tonight, the tax cut deal brokered by president obama is well on its way to senate passage. yet, caught in a republican cross fire. it is a fight that exposes continuing tea party versus establishment tensions and some early 2010 gop presidential fault lines. >> it's easy to stand on the sidelines and to criticize this proposal, and it's perhaps even politically expedient to stand on the sidelines and criticize this proposal. but make me -- let me make one thing very clear, mr. president. advocating against this tax proposal is to advocate for a tax increase. >> also, rahm emanuel says chicago is in his blood. but at an at times tense, and at times hilarious hearing today, he faced down more than two dozen challenges for his legal right to run for mayor. >> there's also a coat that my grandfather on my mother's side, who came to chicago in 1917,

from the russian r/romania bord. >> a bit, we'll explain, or try to explain, anyway, just what that coat has to do with whether rahm can be on the ballot. but we begin tonight with a riddle whose answer might make you wonder if anyone leading the congress remembers there was a pretty big election last month. here it is, it runs more than 1,900 pages, cost more than $1 trillion, and is loaded with earmarks. the answer, it's a massive spending bill pulled together by the senate democratic leaders as they try to exert power one last time before the end of the year. smart politics or pure arrogance? let's break down the spending plan and the politics behind it. joining us, cornell belcher, gloria borger, dana bash, and in new york, cnn contributor ted rowlands and john avalon. dana, you first. this is your beat. >> i didn't kill that tree, though. >> there was an election about this. there was this thing called the tea party. the republicans won 63 seats in

the house, they picked up several seats in the senate, and a lot of the election was about, congress shouldn't do this. shouldn't just take big bills and say, here, vote on it. load it up with earmarks. why? >> well, look, the senate -- the question, the bigger question is, why didn't congress pass any of the 12 appropriations bills that they are required to do by law? this is their basic job, congress, funding the government, they didn't do any of them. and that's why they are all wrapped up in this particular bill. senate democrats say, look, we want to do this the right way. they're doing it with hours left in the session, but they say they're at least trying. and republicans are saying, excuse me, to your point, this is exactly what we voted on. but let me just tell you, this bill, the spending bill they're trying to put forward is only $15 billion above the spending levels that we're at right now, which is what republicans want to continue. so the levels of spending aren't that different. it's just the question of why they didn't do the work before. >> only $15 billion. you're all sitting at home saying, only $15 billion. what a great day this is in

washington! >> not that much. >> yes, it's only $15 billion. you know, cornell, i hate to come to you first on these things -- >> i do too. >> but, look -- >> defend it! >> to dana's point, we can christmas shop to the last minute, but that is their only job, their biggest job, keep the government running, have these hearings all year long so this is done in an orderly fashion. they can't run a toy railroad. >> i feel a little at odd having to defend them. but the truth of the matter, we are sort of one big family, but broadly, we're like second cousins. but you know there's 300 some families in the congressional districts spread all around. and each congressional member, i know you don't like to hear this, but each congressional member has to fight his and her hardest for their district. >> that was yesterday. >> if they do not, they get voted out. so this process is ugly and it's messy, but ultimately, you've got to fight for your district. >> you know what they're going to wind up with instead of this, tell me if you agree, they could

wind up with a short-term resolution to fund the government, get you past january -- >> at the current level. >> at the current level. and guess what, you come back, the new congress, and you have a standoff over shutting down the government. have we been there before? >> and so, john avalon, my favorite in these earmarks, this is the 1,900 pages that's here. this is just a printout, about 70 pages of the earmarks. it's a big spreadsheet, goes through every single state, every single project. there's some for $30 million, for $50 million. here's a great one, an $80 million fund to help restore pacific salmon populations. maybe that's very important, and of course, it covers alaska and oregon, but it also covers california, but nevada? nevada? i missed the pacific coast of nevada. have you been there? >> i keep looking for it when i'm out in vegas and i can't seem to find it, though i've tried. to be fair, this might be classified as a form of stimulus. if you're into biology, but what cornell is suggesting is really, this is the congressional version of the pre-christmas

rush. what it is is pork-a-palooza. and gloria's suggestion is exactly right. it's what they should do. this is ridiculous. that they're all doing this. it's like someone's shutting down the buffet and everyone's all trying to get theirs before they've got to go home. it's completely absurd. >> quick counterpoint, on. here's the reality to the situation in the district. you say that salmon thing is really interesting. it's really interesting and to make fun tod us, but there are jobs connected to that. if i'm in nevada and my senator is the leader and there's a product i can get and can put jobs in nevada, doggone right he better go after it. >> and all the people working in salmon hatcheries in nevada agree with you, but i don't know how many there actually are. >> i volunteer to go rook. ed, we're making fun of the democrat thes. here we are, it's like christmas eve. i've got to go out and shop for, everybody they've got to fund the united states government. but if you go through this list of earmarks, the republicans had

