we're just pushing forward. we're actually waiting for president obama. he is in the arena, with potentially a game-changing moment in a make-or-break month in health care. we're moments away from a presidential town hall in a town and a state that take their town halls seriously, portsmouth, new hampshire. the white house said it welcomes a vigorous debate, though, maybe not the kind that faced arlen specter this morning in pennsylvania. like many of his colleagues are the ex-republican, newly democratic senator stood before a crowd thatranged from resentful to downright hostile. >> one day god is going to stand before you and he's going to judge you and the rest of your damn cronies up on the hill. and then you will get your just desserts. i'm leaving. >> okay. okay. okay. we've just -- we've just had a -- we've just had a demonstration of democracy.

>> well, the president will speak and answer questions in front of 1,800 people who were not handpicked. we're told that 70% of the tickets were given out through portsmouth high school or the white house website. the rest, through community groups or members of congress. things could get intense, and you'll see it live, start to finish, right here in the "cnn newsroom." in the meantime we're going to get you caught up on some of the other day's news. a life of love and service to others. a living prayer. some really moving tributes coming in today for eunice kennedy shriver. he died earlier this morning at 88. sister of a president and two senators. she became respected in her own right for founding the special olympics. shriver's husband of 56 years, sarge, by her side until the end. their five kids and 19 grandkids also there at the cape cod hospital. we're told that there's been no final decision on funeral arrangements. remember the gunman behind last week's health club massacre

in pennsylvania? well, it turns out he was questioned by police a week earlier and let go. george sodini matched the description of a man who allegedly had a grenade on a bus. and an entry in his diary said it was a false grenade which now makes police think he was the guy on the bus. sodini took his own life after killing three women at a health club. nine others were injured. there's new information today on a u.s. soldier captured in afghanistan. the taliban said it's waiting for a response to its demands before deciding the fate of army private bowe bergdahl. no word on what the demands are. this is the first news since the taliban video was released last month. he disappeared in eastern afghanistan in june. a u.s. military spokesman said everything possible is being done to get him back safely. hillary clinton is in eastern congo, site of an 11-year war that killed 5 million people and counting. the secretary of state toured a refugee camp and promised $17 million in u.s. aid to fight an

epidemic of rape. deadly serious issues, but the buzz is all about an apparent slip of the tongue at a "q" and "a" session in the congolese capital. either a student misspoke or a translator mistranslated a request for mr. clinton's opinion about chinese business deals in congo didn't go over so well. >> wait. you want me to tell you what my husband thinks? my husband is not the secretary of state. i am. but you asked my opinion? i will tell you my opinion. i'm not going to be channeling my husband. >> well, quite a sound bite from madam secretary, huh? what's your reaction? shoot us a tweet at kyracnn. we'll try to read some on the air next hour. more now as we await the president's town hall meeting in new hampshire. a packed house expected. and then who knows what to expect? we've learned from town hall meetings in mowz, memphis, and lebanon, pennsylvania, that these forums can be civil affair

ar s or strident free-for-alls. if you're looking for a passive debate, this isn't it. here's jim acosta. >> reporter: opponents for health care reform aren't just sounding off at congressional town hall meetings. in new hampshire last week, protesters descended on staff members of democratic senator jeanne shaheen in a middle of a routine constituent services meeting, it wasn't a town hall forum and the senator wasn't even there. the protesters recorded the confrontation and put it on youtube. >> one constituent who was there wound up almost in tears, where our staff person had to be escorted out with a police escort. >> reporter: and have you ever seen anything like this in all of your years of public service? >> never where people have been encouraged to be disrespectful. >> reporter: democrats charge that people shouting health care questions at members of congress these days are being encouraged by the likes of rush limbaugh, whose website compares reform supporters to nazis. but corey lewdowsky from a

conservative group who backs the protests insists the anti-reform movement is real. how do you respond to the charge that this is all orchestrated and artificial if it's all coming from talk show hosts and websites? >> i think if that were the case, that you wouldn't see the massive turnout that you're seeing at each and every event. no, the average person is at work when rush limbaugh is on the radio. >> reporter: as we were talking almost out of nowhere a bystander listening in on our conversation came right up to us to say ditto. and you happen to agree with this person? >> i do. >> reporter: democrats are flexing their grassroots. the former obama volunteers were back in campaign mode. >> i really think you've got some folks that are very anxious about change. who really love to play the fear card. >> reporter: he says it's about facts, not fear. but time and again -- want to take you live now to new hampshire. the president of the united states getting ready to step up to the mike. once again, another town hall on health care. as you know, in the past couple

of days, things have gotten pretty heated across the country. and we're calling august our make-or-break month for health care reform in america. what happens next, actually in the next three weeks, could decide if one of the president's two biggest domestic priorities goes forward or gets thrown under the bus as we speak. we're going to talk to our ali velshi coming up in a little bit as he's traveling across the country. actually talking to folks like you are seeing here in new hampshire as the president is meeting and greeting and getting ready once again to push for his health care reform. let's listen in. >> thank you! thank you! thank you so much. thank you! everybody have a seat. thank you. oh, thank you so -- i love you back. thank you. it is great -- it is great to be back in portsmouth. it is great to be back -- it's great to be back in new hampshire.

i have to say, though, that most of my memories of this state are cold. so, it's good to be here in august. there are a couple of people that i want to acknowledge who are here today, some special guests. first of all, i want to thank principal jeffrey collins and the portsmouth students and faculty and staff. thank you. our host for today. your own outstanding governor, john lynch, is here. and his wonderful wife, dr. susan lyne ch, is here. your united states senator doing a great job, jeanne shaheen, is here. the governor of the great state

of maine, and we are glad he's here in new hampshire today, john baldacci, is here. two of my favorite people, they are just taking congress by storm, outstanding work -- paul hods, carol shea porter. give them a big round of applause. and we've got your own mayor, tommer tom ferrine is here. where is tom? there he is. now, i want to thank, more than anybody, laurie, for that introduction and for sharing her story with the rest of us. thank you, laurie. yeah, laurie's story is the same

kind of story that i've read in letters, that i've heard in town hall meetings just like this one for the past five years. in fact, some of you were in that -- in those town hall meetings as i was traveling all throughout new hampshire. it's the story of hardworking americans who are held hostage by health insurance companies that deny them coverage or drop their coverage or charge fees that they can't afford for care that they desperately need. i believe it is wrong. it is bankrupting families and businesses, and that's why we are going to pass health insurance reform in 2009. now, this is obviously a tough time on for families here in new hampshire and all across america. six months ago we were in the

middle of the worst recession of our lifetimes. i want you to remember what things were like in january and february. we were losing about 700,000 jobs per month, and economists of all stripes feared a second coming of the great depression. that was only six months ago. that's why we acted as fast as we could to pass a recovery act that would stop the free-fall. and i want to make sure everybody understands what we did. one-third of the money in the recovery act went to tax cuts that have already started showing up in the paychecks of about 500,000 working families in new hampshire. 500,000 families in new hampshire. we also cut taxes for small businesses on the investments that they make, and over 300 new hampshire small businesses have qualified for new loans backed by the recovery act. now, that was a third -- that

was a third of the recovery act. another third of the money in the recovery act is for emergency relief for folks who have borne the brunt of this recession. so, we've extended unemployment benefits for 20,000 new hampshire residents. we've made -- we've made health insurance 65% cheaper for families who rely on c.o.b.r.a. while they're looking for work. and for states that were facing historic budget shortfalls, we provided assistance that has saved the jobs of tens of thousands of workers who provided essential services, like teachers and police officers. so, it's prevented a lot of painful cuts in the state but also a lot of painful state and local tax increases. now, the last third of the recovery act is for investments

that are already putting people back to work. these are jobs refurbishing bridges and pavement on i-95 or jobs at the community health centers here in portsmouth that will be able to add nurses and extend hours and serve up to 500 new patients. these are good jobs, doing the work america needs done. and, by the way, most of the work is being done by private, local businesses, because that's how we're going to grow this economy again. so, there is no doubt that the recovery act has helped put the brakes on this recession. we just saw last friday, the job picture is beginning to turn. we're starting to see signs that business investment is coming back. but, new hampshire, that doesn't mean we're out of the woods, and you know that. it doesn't mean that we can just sit back and do nothing while so many families are still struggling. because even before this recession hit, we had an economy that was working pretty well for the wealthiest americans.

