trayvon Martin would still be alive.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, there is no telling what would have happened. We don't know if we would have been commemorating shortly the one year anniversary that George was another statistic, another person killed at the hands of his attacker.

You know, you can only slam someone's head violently into the concrete so many times. You can only break someone's nose and sit on them for so long while they're screaming for help for over a minute before that person has to take some kind of action.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Even one year later, we the public remain polarized along racial and political lines on who was the victim that night. Trayvon Martin one year later, what have we learned?

And I'll ask that question first to Chuck D. What have we learned.

CHUCK D: Why are you going to come to me first? One man had a gun. One didn't. And we're going on the story that this man is telling everybody. So, I mean bottom line is this. Back when I was growing up, you couldn't find a gun on anybody. Since 1980, the beginning of R&B, Reagan and Bush, it's been nothing but guns and drugs in the black community for the last 30-some odd years. Nobody seems to give a clear answer. And there's been an upswing of people in prison largely black males since that time. And nobody seems to give a clear answer.

And when these things all come out, these are the side effects that come out of it. You know, race is America's problem. Se we haven't even got down to is. So when you talk about an accident like this, it's just the same old tired story over and over again. And it reared its ugly head once again.

I've been seeing it the past 30 years. I'm going back and forth with this cat on Twitter on how he thinks the case is just all wrong and everybody has got it all wrong. And talking about the head banging on the pavement. You know, one person had a gun and one person didn't. One person's dead and the one we're relying on is the story that's told from the person that had the gun. I mean, stop.

COSTELLO: Ross, what do you think?

DOUTHAT: I think that we should have a trial and that it might be helpful for everybody commenting on this case to watch the trial unfold and see how the evidence is presented and come to conclusions that might be somewhat more informed than the conclusions we've been making for the past year on the basis of selective leaks from both sides.

So, you know, one week you have something about a 911 tape, the next week you have a photo of Zimmerman's bloody head and so on. I don't think we've learned that much from this case because I don't think there is that much to learn in the absence of the kind of trial by jury that is supposed to be the actual truth and fact finding mechanism.

COSTELLO: Yes, but you know, Chuck D earlier, and I'll pose this to Jason, brought up earlier, we had the O.J. trial. I mean it's pretty -- everybody like knows pretty much that O.J. Simpson is guilty of that, but that trial didn't prove much.

JOHNSON: Right, you know. Or Oscar Pistorius. Look, we all know what the situation is. I haven't learned anything in the last year. I've been reminded about how the lives of young black men are not necessarily considered to be as important. It has been amazing to me that Trayvon Martin's death was not rolled into these larger discussions about gun violence. Because that's really what this is also about. The fact that George Zimmerman had a gun made it possible for him to make a stupid decision that cost a young man his life.

It's the same issue that it took Barack Obama forever to start talking about young kids dying in Chicago. This is a larger gun issue, it is a race issue, and America has still not learned anything and unfortunately, nothing's going to be learned after this trial because that young man will still be dead and his family will still be mourning and Zimmerman and his family will still be running around on television trying to play the victim.

COSTELLO: Amy, do you agree?

KREMER: Well, you know, I think if anything we've learned that you shouldn't form your opinions off the sound bites that you hear in the media because we've had edited tapes be released that the network wanted to serve a purpose. You need to let the court system and the justice system work so that justice can be served. Don't try this in the media. It doesn't work.

Yes, O.J. Simpson, that's one trial. Casey Anthony is another one. But at the end of the day, I do think it's a bigger story like Jason just referred on to. And I think Chicago is the perfect example.

These kids in Chicago, there is so much violence there. No one is really talking about it. I mean we're starting to have that conversation, but it's a deeper issue, Carol. Because there is no opportunity for these kids. They don't know what it's like to go out and work?

No --

KREMER: Hold on, let me finish. The thing is the city itself is going bankrupt. There is no jobs in the private sector. And what do they do? They turn to gangs and selling drugs and we need to go in there, and I'm not saying government is the answer, we need to go in there and we can do it through private charity and citizen activism.

JOHNSON: Wait a minute --

COSTELLO: Wait, wait -- I want Donna Brazile to button this up for us. Donna -- your thoughts.

BRAZILE: Well, one year later, my heart still is heavy. An unarmed teenager should be able to walk freely in his or her neighborhood without the threat of violence. The stand your ground law should be repealed. Instead more states and localities are embracing that stupid concept.

One year later, we have a family grieving the loss of a young teenager and another family trying to figure out what's the best defense for their loved one. I would hope that we would use this anniversary to talk about peace and nonviolence and how we take control of our neighborhoods, our communities, and re-establish ties with our young people. I have six nephews under the age of 15 and I just pray that they can walk safely in their neighborhood, not just today, but every day of their lives.

COSTELLO: Ok. I want to get some viewer responses in because this is quite interesting.

This is from Juan -- that's the name-- "That we jump to conclusions in the country without first knowing the facts."

And this from another viewer, "Some wanted this case to be about a black teenager who for no reason other than he was black was gunned down by a white man who didn't like his skin color. And this, others believe the case is about -- I'm sorry, I'm no not reading these quite right.

Ok. This is from rosemary. Let me get back to my right script here. "Teach our children well. This is a tragedy that we cannot correct except to let the police do its job and teach children the pitfalls of life. Please keep the conversation going. Facebook.com/carolcnn or tweet me at Carol CNN.

I'd like to thank all of our guests for joining us today.

Thank you so much, we'll be right back.

BRAZILE: Thank you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)