this tea party help. now they say they're going to be the reformers. right here on the front page, $30 million, dick shelby, republican senator from alabama, for the university of alabama tuscaloosa to help the science, teaching, and engineering research corridor. the senators from mississippi, tad cochran, one of the great appropriators of all times, i could go on for a few pages with his earmarks. did the republicans not after the election have an obligation to go back and say, i know i asked for that before the election, could you please take it out of the bill now? >> it certainly would have been nice, but obviously there are guys on both sides who think this is the way thing should be done. the game is going to change dramatically, though. come january, either the new tea party members or the old republicans who learned the lessons from 2006 are going to basically set new rules. and we will pass a budget. we will pass resolutions. we will pass appropriations bills. and if we don't, we deserve to be beat. i just challenge one of my friends here on this show, who say that members lose if they don't bring home the bacon. show me one single member who

lost this last year, because he didn't bring back earmarks, and i'll show you ten who basically got re-elected for having no earmarks. the game needs to change and change dramatically. >> to ed's point, it was an interesting year. the old rules did not apply. you know, bob bennett lost his seat in utah. he went home saying, i'm doing what i'm supposed to do. i'm bringing home money, i'm doing my job, and the tea party said, see ya. and we can go through other states and find examples of that. >> that's more about ideology than it was about anything. you had an ideology purification going with the tea party. but ed, you know as well as i do that as a member of congress, your job is to bring home the bacon. and if you don't bring home the bacon and you're losing jobs, you know what, ed -- >> i'm not sure -- >> -- to lead. >> i'm not sure after two years in which every american family has had to make horrendously tough choices about their personal finances that those rules still apply. i get that's the playbook here in town. but i don't think they get the message of what average americans have been through. >> they're not going to change

on their own. >> but on that point, of course, republicans did make a pledge the minute they got back after the election, with all of the new republicans, make a pledge, no new earmarks. >> here's the list from mitch mcconnell. now, he's mad about this because he's in a pickle. he's the senate republican leader, he loves earmarks, and he said as much. but the tea party sent us a message and the american people sent us a message. so why are these still in there? >> not just these, we added them all up, we added almost $108 million in earmarks from the gop leader, mitch mcconnell. he could have taken them out, according to the senate appropriations staff that we talked to. we asked him that question today, and he said, it doesn't matter because i'm fighting against this whole bill. so he's trying to kill the bill that includes all of these earmarks in there. >> that's cynical. >> but it's about -- >> -- alice in wonderland. >> he was for them before he was against them. >> we went to senate floor and said that. it is a little bit alice in wonderland. >> it's the new rule czar, it's not about bringing home the pork

or whatever you want to call it. it's about leading. it's about saying to the american public, okay, you understand we have a deficit problem, i understand we have a deficit problem, we're not going to fix the deficit with pork. we're going to do it another way. >> one man's pork is another man's -- >> some perspective here. perspective here. >> when i want an earmark, i'm voting for senator cornell belcher. i'll tell you right now. >> i can't wait for the tea party -- >> this is $8 billion in earmarks in a $1 trillion plus budget. >> it's a tiny slice, but it's the symbolism. go ahead, john. >> i want to see the tea party challenge to, you know, thad cochran, i'm really looking forward to that one down the line. >> here's one of my favorite -- >> it's not going to happen, john, i'm sorry. >> i know. why isn't it? >> maybe it's going to be one of your independents from the new party you're creating. the key thing here is -- >> that just shows the hirms hypocrisy of it ed. >> i'm arguing the process needs

to change and will change. we have a budget resolution, a system that everybody's not adhered to, and at the end of the day, judge republicans one year from now. we still don't have control of the house of representatives. we are part of the minority in the congress. and let's see where we are a year from now. i promise you it will be better. >> i want you to listen to one of my favorite moments of the day. because as this debate is playing out, they're also debating big tax cut compromise. we're going to get to that in a minute. here's senator kay bailey hutchison. we thought she wouldn't be in the senate anymore because she was running for governor. she did win the primary down in texas. here she is on the floor today when they're about to debate this monstrosity, the 1,900 pages i have right here. they're talking about the tax cuts, $900 billion to add to the deficit. senator hutchison -- >> once this bill is passed, we must get about the business of cutting overall spending in this government. and that is not just the discretionary part, which is a minor part of our budget. it is also the entitlements.