it was working pretty well for wall street bankers. it was working pretty well for big corporations, but it wasn't working so well for everybody else. it was an economy of bubbles and busts. and we can't go back to that kind of economy. if we want this country to succeed in the 21st century and if we want our children to succeed in the 21st century, then we're going to have to take the steps necessary to lay a new foundation for economic growth. we need to build an economy that works for everybody and not just some people. now, health insurance reform is one of those pillars that we need to build up that new foundation. i don't have to explain to you that nearly 46 million americans

don't have health insurance coverage today. in the wealthiest nation on earth, 46 million of our fellow citizens have no coverage. they're just vulnerable. if something happens, they go bankrupt or they don't get the care they need. but it's just as important that we accomplish health insurance reform for the americans who do have health insurance, because right now -- because right now we have a health care system that too often works better for the insurance industry than it does for the american people. and we've got to change that. now, let me just start by setting the record straight on a few things i've been hearing out here about reform. under the reform we're proposing if you like your doctor, you can

keep your doctor. if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. you will not be waiting in any lines. this is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance. i don't believe anyone should be in charge of your health insurance decisions but you and your doctor. i don't think government bureaucrats should be meddling, but i also don't think insurance bureaucrats should be meddling. that's the health care reform i'm talking about. now, we just heard from laurie about how she can't find an insurance company that will cover her because of her medical condition. she's not alone. a recent report actually shows that in the past three years

over 12 million americans were discriminated against by insurance companies because of a pre-existing condition. either the insurance company refused to cover the person or they dropped their coverage when they got sick and they needed it most or they refused to cover a specific illness or condition or they charged higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs. no one holds these companies accountable for these practices, and i have to say this is personal for laurie, but it's also personal for me. i talked about this when i was campaigning up here in new hampshire. i will never forget my own mother, as she fought cancer in her final months having to worry about whether her insurance would refuse to pay for her treatment. and, by the way, this was -- this was because the insurance company was arguing that somehow she should have known that she had cancer when she took her new job, even though it hadn't been diagnosed yet. so, if it could happen to her, it could happen to any one of

us. and i've heard from so many americans who have the same worries. one woman testified that an insurance company would not cover her internal organs because of an accident she had when she was 5 years old. think about that. that covers a lot of stuff. you know, they're only going to cover your skin. dermatology, that's covered. nothing else. another lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because the insurance company discovered he had gallstones that he hadn't known about when he applied for insurance. now, that is wrong. and that will change when we pass health care reform. that is going to be a priority.

under the reform we're proposing insurance companies will be prohibited from denying coverage because of a person's medical history, period. they will not be able to drop your coverage if you get sick. they will not -- they will not be able to water down your coverage when you need it. your health insurance should be there for you when it counts, not just when you're paying premiums, but when you actually get sick. and it will be when we pass this plan. now, when we pass health insurance reform, insurance companies will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage that you can receive in a given year or in a lifetime, and we will place

a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because no one in america should go broke because they get sick. and, finally, this is important, we will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies. because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end. that makes sense. it saves lives. it also saves money, and we need to save money in this health care system. so, this is what reform is all about. for all the chatter and the yelling and the chatter and the noise, what you need to know is this -- if you don't have health insurance, you will finally have

quality, affordable options once we pass reform. if you do have health insurance, we will make sure that no insurance company or government bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need, and we will do this without adding to our deficit over the next decade. largely by cutting out the waste and insurance company giveaways in medicare that aren't making any of our seniors healthier. [ inaudible ] right. now, before i start taking questions, let me just say, there's been a long and vigorous debate about this, and that's how it should be. you know, that's what america's about. we have a vigorous debate. that's why we have a democracy. but i do hope that we will talk with each other and not over

each other. because -- because -- because one of the objectives of democracy and debate is that we start refining our own views because maybe other people have different perspectives, things we didn't think of. where we do disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that's actually been proposed. because the way politics works sometimes is that people who want to keep things the way they are will try to scare the heck out of folks, and they'll create boogiemen out there that just aren't real. so, this is an important and complicated issue that deserves

serious debate, and we have months to go before we're done, and years after that to phase in all these reforms and get them right. and i know this, despite all the hand-wringing pundits and the best efforts of those who are profiting from the status quo, we are closer to achieving health insurance reform than we have ever been. we have the american nurses association supporting us. we have the american medical association on board. america's doctors and nurses know firsthand how badly we need reform. we have broad agreement in congress on about 80% of what we're trying to do. we have an agreement from the drug companies to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors. we can cut the doughnut hole in half if we pass reform. we have the aarp on board, because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.

but -- but let's face it, now's the hard part, because the history is clear. every time we come close to passing health insurance reform, the special interests fight back with everything they've got. they use their inference. they use their political allies to scare and mislead the american people. they start running ads. this is what they always do. we can't let them do it again. not this time. not now. because for all the scare tactics out there, what is truly scary, what is truly risky, is if we do nothing. if we let this moment pass, if we keep the system the way it is right now, we will continue to see 14,000 americans lose their health insurance every day. your premiums will continue to

skyrocket. they have gone up three times faster than your wages, and they will keep on going up. our deficit will continue to grow, because medicare and medicaid are on an unsustainable path. medicare is slated to go into the red in about eight to ten years. i don't know if people are aware of that. if i was a senior citizen, the thing i'd be worried about right now is medicare starts running out of money because we haven't done anything to make sure that we're getting a good bang for our buck when it comes to health care. and insurance companies will continue to profit by discriminating against people for the simple crime of being sick. now, that's not a future i want for my children. it's not a future that i want for the united states of america. new hampshire, i was up here campaigning a long time. a lot of you guys came to my town hall events. some of you voted for me. some of you didn't. but here's one thing i've got to say -- i never said this was

going to be easy. i never said that change would be easy. if it were easy, it would have already been done. change is hard. and it doesn't start in washington. it begins in places like portsmouth. with people like laurie, who have the courage to share their stories and fight for something better. that's what we need to do right now. and i need your help. if you want a health care system that works for the american people as well as works for the insurance companies, i need your help, knocking on doors, talking to your neighbors, spread the facts. let's get this done! thank you! thank you! thank you. >> yes, we can. yes, we can. yes, we can.

>> thank you! i remember that. everybody have a seat. all right, this is the fun part. now, first of all, by the way, let's thank the bands. i didn't see the band over here. thank you, band. great job. all right, here's how we're going to do this. we do a lot of town hall meetings in new hampshire, so everybody knows that -- the basic outlines of this thing. if you have a question, just raise your hand. there are people with microphones in the audience. i am going to try to go girl, boy, girl, boy, to make sure it's fair. if i hear only from people who agree with me, i'm going to actively ask some folks who are concerned about health care, give them a chance to ask their questions, because i think we've got to make sure that we get on

the surface some of the debates and concerns people have. some of them are legitimate. i'm going to try to get through as many questions as i can, but if you can keep your question or comment relatively brief, then i will try to keep my answers relatively brief. okay? all right. so, we're just going to go around the room. and i'm going to start with this gentleman right here. this gentleman right here. please introduce yourself, if you don't mind. >> thank you, mr. president. welcome to portsmouth and new hampshire. my name is peter schmidt. i'm a state representative from dover. i'm a senior citizen. i have a wonderful government-run health care plan called medicare. >> right. >> i like it. it's affordable. it's reasonable. nobody tells me what i need to do. i just go to my doctor or the hospital. i get care. now, one of the things you've been doing in your campaign to change the situation is you've been striving for bipartisanship. >> right. >> i think it's a wonderful

idea. but my question is, if the republicans actively refuse to participate in a reasonable way with reasonable proposals, isn't it time to just say we're going to pass what the american people need and what they want without the republicans? >> well, let me -- let me -- let me make a couple of points. first of all, you make a point about medicare that's very important. i've been getting a lot of letters, pro and con for health care reform, and one of the letters i received recently, a woman was very exer sio upset ai don't want the government-run health care, you are meddling in the private mark ket place, and keep your hands off my medicare.

i think it's important currently for seniors who receive medicare, to understand that if we're able to get something right, like medicare, then there should be a little more confidence that maybe the government can have a role, not the dominant role, but a role, in making sure the people are treated fairly when it comes to insurance, you know? the -- under our proposal, the majority of americans will still be getting their health care from private insurers. all we want to do is just make sure that private insurers are treating you fairly, so that you are not buying something where you failed to read the fine print. next thing you know, when you actually get sick, you have no coverage. we also want to make sure that everybody has some options, so there's been talk about this public option. this is where a lot of the idea of government takeover of health care comes from. all we want to do is set up a set of options so that if you

don't have health insurance or you're underinsured, you can have the same deal that members of congress have, which is they can look at a menu of options -- we're calling it an exchange, but it's basically just a menu of different health care plans, and you will be able to select the one that suits your family best. and i do think that having a public option as part of that would keep the insurance companies honest, because if they've got a public plan out there that they've got to compete against, as long as it's not being subsidized by taxpayers, then that will give you some sense of what sort of is a good bargain for basic health care would be. now, i think that there are some of my republican friends on capitol hill who are sincerely trying to figure out if they can find a health care bill that

works. chuck grassley of iowa, mike enzi of wyoming, olympia snowe from maine, they have been -- yeah, i got to admit, i like olympia, too. you know, they are diligently working to see if they can come up with a plan that could get both republican and democratic support, but i have to tell you, when i listen to folks like laurie and families all across america who are just getting pounded by the current health care system and when i look at the federal budget and realize that if we don't control costs on health care, there is no way for us to close the budget deficit. it will just keep on skyrocketing. when i look at those two things, i say we have to get it done.

and my hope is we can do it in a bipartisan fashion, but the most important thing is getting it done for the american people. all right. let's -- this young lady right here. all right, this young lady right here. she's still enjoying her summer. when do you go back to school? >> i go back to school september 3rd. >> september 3rd, okay. what's your name? >> julia hall from northern massachusetts. >> nice to meet you, julia. >> as i was walking in, i saw a lot of signs outside saying mean things about reforming health care. how do kids know what is true, and why do people want a new system that help more of us? >> well, the -- i've seen some of those signs. let me just be specific about

some things that i've been hearing lately that we just need to just dispose of here. the rumor that's been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the house of representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we've decided that we don't -- it's too expensive to let her live anymore. and there are various -- there are some variations on this -- this theme. it turns out that i guess this arose out of a provision in one of the house bills that allowed medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life

care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, et cetera. so, the intention of the members of congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues about end-of-life care when they're ready on their own terms. it wasn't forcing anybody to do anything. this is, i guess, where the rumor came from. the irony is that actually one of the chief sponsors of this bill originally was a republi n republicrepublican then house member, now senator, named johnny isakson from georgia who very sensibly thought this was something that would expand people's options. and somehow it's gotten spun into this idea of death panels. i am not in favor of that. so, just -- i want to -- i want to -- i want to clear the air here. now, in fairness, the underlying argument i think has to be addressed, and that is, people's

concern that if we are reforming the health care system to make it more efficient -- which i think we have to do -- the concern is that somehow that will mean rationing of care. all right? that somehow, some government bureaucrat out there will be saying, well, you can't have this test or you can't have this procedure because some bean counter decides that this is not a good way to use our health care dollars. and this is a legitimate concern, so i just want to address this. we do think that systems like medicare are very inefficient right now, but it has nothing to do at the moment wish issues of benefits. the inefficiencies all come from things like paying $177 billion to insurance companies in subsidies for something called medicare advantage that is not competitively bid, so insurance

companies basically get $177 billion of taxpayer money to provide services that medicare already provides. and it's no better -- it doesn't result in better health care for seniors. it is a giveaway of $177 billion. now, think about what we could do with $177 billion over 10 years. i don't think that's a good use of money. i would rather spend that money on making sure that laurie can have coverage, making sure that people who don't have health insurance get some subsidies, than i would want to be subsidizing insurance companies. so, the -- another -- another way of putting this is right now insurance companies are rationing care. they are basically telling you what's covered and what's not. they're telling you, you know,

we'll cover this drug, but we won't cover that drug. you can have this procedure or you can't have that procedure. so, why is it that people would prefer having insurance companies make those decisions rather than medical experts and doctors figuring out, you know, what are good deals for care and providing that information to you as a consumer and your doctors so you can make good decisions? so, i just want to be very clear about this. i recognize there's an underlying fear here that people somehow won't get the care they need. you will have not only the care you need, but also the care that right now is being denied to you, only if we get -- only if we get health care reform. that's what we're fighting for. all right. gentleman back here in the -- with the baseball cap. right there.

>> good morning. good afternoon, mr. president. bill anderson from new hampshire. in reference to what you just said, i'm presently under the new hampshire medicaid system, and i have to take a drug called lipitor. when i get on to this program, they said, no, we're not going to cover lipitor even though i've been on that pill for basically ten years based on the information my doctor feels is right for me. and i had to go through two different trials of other kind of drugs before it was finally deemed that i was able to go back on the lipitor through the new hampshire medicaid system. so, here it is the medicaid that you guys are administering and you're telling me that it's good, but in essence i'm dealing with the same thing you're telling me the insurance companies are doing. thank you. >> well, look, i think that's a legitimate point. i don't know all the details. but it sounds to me like they were probably trying to have you take a generic as opposed to a brand name. is that right?

and it turned out that you did not have as good of a reaction under the generic as the brand name, and then they put you on the brand name, is that what happened? well, right, look, there may be in nine out of ten cases the generic might work as well or better than the brand name. and we don't want to just subsidize the drug companies if you've got one that works just as well as another. the important thing about the story that you just told me was, is that once it was determined that, in fact, you needed the brand name, you were able to get the brand name. now, i want to -- i want to be absolutely clear here. there are going to be instances where if there is really strong, scientific evidence that the generic and the brand name work just as well and the brand name costs twice as much, that the

taxpayers should try to get the best deal possible, as long as, if it turns out that the generic doesn't work as well, you're able to get the brand name. so, the basic principle that we want to set up here is that if you're in private insurance -- first of all, your private insurance can do whatever you want. if you're under a government program, then it makes sense for us to make sure that we're getting the best deal possible and not just giving drug makers or insurers more money than they should be getting, but ultimately you've got to be able to get the best care based on what the doctor says. and it sounds like that is eventually what happened. it may be that it wasn't as efficient, you know -- it wasn't as smooth as it should have been, but that result is actually a good one. and you think about all the situations where a generic actually would have worked -- in fact, one of the things i want to do is speed up generics

getting introduced to the marketplace. because right now drug compan s companies -- right now drug companies are fighting so that they can keep essentially their patents on their brand name drugs a lot longer. and if we can make those patents a little bit shorter, generics get on the market sooner. ultimately you as consumers will save money, all right? but it was an excellent question. so, thank you. all right, it's a -- it's a young woman's turn or a lady's turn. right here. yes, you. >> good afternoon, mr. president. i'm jackie millet. and i'm from wells, maine, and my question is, i am on -- presently on medicare, and i do have a supplement, but if something happens to my husband, i lose the supplement.

and what will happen? i have -- i take a lot of medications. i need a lot -- i've had a lot of procedures. and how will medicare under the new proposal help people who are going to need things like this? >> well, first of all, another myth that we've been hearing about is this notion that somehow we're going to be cutting your medicare benefits. we are not. the aarp would not be endorsing a bill if it was undermining medicare. okay? so, i just want seniors to be clear about this, because if you look at the polling, it turns out seniors are the ones who are most worried about health care reform. and that's understandable because they use a lot of care. they've got medicare, and it's already hard for a lot of people even on medicare because of the supplements and all the other costs out of pocket that they're still paying.