>> i just do want to note for the record, senator hutchison voted yes on george w. bush's medicare part "d" prescription drug benefit, which if you ask any deficit hawk in town, which is one of the reasons that we have a big deficit. but everybody seems to have gotten the message of the election for their speeches. the question, then, is, why are they killing trees? >> it's like one last drink. okay? it's sort of, i'm going to stop, i'm going to quit, but i've got to have one last drink before -- >> after the holidays. >> right, exactly. >> i'm going on the diet, too, after the holidays. >> well, when we come back from the break, we'll see if our weight loss plan includes perhaps as early as tonight in the united states senate that big tax cut compromise. stay with us. [ male announcer ] this is steven, a busy man. his day starts with his arthritis pain. that's breakfast with two pills. the morning is over, it's time for two more pills. the day marches on, back to more pills. and when he's finally home... but hang on; just two aleve can keep arthritis pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol.

this is steven, who chose aleve and 2 pills for a day free of pain. and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels. took some foolish risks as a teenager. but i was still taking a foolish risk with my cholesterol. anyone with high cholesterol may be at increased risk of heart attack. diet and exercise weren't enough for me. i stopped kidding myself. i've been eating healthier, exercising more...

and now i'm also taking lipitor. if you've been kidding yourself about high cholesterol...stop. along with diet, lipitor has been shown to lower bad cholesterol 39% to 60%. lipitor is fda approved to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients who have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease. [ female announcer ] lipitor is not for everyone, including people with liver problems and women who are nurspregnant or may become pregnant. you need simple blood tests to check for liver problems. tell your doctor if you are taking other medications or if you have any muscle pain or weakness. this may be a sign of a rare but serious side effect. let's go, boy, go! whoo-whee! if you have high cholesterol, you may be at increased risk of heart attack and stroke. don't kid yourself. talk to your doctor about your risk and about lipitor.

the senate, perhaps tonight, most likely early tomorrow, will vote on that big tax cut compromise president obama brokered with the republican congressional leadership. when it passes the senate, it goes to the house. we'll debate some of it in a minute, including interesting politics within the republican party. but every night this week, we're going to break down some key provisions in it. tonight, we want to look at what the compromise does to the bush tax cuts. the bush tax cuts remember, this is one of the big controversies. if you break them down, one of the things democrats are mad about is this right here, $82 billion, that's for the highest income families. $463 billion of the cost is to extend those tax cuts for families making $250,000 a year or less.

this has been one of the faultlines. the president wanted the yellow part, the republicans insisted on the red part. that's all in that compromise. why does this matter? if you take a look at this right here, this is the america broken down by income. 66% of americans make between $20,000 and $200,000. almost 30% of americans make below $20,000 a year. only 0.9% make more than $500,000. that's that little tiny slice right here, and about 3.4% make between $200,000 and $500,000. those income rates matter. here are the tax rates right now. the darker blue over this side, that's what's in the compromise. the lighter blue, that's what the president wanted. you can see every single tax rate group is a little bit lower in the compromise than in the president had proposed in his plan. especially on this end, he wanted high-end tax rates to go up more. why does that matter? let's take a look at this. this is how it affects you. this is why liberals and democrats are mad. from here on over, $500,000 or less, you're actually going to

pay more in taxes next year than you would had had president obama had his initial plan put through the congress. if you make $200,000 to $500,000, you're going to pay about $2,600 more in taxes under this compromise, because the president's plan had additional tax cuts for this group. but if you're on this end, here's what the president wanted you to do, this is what you get. you'll make money, you'll pay less in taxes. this is what the obama plan would have taken away from you if you make over $1 million, instead, you'll actually make a little more. that's why when this goes over to the house, they probably can't stop it, but you'll hear a lot of liberals criticizing it. this is a done deal, right? >> it seems that way. i'm reluctant to say total done deal. but the senate will probably vote at this point tomorrow morning. that seems to be all over, you know, whatever the singing. but in the house, democratic leaders are making pretty clear that they think this is probably going to be done. the question still is whether or

not they'll actually be able to change it, particularly the estate tax level. >> ed rollins, as this debate place out, it has become a fault line among republicans. the democrats are mad because the rich get a great deal on the estate tax and those upper income. but you have a little tea party republican establishment going here, in part because the unemployment benefit extension that's in here, it's not paid for. so it adds to the deficit. i want you to listen. here's john thune, republican senator, a member of the leadership. he's from south dakota. here's an important footnote. he's thinking about running for the republican nomination for president. he's on the floor today, he's not naming names, but he's sending a message. >> when it's perhaps even politically expedient to stand on the sidelines and criticize this proposal. but let me make one thing very clear, mr. president. advocating against this tax proposal is to advocate for a tax increase. and that is something that we cannot and the american economy cannot afford. >> now, not naming names, but perhaps, just perhaps, he read