so, i just want to assure, we're not talking about cutting medicare benefits. we are talking about making medicare more efficient, eliminating the insurance subsidies, working with hospitals so that they are changing some of the reimbursement practices. right now hospitals, they are not penalized if there are constant readmission rates from patients that have gone through the hospital. if you go to a -- if you go to a car company or an auto shop and you say, can i have my car repaired, you get your car repaired. if two weeks later it's broken down again, if you take it back, hopefully they're not going to charge you again for repairing the car. you want them to do it right the first time. and too often we're not seeing the best practices in some of these hospitals to prevent people from being re-admitted. that costs a lot of money.

so, those are the kinds of changes we're talking about. now, in terms of savings for you as a medicare recipient, the biggest one is on prescription drugs. because the prescription drug companies have already said that they would be willing to put up $80 billion in rebates for prescription drugs as part of a health care reform package. now, we may be able to get even more than that. but think about it. when the prescription drug plan was passed, medicare part "b," they decided they weren't going to negotiate with the drug companies for the cheapest available price on drugs. and as a consequence, seniors are way overpaying. there's that big doughnut hole that forces them to go out of pocket. you say you take a lot of medications. that means that doughnut hole is always something that's looming out there for you. if we can cut that doughnut hole in half, that's money directly out of your pocket. and that's one of the reasons that aarp is so supportive,

because they see this as a way of potentially saving seniors a lot of money on prescription drugs. okay? all right. gentleman right here in the white shirt. >> good afternoon, mr. -- good afternoon, mr. president. my name is ben hirschson, i'm from maine and also bonita springs, florida. i'm a republican. i don't know what i'm doing here, but i'm here. >> we're happy to have you. we're happy to have you. >> mr. president, you've been quoted over the years when you were a senator and perhaps even before then, that you were essentially a supporter of a universal plan. i'm beginning to see that you're changing that. do you honestly believe that? because that is my concern. i'm on medicare, but i still worry that if we go to a public option, period, that the private

companies, the insurance companies, rather than competing, because who can compete with the government? the answer is nobody. so, my question is, do you still as a -- yourself now support a universal plan, or are you open to the private industry still being maintained? >> well, i think it's an excellent question, so i appreciate the chance to respond. first of all, i want to make a distinction between a universal plan versus a single-payer plan, because those are two different things. a single-payer plan would be a plan like medicare for all or the kind of plan that they have in canada, where basically government is the only person -- is the only entity that pays for all health care. everybody has a government paid-for plan. even though depending on which country, the doctors are still private or the hospitals might still be private. in some countries the doctors

work for the government and the hospitals are owned by the government. but the point is, is that government pays for everything. like medicare for all. that is a single-payer plan. i have not said that i was a single-payer supporter, because, frankly, we historically have had an employer-based system in this country, with private insurers, and for us to transition to a system like that, i believe, would be too disruptive. so, what would end up happening would be a lot of people who currently have employer-based health care would suddenly find themselves dropped, and they would have to go into an entirely new system that had not been fully set up yet, and i would be concerned about the potential destructiveness of that kind of transition. all right? so, i'm not promoting a single-payer plan. i am promoting a plan that will assure that every single person is able to get health insurance at an affordable price and that

if they have health insurance, they are getting a good deal from the insurance companies. that's what i'm fighting for. now, the -- the way we have approached it is that if you've got health care under a private plan, if your employer provides you health care or you buy your own health care and you're happy with it, you won't have to change. what we're saying is if you don't have health care, then you will be able to go to an exchange, similar to the menu of options that i used to have as a member of congress, and i can look and see what are these various private health care plans offering, what's a good deal, and i'll be able to buy insurance from that exchange. and because it's a big pool, i'll be able to drive down costs.

i'll get a better deal than if i was trying to get health insurance on my own. this is true, by the way, for small businesses as well. a lot of small businesses, they end up paying a lot more than large businesses per person for health care because they've got no bargaining power. they've got no leverage. so, we want small businesses to be able to buy into this big pool, okay? now, the only thing that i have said is that having a public option in that menu would provide competition for insurance companies to keep them honest. now, i -- i recognize, though, you make a legitimate -- you raise a legitimate concern. people say, well, how can a private company compete against the government? and my answer is that if the -- if the insurance -- private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining -- meaning, taxpayers aren't subsidizing it,

but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services and a good network of doctors just like any other private insurer would insurer i think private insurers should be able to compete. they do it all the time. if you think about it, you know, ups and fedex are doing just fine. they are. it's the post office that's always having problems. so right now you've got private insurers who are out there competing effectively even though a lot of people get their care through medicare or medicaid or the va. there is nothing inevitable about this destroying the private marketplace as long as it is not set up where the

government is basically being subsidized by the taxpayers so even if they are not providing a good deal, we keep having to pony out more and more nonany. i have already said, that can't be the way the public option is set up. it has to be self-sustaining. does that answer your question? okay. thank you. all right. right here. go ahead. >> hello, mr. president. my name is linda betcher. i am from portsmouth. >> what do you teach? >> i teach english and journalism. in those 37 years, i have been lucky enough to have very good health care coverage. my concerns currently are for those who do not. i guess my question is, if every american who needed it had access to good mental health

care, what do you think the impact would be on our society? >> well, you know, you raised a good question. mental health has always been undervalued in the health insurance market. what we now know is that somebody who has severe depression has a more debilitating and dangerous illness than somebody who has got a broken leg but broken leg, nobody argues that's covered. severe depression, unfortunately, oftentimes, isn't. even under existing insurance policies. so i think -- i've been a strong believer in mental health parody, recognizing that those are serious illnesses. and i would like to see a mental

health component as part of a package that people are covered under our plan. this gentlemen right here. >> hello, mr. pre. i'm justin higgins from new sham shir. >> how are you, justin? >> fine, thank you. there is a lot of misinformation about how we are going to pay for this health care plan i many wondering how we are going to do this without raising the taxes on the middle class, because i don't want the burden to fall on my parents. >> they already have enough problems paying your college tuition. >> exactly, exactly. >> i hear you. also, i'm looking toward my future with career options and opportunities and i don't want inflation to skyrocket by adding this to the national debt. so i'm wondering, how can we

avoid both of those scenarios? >> that's a great question. first of all, i said i won't sign a bill that adds to the deficit for the national debt. so this will have to be paid for. that, by the way, is in contrast to the prescription drug bill that was passed that cost hundreds of bills of dollars by the previous administration and previous congress that was not paid for at all and that was a major contributor to our current national debt. that's why you will forgive me if sometimes i chuckle a little bit when i hear all these folks saying, oh, big spending obama when i'm proposing something that will be paid for and they signed into law something that wasn't and they had no problem with it.

same people. same folks and they say with a straight face how we have got to be fiscally responsible. now, having said that, paying for it is not simple. i don't want to pretend that it is. by definition, if we are helping people who currently don't have health insurance, that's going to cost some money. it has been estimated to cost somewhere between $800 billion and $1 trillion over ten years. everybody thinks it is a trillion dollars a year. it is about $100 billion a year to cover everybody and to implement some of the insurance reforms we are talking about. about two-thirds of those costs,

we can cover by eliminating the in efficiencies that i already mentioned. so i already talked about $177 billion worth of subsidies to the insurance company. let's take that money and put it in the kitty. there is about $500 billion to $600 billion over ten years that can be saved without cutting benefits for people who are currently receiving medicare. actually, making the system more efficient over time. that does still lead, though, anywhere from $300 billion to $400 billion over ten years or $30 billion or $40 billion a year that does have to be paid for. we will need new sources of revenue to pay for it. and i have made a proposal that would, i want to just be very clear, the proposal -- my preferred approach to this would have been to take people like myself, who make more than

$250,000 a year and limit the itemized deductions that we can take to the same level as middle class folks can take. right now, the average person -- the average middle class family, they are in the 28% tax bracket and so they basically can itemize and take a deduction that is about 28%. i can take, since i'm in a much higher tax bracket. i can take a much bigger deduction and as a consequence, if i give a charitable gift, i get a bigger break from uncle sam than you do. so what i said is just let's even it out. that would actually raise it this much. that was my preferred way of paying for it. members of congress have had different ideas. we are still exploring these ideas. by the time that we actually have a bill that is set, that is

reconciled between house and senate and is voted on, it will be very clear what those ideas are. my belief is that it should not burden people who make $250,000 a year or less and i think that's the commitment that he made, the pledge that i made when i was up here running in new hampshire, folks. so i don't want anybody saying, somehow, that i am pulling the bait and switch here. i said very specifically, i thought we should roll back bush tax cuts and use them to pay for health insurance. that's what i'm intending to do. all right? okay. i only have time for a couple more questions. somebody here who has a concern about health care that has not been raised or is skeptical and suspicious and wants to make sure that -- because i don't want people thinking i just have

a bunch of plans in here. so i've got one right here. then, i'll ask the guy with two hands up, because he must have a burning question. all right. go ahead. >> thank you, mr. president. i have worked in the medical field for about 18 years and seen a lot of changes over those 18 years. i currently work here at the high school as a paraprofessional. my name is linda arsenal from portsmouth new hampshire. i have a question of questions, mr. president obama. if i understand you correctly, you seek to cover 50 million new people over and above the amount of people that are currently getting health care at this moment. >> it will probably -- i just want to be honest here. there are about 46 million people who are uninsured and

under the proposals that we have, even if you have an individual mandate, probably only about 37 million, 38 million, somewhere in that ballpark. >> i'm off a little bit. >> i just want to make sure i wasn't overselling my plan here. >> it's okay, mr. president. my concern is for where are we going to get the doctors and nurses to cover these? right now, i know that the really -- people are not going to school to become teachers to teach the nursing staff. doctors have huge capacities. some of them are leaving private to go to administrative positions because of the case load that they are being made to hold. i really do feel that there will

be more of a demand with this universal health care and no added supply. i also understand that it is to be taken from medicare, about $500 billion. correct me if i'm wrong on that. also, i'm very, very concerned about the elderly. i don't know if this is also correct but i understand that a federal health board will sit in judgment of medical procedures and protocols to impose guidelines on all providers, when to withhold certain types of care. what is the point you get to when we say, i'm sorry that this cannot happen and thank you very much for letting me ask those questions, mr. president. >> of course. >> well, first of all, i already mentioned that we would be taking savings out of medicare that are currently going to insurance subsidies, for example. that is absolutely true. i just want to be clear again.

seniors who are listening here, this does not affect your benefits. this is not money going to you to pay for your benefits. this is money that is subsidizing folks who don't need it. that's point number one. point number two, in terms of these expert health panels, this goes to the point about death panels, that's what folks are calling it, the idea is actually pretty straightforward. which is if we've got a panel of experts, health experts, doctors who can provide guidelines to doctors and patients about what procedures work best in what situations, and find ways to reduce, for example, the number of tests that people take, these aren't going to be forced on people but they will help guide

how the delivery system works so that you are getting higher quality care and it turns out that oftentimes, higher quality care actually costs less. so let me just take the example of testing. right now, a lot of medicare patients, you have something wrong with you. you go to your doctor. doctor checks up on you. maybe he takes -- has a test. he administers a test. you go back home. you get the results. the doctor calls you and says, okay, now you've got to go to this specialist. then, you have to take another trip to the specialist. the special. i doesn't have the first test. so he does his own test. then, maybe you've got -- when you go to the hospital, you have to take a third test. now, each time taxpayers under medicare are paying for that test. so for a panel of experts to say, why don't we have all the

specialists and the doctors communicating after the first test and let's have electronic medical records so that we can forward the results of that first test to the others, that's a sensible thing to do. so we want -- i'm if eye customer, if i'm a consumer and i know that i'm overpaying $6,000 for anything else, i would immediately want the best deal but for some reason, in health care, we continue to put up with getting a bad deal. we're paying $6,000 more than any other advanced country and we are not healthier for it. $6,000 per person more per year. that doesn't make any sense. there has to be a lot of waste in the system. the idea is to have doctors, nurses, medical experts look for

it. now, the last question that you asked is very important. i don't have a simple solution to it. if you look at the makeup of the medical profession right now, we have constant nurse shortages and we have severe shortages of primary care physicians. primary care physicians, ideally, family physicians, they should be the front line of the medical profession in encouraging prevention and wellness but the problem is that primary care physicians, they make a lot less money than specialists and nurse practitioners too. so -- and nurses, you have a whole other issue which you already raised which is the fact that not only are nurses not paid as well as they should be but you also have nursing professors are paid even worse

than nurses. so, as a consequence, you don't have enough professors to teach nursing, which means that's part of the reason why you got such a shortage of nurses. so we are going to be taking steps as part of reform to deal with expanding primary care physicians and our nursing. on the doctors front, one of the things we could do is to reimburse doctors who are providing preventative care and not just surgeon who provides care after somebody is sick. nothing against surgeons. i want surgeons. i don't want to be getting a bunch of letters from surgeons, now. i'm not dissing surgeons here. all i'm saying is, let's take the example of something like diabetes, a disease that's skyrocketing, part of obesity, and partly because it is not

treated as effectively as it could be. right now, if we paid a family -- if a family care physician works with his or her patient to help them lose weight, modify diet, monitor whether they are taking their medications in a timely fashion, they might get reimbursed a pit tans. if that same diabetic ends up getting their foot amputated, that's $30,000, $40,000, $50,000, immediately, the surgeon is reimbursed. why not make sure we are also reimbursing the care that prevents the amputation? that will save us money. so changing reimbursement rates will help. the other thing that will help both nurses and doctors, helping pay for medical education for those who are willing to go into

primary care. that's something that we already started to do under the recovery act. we want to do more of that under health care reform. last question, last question right here. this is a skeptic. >> i am a skeptic. thank you, mr. president, for coming to portsmouth. i am one of the people that turned myself in on the white house web page the other day for being a skeptic of this bill. >> before you ask this question, just because you referred to it, can i just say this is another example of how the media ends up just completely distorting what's taken place. what we said is that if somebody has -- if you get an e-mail from somebody that says, for example, obama care is creating a death panel, forward us the e-mail and we will answer the question that's raised in the e-mail.

suddenly, on some of these news outlets this is being portrayed as obama is collecting an enemy's list. come on, guys. here i am trying to be responsive to questions that are being raised out there. >> and i appreciate it. >> and i just want to be clear that all we're trying to do is answer questions. >> my question is for you and i know in the white house, what you are on is referred to as the bully pulpit. why have you not chastised congress for having two systems of health care. one for all of us and one for them. >> well, look, first of all, if we don't have health care reform, the gap between what congress gets and what ordinary americans get, will continue to be as wide as it is right now. you are absolutely right. i don't think carol or paul would deny they have got a

pretty good deal. they have got a pretty good deal. the fact is that they are -- their deal is no better than the janitor who cleans their offices, because they are part of a federal health care employee plan. it is a huge pool. so you've got millions of people who are part of the pool, which means they've got enormous leverage with the insurance company, right? so they can negotiate the same way that a big fortune 500 company can negotiate. that drives down their costs. they get a better deal. now, what happens is, those members of congress, same situation. i could at the beginning of the year, look at a menu of a variety of different health care options. these are all private plans. they could be not for profit. blue cross, blue shield or etna

or what have you. they would have these plans that are offered and we would then select what plan worked best for us. there were certain requirements. if you wanted to sell insurance to federal employees. there were certain things you had to do. you had to cover certain illnesses. you couldn't preclude for pre-existing illnesses. there were a lot of rules that had been negotiated for the federal government. that's what we want to do with health care reform. we want to make sure that you are getting that same kind of option. that's what the health exchange is all about.

if you look at it and you say, you know what, this is a good deal. i have more leverage because maybe i'm a small business or maybe i'm self-employed or maybe i'm like lorie and nobody will take me because of a pre-existing condition, why haven't i got the rules set up. why wouldn't i want to take advantage of it. there are legitimate concerns about the cost of the program. i understand there are legitimate concerns about the public option. i think it is a good idea but i

understand some people think that if you set up a public option, that that will drive public insurance out or private insurers out. i think that's a legitimate concern. i disagree with it but i think that's a legitimate debate to have. i want everybody to understand, though, the status quo is not working for you. the status quo is not working for you. and if we can set up a system, which i believe we can, that gives you options just like members of congress has options that gives a little bit of help to people who currently are working hard every day but they don't have health care insurance on the job and most importantly if we can make sure that you, all of you, who have insurance, which is probably 80% or 90% of you, that you are not going to be dropped because of

pre-existing conditions or because you lose your job or because you change your job, that you are actually going to get what you pay for, that you are not going to find out when you are sick that you got cheated, you are not going to hit a lifetime cap where you thought you were paying for insurance but after a certain amount, suddenly, you are paying out of pocket and bankrupting yourself and your family. if we can set up a system that gives you some security, that's worth a lot. this is the best chance we've ever had to do that. we're all going to have to come together. we are going to have to make it happen. i am competent we can do so. i am going to need your help, new hampshire. thank you very much, everybody. god bless you. [ applause ] president obama and a big dose of new hampshire style democracy. you just saw the president's sixth town hall on health care reform since june at portsmouth high school in front of 1,800 people not hand picked by the

white house. like voters who have crowded town hall all across america, folks in the live free or die state have very strong opinions on health care, mon i ey and th government and the president heard all of them. he did not hear a threat of eternal damnation as senator arlin spectrum did this morning. >> one day, god is going to stand before you and he is going to judge you and the rest of your damn cronies up on the hill and then you'll get your just deserves. >> it's a make or break month. we are gauging the outrage and the pushback from health reform supporters. in the past 24 thundershowers, we have brought you town hauls in a free state. democratic senator, claire mccaskill, spending a second day fielding questions and complaints from her fellow

missouriians. >> people have really strong opinions in there. i think we had a good, full discussion. i think i was able to hopefully correct some really bad misinformation out there. people are just getting information that's just flat wrong. >> reporter: what did you think was really important to say, this is true, this is no the true, et cetera? >> the most important thing, i have an 81-year-old mother that is incredibly important to me. the notion that i would ever or that our government would ever do anything to cut short or dismiss the quality of life for our seniors is so offensive to me as an american and as the aarp said, it is just a flat lie. there is no rationing of health care that is being proposed for our elderly. there is no notion that people are batting about that somehow elderly people are going to be dismissed and going to be told you can't get health care. hopefully, i was able to reassure people that, not in america, that's not going to happen. pennsylvania's

party-switching senator, arlen specter, tried to plain a public option and the congressional committee process. >> we're talking about a governmental option, public option, we are debating it. so far, no bill has passed the congress. in the house of representatives, five committees have passed bills but the house has not pass a bill. in the senate, we are still working on a bill, trying to get bipartisan shi bipartisanship. i know the american people are sick and tire of republicans and democrats fighting and the american people would like to see some bipartisanship and coming together in the public interest. >> let's take a look at where health care reform stands in congress. the breakdown looks kind of like your college basketball bracket. three house committees have passed separate versions of the

legislation. now, they have to be merged into one bill the full house can vote on. in the senate, two plans have to be merged. if bills pass the house an senate, negotiators iron out differences and both vote again. if the final bill passes, it goes to president obama. between now and then, assuming there is a then, there is a lot of room for misinterpretation, fudging, confusion and plain may-up nonsense an an politics too. it's pretty easy to get lost in the bill. we like to pri in senior political correspondent, candy crowley. she, at the same time, has been trying to pars this out as well. candy, if you don't mine, let's go back to arlen specter's town hall in lebanon, pennsylvania.

>> it is written with the assumption that government has the right to control our lives from prebirth to death. for that reason, it is not worth considering, modifying, amending. it knees to be dumped. >> let's backtrack that. even the president brought it up. i remembered what this gentlemen had said in specter's town hall today. candy, can you hear me okay? >> i thought we were going to hear the president's answer before mine. >> that's okay. we were listening to the president for about an hour. pour the hot cup of tea. here we go. >> part of the problem is what you just laid out before you came to me. there are all these bills out there. they are open to interpretation. nothing is final.

ef everyone is going through these things when they are not lawyers. i don't know if you have ever seen a bill on capitol hill. the reason there are so many lawyers and judges in the united states of america is because people look at a law and see something different. you have just a situation that is open for flogging. if he are one side or the other, it is open for interpretation. then, you get what would seem to me some very real fears here from people, because they are trying to interpret something that doesn't yet exist. and, about which there has not been adequate explanations why you see the president out there, why you see people like senator claire mccaskill out there, why you see senator chuck grassley, who we are going to go see tomorrow, republicans and democrats saying, here is what it is, what are your fierce and your concerns. there is just so much out there that people pick and choose what they want without saying what they are finally going to get or, b, totally understanding what the lawmakers had in mind. >> the president made that point. there air lot of rumors and

myths out there. when the president mentioned a response today, he said he felt there was a misunderstanding about coverage for consultation on end of life care. let's go back to that same town hall meeting if you don't mind and what this woman had to say also stood out to us as well, candy. >> this is about the system matt particular dismantling of this country. i'm only 35 years old. i have never been interested in politics. you have awakened sleeping giants. we are tired of this. this is why everybody in this room is so ticked off. i don't want this country turning into russia, turning into a socialized country. my question for you is, what are you going to do to restore this country back to what our founders created according to the constitution? >> okay. according to the constitution. what did you make of what she

brought up there? >> here is what i make of it, conservatives have watched the past six months as the president tries to get the economy back on track. what they see is increased government involvement in the banking industry, in the mortgage industry, in the car industry. now, they look at this big big, one-sixth of the economy and they see the government getting further involved, beyond medicare and medicaid in the health industry. you also have, according to our polls, people who overwhelmingly believe that reform is needed, some or a lot. also, people who 85% of whom say i actually like the health care that i am getting, their doctors and the attention to their health needs and 75% of whom say, and i like my insurance, actually. so you see people thinking there is going to be this big

government, socialist, russian takeover of this and you add it on top of the other things they have seen and i think that's what's driving this sort of concern. >> candy crowley, good to see you. >> sure. the president had his day on health care reform. you heard it. how about a little feedback from the gop. that's coming up next.

a make or break month for health care. let's hear from pete olson, a republican critic. he joins me live from houston. he was listening to the president's speech. let's begin with the first thing that stands out to you that you have an issue with. >> thanks for having me. it was nice to seat president out on the trail like the rest of us. but, again, what stuck to me today is the same thing that's stuck with me forever. there is a fundamental difference between our side and his side as to what health care reform means. we all agree we need to reform our health care system. basically, the president says the government as the solution and we've got alternatives in

the private sectors and modifications and changes of tax code that will bring the american people the health care they want, need, and deserve. >> the president made the point it's not just going to be a government-run system. there will still be plenty of options. let's take a listen. >> under the reform we're proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. you will not be waiting in any lines. this is not about putting the government incharge haof your health care insurance i don't believe anyone should be in charge of your health care insurance but you and your doctor. >> he has nad clear, options, options, options. >> what the problem is that the president talks about the public option and talks about it being comparative to private sector

options but the government will determine which qualify to compete within the public option. there is tremendous problems with small businesses. one of the big things we are looking at there is a large tax increase on small businesses, up to 8% for those that provide insurance but not up to the government's standards. that's the problem with the federal government being part of the pool. >> he did make a point to talk about small business in new hampshire and overall in this couldn't interest i. let's take a listen. >> small businesses end up paying a lot more than large businesses per person for health care because they have no bargaining power. they have got no leverage. we want small businesses to be able to buy into the big pool. >> he says, small business wins. >> i'm sorry. that's what -- we support that idea as well as republicans. he is expanding the pool for small businesses. it was called associated health

plans a couple years ago. that was part of our plan. we think that small businesses should be given tax deductions similar to corporations. right now, a small business can't deduct, in some cases, the cost of providing health care insurance to their employees. that makes no sense. >> something else the president wanted to make sle clear, because there has been a lot of back and forth on, look, overall, this is very much about keeping the insurance companies on their toes, wanting insurance companies to compete. >> we want to make sure that everybody has some options. so there has been talk about this public deposition o, where a lot of the idea of government takeover of health care comes from. all we want to do is set up a set of options so that if you don't have health insurance or you are underinsured, you can have the same deal that members of congress have, which is they can look at a menu of options. we are calling it an exchange. it's basically amen u of different health care plans and you will be able to select the

one that suits your family best. i do think that having a public option as part of that would keep the insurance companies honest. >> congressman, whether democrat or republican, we have all felt the sting from an insurance company at least once in our lives. >> the insurance companies, there is some reform that can be done there. there needed to be more transparency. one thing we think is a good idea is allowing insurance companies to take their business across state lines. another thing is that if someone loses their jobs or changes jobs, there is no reason why their insurance shouldn't follow. so those are things that we endorse on our side of the aisle. if they can do a better job of fixing our health care problems than what the president plans. >> congressman, pete olson, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. he left cnn center in atlanta yesterday, a man with a mission. shirt untucked, all terminator like. hitting the road, hunting back

your feedback on health care, hopes, fierce, and criticisms, good, bad, and ugly. we are checking in with the studly ali velshi in just a second. upbeat rock ♪ singer:wanted to get myself a new cell phone ♪ ♪ so i could hear myself as a ringtone ♪ ♪ who knew the store would go and check my credit score ♪ ♪ now all they let me have is this dinosaur ♪ ♪ hello hello hello can anybody hear me? ♪ ♪ i know i know i know i shoulda gone to ♪ ♪ free credit report dot com! ♪ that's where i shoulda gone! coulda got my knowledge on! ♪ ♪ vo: free credit score and report with enrollment in triple advantage.

a life of love and service to others. eunice kennedy shriver, she died

this morning at the age of 88. she became respected in her own right for founding the special olympics. her husband of 56 years right there by her side till the end. there are five kids and 19 grandchildren. we are told there is no final decisions on the funeral arrangements. police and federal drug agents searched a pharmacy on flamingo road in las vegas following raids on the mohome a clinic of michael jackson's doctor who they think may have given him drugs that killed him. police are keeping the findings confidential for now. more evidence that the economy is number one for many americans. all these people are looking for help with their mortgages. this is just outside the georgia world congress center where major lenders gathered to help homeowners find ways to avoid foreclosure. the event was organized by the

nonprofit neighborhood assistance of north america. we are told that about 15,000 people attended. even more expected before the event closes. >> we have an update on the gunman from the shooting last week. five days before he opened fire, he was questioned by police. he fit the description of a man that allegedly had a grenade on a bus. police didn't find one. they let him go. now, police think they were right after all. an entry in sodini's diary stead was a false grenade. he killed himself after killing three women and injuring nine others at the gym. an army private captured. today, there is word on him. the taliban says they are waiting for a response before deciding his fate.

bowe bergdahl disappeared in june. they are saying everything possible is being done to get him back safely. secretary of state clinton is in the congo. they promised $17 million in u.s. aid to fight an epidemic of rape against congolese women and girls. the buzz is all about an apparent slip of the tongue in a q and a session yesterday. either a student misspoke or a translator translated. a request for mr. clinton's opinion about chinese deals in the congo didn't go over so well. >> you want me to tell you what my husband this is. my husband is not the secretary of state. i am. >> quite a sound bite from mad an secretary there. what's your reaction? shoot us a tweet at kyra cnn. we have gotten some. >> reporter:. >> sigh eed says, hey, it happens. she is in the job, not her

husband. the ufp says she needs to hill. bill was the president of the united states after all. go ahead and tweet us and we will try to read a bunch more at the bottom of the hour. now, we take you live to that town hall with claire mccaskill in st. louis, missouri. as you know, she was going to hold this at another site in hillsboro, but it was called off due to safety concerns. that was because another town hall had broken into a bit of a melee and six people were arrested. it had to change to this location. >> i have not med any veterans that want us to get rid of their specialized health care. they have specialized health care that the government provides for them. there is the va system and medicare that are two examples

of where the government has been involved in health care. not perfect. we have work to do but i don't think that the idea that the government should not have any involvement in health care, i don't think that dog is going to hunt in america, because i don't think most americans want us to wipe out medicare. the next question is from lorie in ditmer, missouri. the one i have got is where you want to hold me accountable about the kind of health care i might get.

[ inaudible ] >> this was a nonpartisan poll. are you willing to vote on any bill that does not include this program? i believe that we have to -- [ applause ]

>> i agree. i take that pledge. i am not going to vote for any bill that would allow any federal employee, and believe me, i am blessed for so many reasons. i am blessed to be standing here. i am lucky to have this job and work for you, even though today may be a little tough. that's okay. that's okay. and we do, the federal employees, i have the same choices in health care as any other federal employee, but they are good choices. i think that any bill that's written should give the people that serve and write the bill the exact same options and require them to face the exact same options as anyone else who would be using the health care

system. next question. okay. be polite, everybody. we have good manners in missouri. i swear we do. this is mike o'day from kirkwood. yes, sir. where are you? there you go. okay. great. thank you for being here. [ inaudible question ]

>> this is a doctor who works at the va and he is concerned that if we nationalized health care that it would drain resources away from social security disability and to the va system. in fact, the question is, will the va remain intact? first of all, let me just tell you and i said this yesterday and i am going to say it again, if anyone wants to bet you whether or not we are going to get a single payer, nationalized health care bill out of congress, take the bill and take their money. it is not going to happen. we will not get a single payer bill, nationalized health care system out of congress.

i know you hate to hear good news but we will not do this. okay? so anyone who believes -- there is not any support in congress, very little support. i shouldn't say any. there air few members that think it is a good idea. there are many, many more members who think it is a bad idea. it is not even being discussed. it is not even on the table. i don't understand this rudeness. what is this? i don't get it. i honestly don't get it. do you all think that you are persuading people when you shout out like that? beg your pardon? you don't trust me. okay. i don't know what else i can do. i don't know what else i can do. if you want me to go home -- let

me -- please, please. let me tell the doctor from va, there is nothing that has any impact on the va system. finally, i will not vote for a bill that is not deficit neutral. all right. the next question, i don't -- from andrea. >> this is just another example of a number of forums that we have been monitoring across the united states on health care. these town halls that are being held by senators like you see there. senator claire mccaskill, a democrat from missouri. we have been following various congressmen and congress women holding town halls as well. people within the audience getting really heated an emotional about their questions with regard to health care.

it goes to show how important this is to americans across the country and why we are doing the best to follow these live events and these various town hauls as people like you and me come forward and want to ask our representatives important questions about what the health care bill is going to do for you and for me. so we will continue to follow this here with claire mccaskill out of jefferson college's field house. interesting. they had to change to this location versus another location, because they were worried about safety concerns. another town hall actually one that took place with u.s. representative russ carnahan, a democrat from st. louis. he had one last weekend and it turned into a melee and six people were arrested. there had to be extra security and eyes on these town hall meetings. we will continue to follow it. another story we have been staying on top of for a couple of months, a story that really broke our hearts. it is quite a shake they had to

meet under these circumstances. a liberian diplomate in the u.s. after a crime that rocked phoenixs community. hear about his emotional visit with the 8-year-old rape victim. wellbeing. we're all striving for it. purina cat chow helps you nuture it in your cat... with a full family of excellent nutrition... and helpful resources. ♪ purina cat chow. share a better life. limb: dude that was sick!

i've been hangin' up there for, what, like, forty years? and then - wham - here i am smacking the pretty off that windshield of yours. oh, what you're looking for an apology? well, toss another coin in the wishing well, pal. it's not happenin'. limb: hey, what's up, donnie? how you been? anncr: accidents are bad. anncr:but geico's good ding! with onsite windshield replacement.

an eight-year-old girl allegedly raped by young boyce at at phoenix apartment complex. the little girl is in choeld protective services. according to police, the girls parents say they did not want her back. family advocates say that was the result of a language barrier. the liberian president has sent an ambassador to phoenix. i asked president ellen johnson sirleaf what was the message for the rape victim and her family. >> we want to make sure that the parents take care of that child. if they don't, reach out to others, facilitated by our ambassador, to make sure she is placed in a situation where she can be administered to, that she can be loved and cared and call

upon the parents to do right by that child. they cannot allow her life to be so interrupted by this incident and take away the future that is sobriety for her. >> he is just back from the mission of meeting with the little girl and her family and joins me live from washington. let me ask you, if you don't mind, sir, when you talked with this little girl, how is she doing, what did she tell you. what's your sense of her condition? >> let me say thank you for having me. when i met this very cute, pretty, 8-year-old little girl, she was very distraught. i took her a teddy bear that i told her was from the president of liberia.

that she and liberians extended their love to her. it was a moment that i will never forget as a father and grandfather. this girl has had so much at the tender age of eight. it was a very sobering moment for me. she expressed to me in the way that she was missing her parents and she knows that the parents have had statements that were destructed. she also know these parents have never been to school before. they only speak liberian english, a broken english. it was a moment for me that i will never forget. >> mr. ambassador, there is a lot of concern about this little girl being put back into possibly a family that doesn't necessarily want her, into a community that really hurt her. this has caused response from around the world. do you think it would be a good good idea to put her back into

that apartment complex with that family? >> i recommended that she go back to the apartment. it is important to note that the little girl. there was some misinformation with the language. the parents said they never said they did not want their daughter. the father was quoted to the examiner when the incident took place. the examiner was able to say that the girl was okay. so he, not understanding too much, did not mean that the rape did not occur but it was important for him to know that the girl did not have permanent damage. the second day, they returned to the hospital and did similar tests. >> yes. mr. ambassador, respectfully, we did hear what her sister had said. we also heard what her mother had said and it didn't seem that

this was lost in translation. let's listen to this just one more time. >> nothing has happened to my daughter, nobody not touched my daughter. >> she always bring trouble. she always bring thubl. when she comes i'm going to tell her don't ever do that again because all of us we are at the same family. we are from the same plays. now, she's just bringing confusion among us. now the other people they don't want to see her. >> that's pretty heartbreaking when you hear the system. >> that's unfortunate. the statement by the sister there that you heard was an off-the-cuff statement but when the mother spoke, the examiner had said that the girl would be all right. it was based on that this they did not understand so well that the rape actually took place. they decided that the girl should be able to come home. it is very important to note that. i don't care how poor you are. it is important for some of us

even in this sophisticated society, you may not understand, you may not know how to react when your eight yeerd daughter is raped. this was said under confusion, frustration and we have to take it at that. >> let me ask you this, mr. ambassador. when you met with the little girl, were you able to have some type of conversation with her so she understands that this is not her fault. because, when you listen to her sister, you get the impression that the family is blaming her for this. that she was the troublemaker. >> that's unfortunate. when i met with her, in fact, she is thinking that her parents are being sent away to liberia. she wants her parents back. there is more injury to her to keep her away from the family setting. this is what i suggested that it is important. i saw the girl grieve and i nearly cried myself. it is unfortunate that this happened. it is more foreign bring the girl in a family setting.

before this, july 15th, 2009, there is no record of violence against her. they have always lived together. so it's very important that the girl goes back to the family situation. we have spoken with the cps and they are saying that after 90 days, perhaps there will be a moment for them to go back. as we saw it, it is very important at least to have a telephone call by now to be able to talk to the child so that she can know the family is out there in the united states. >> and you mentioned cps. in all fairness, i want to say that cps did give us a statement, because there is ai lot of concern that this little girl may go back into a harmful environment. cps said the department remains committed to ensuring the safety of the children in its care and custody. department staff have met with representatives of the liberian community and with the deputy ambassador. of course, that's you, to foster better understanding and communication. as with all children, the safety, well-being and best

interest of the child are the paramount consideration. so no decision has been made what will happen with that 8-year-old girl. deputy ambassador, we would like to stay in touch with you. i think more than anything, everybody that is paying attention to thiss story. >> it is important for you to let me say this. after this incident, the liberian community has been maligned. it is unfortunately. the liberians are peace-loving people. liberians are civilized. we can never condone rape. it has never happened in the liberian society. it should be said that liberians are civilized people. >> mr. ambassador, rape has been used as a tool in liberia. that's why the president of liberia made it part of her inaugural address that this was something she was going to end. we hope these boys did not come

into the united states seeing rape used as a tool of war to hurt women. that's the last thing we want to see as you point out. >> it is important for you to note that this happened during the age of conflict, 14 years of conflict. everywhere in the world, bosnia, iraq, very have sexual violence when there is conflict. >> i understand but that cannot be tolerated in the u.s. it is a crime. it is against the law and little girls should not be raped. >> definitely. we all love the girl. i embrace her. we love the girl. if you may allow me to say, here in the united states, it is is said that statistics say that every two minutes, a woman is raped. cannot say because of that sexual violence or assault is ingrained in cultural situation in the united states. this is what we are saying. in liberia, it has not been the case before and it is not now. people need to understand that. you cannot say that liberia has

been this way. this is a country that has a woman as president, minister of foreign affairs as president. commerce minister as minister, a woman. we also have justice minister, a woman. all these things are very important for us. >> totally. >> now, you have women and gender sensitivity. >> deputy, ambassador, we want to stay focused on what's happening to that little girl here in the united states. we will follow up with you. we are glad you met with her and we will follow up on the case and we sure appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> thank you i just wanted to say thank you to all the city of phoenix, the good people that were there that welcomed me and the liberian community, dr. wright and dr. stuart and all those within the american community that helped to carry on the discussions. >> thank you so much, am bass done sele. >> you can see my full interview at cnn.com/kyra.

with an epa estimated 32 miles per gallon. and up to 600 miles between fill ups. it's the most fuel efficient crossover on the highway. better than honda cr-v, toyota rav4 and even the ford escape hybrid. the all new chevy equinox. you hungry? yeah. me too. (door crashes in) (broadview alarm) (gasp and scream) go! go! go! go! go! go! (phone rings) hello? this is mark with broadview security. is everything okay? no. someone just tried to break in. i'm sending help right now. thank you. (announcer) brink's home security is now broadview security. call now to install the standard system for just $99.

the proven technology of a broadview security system delivers rapid response from highly trained professionals, 24 hours a day. call now to get the $99 installation, plus a second keypad installed free. and, you could save up to 20% on your homeowner's insurance. call now - and get the system installed for just $99. broadview security for yop- home or business - the next generation of brink's home security. call now.

you want me to tell you what my husband thinks? my husband is not the secretary of state, i am.

if you ask me my opinion, i will tell you my opinion. imnot going to be channeling my husband. >> so we asked your reaction to that little snap by the secretary of state. we were told there was a translation issue and apparently the reporter meant so a obama, not clinton. here is what your tweets say. we know that is a fact. smooth operator says it is good to see hillary clinton make a stand for herself. you go, girl. bobby's girl 1972 says i honestly think it was a combination of jet lag, miscommunication and she is secretary of state, not bill. plus, the nor korea thing. cut her some slack. ginger said, that sort of remined me of the professor overreaction. secretary clinton assumed a refusal to acknowledge women in government sensitive. professor cane says, can't blame the woman, can you? living with bill has been tough from the get-go. stop entertaining. talk