"usa today" this morning, where there's a guy, the former massachusetts governor, mitt romney, i think he's running for the republican nomination as well. and he wrote this. "given the unambiguous message that the american people sent to washington in november, it is difficult to understand how our political leaders could have reached such a disappointing agreement. because the tax deal is temporary, a large portion of this ben efficient effect is missing. what some are calling a grand compromise is not grand at all, except in its price tag. the total package will cost nearly $1 trillion, resulting in substantial new borrowing in a time we are already drowning in red ink." so thune versus romney, and it's not just those two, ed, there's a split in your party. >> there's a split in my party. obviously, we're not for expanding the deficits. but you've got to make a compromise. if you didn't want the tax increases in january, you had to make -- we don't have the whole government. and as mitt romney ought to know better than anybody, because when he was the governor of massachusetts and he had it democrat controlled, about the only thing that he accomplished was romneycare, which he'll get

to explain the difference between romneycare and obamacare for the next two years. >> it's not your candidate, ed? >> pardon? >> it's not your candidate? >> ed rollins got to that before john thune could. >> i think at the end of the day, as the senator has said, and romney did try to be a senator, he didn't make it, but he tried to be a senator. and i think at the end of the day, he tried to take democrats out and he didn't succeed. so what he did the last year of his governorship is he ran around the country 344 days running for president. so he's off trying to run for president again. >> if you're scoring this one at home, ed rollins is not for mitt romney. 25 years covering politics and i got that one. >> right. >> exactly. >> but, john, to ed's point, i mean, ed said it in a semi-political kind of way. but it is interesting the day after this big federal court ruling that puts the obama health care plan back into play, which every year romney campaigns in a conservative area which does put romneycare, the massachusetts plan, which has a mandate, back into play. this seems pretty clear to the tea party. >> oh, yeah.

no, this isn't subtle. no more subtle than ed's coming attraction speech just a second ago. mitt romney's trying to open up a fight on another front to distract people from the mandate-driven health care debate going on in the courts, which is, after all, the basis of his health care plan in massachusetts. so he's got a real problem on his right. he's trying to play offense on the other front. but the larger fault lines are really interesting. because what republicans are wrestling with in public right now is the fact that their theology about tax cuts breaks down if you really care about the deficit. and it's essentially an admission that tax cuts don't pay for themselves, at every level. so that's the fault line here, and it's fascinating to watch. and i hope they do enter the new congress with a real commitment -- >> but the republican party has always had that fault line between the people who worship at the shrine of the balanced budget and the folks like jack kemp. remember jack kemp, who said, i don't worship at that shrine, i'm for tax cuts, because i think it's going to stimulate the economy. >> but after this election, boy, is it hard? >> right, and this is welcome to mitch mcconnell's world and john

boehner's world. because they're going to have that problem. >> and just to show you where the fault lines are right now, yesterday in the key test vote, 37 republicans voted for this, only 5 republicans voted no and stood with mitt romney and sarah palin and the tea party. >> so the taxes still trump deficit reduction for now. but cornell, the biggest challenge is going to come january, when republicans will have to prove it when it comes to spending cuts. and the question is, how far will the president go with them. >> what the president has to do and congressional democrats have to do is two different things. the president is showing where he's going to go on this bipartisanship. and the polling is really interesting, because you put this bipartisan tax cut proposal out there in a big form and all americans are clamoring for it, yes, bipartisanship, but when you start breaking it down, support begins to wane. the president has to show leadership and look like the adult in the room. however, congressional democrats have to draw big lines of extinction about what you were just talking about. they're for the rich, he's for you.

>> i've got to call a time-out. if i can afford the postage, i'll send you all a copy of this. coming up, rahm emanuel has an interesting question of residential politics. to the pos. ok. uh, a little help... oh! you know shipping is a lot easier with priority mail flat rate boxes. if it fits, it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. plus, you can print and pay for postage online. and i can pick them up for free with package pickup. perfect! cause i'm gonna need a lot of those. wow! i knew i should have brought my sleigh. priority mail flat rate shipping starts at $4.90 only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship. slow you down. introducing bayer am. its dual-action formula delivers extra strength pain relief, plus it fights fatigue. so get up and get going with new bayer am, the morning pain reliever.

so get up and get going with new bayer am, exchange traded funds. some firms offer them "commission free." problem is they limit the choice of etfs to what makes financial sense to them. td ameritrade doesn't limit you to one brand of etfs... they offer more than 100... each selected by investment experts at morningstar associates. only at the etf market center at td ameritrade. before investing, carefully consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. contact td ameritrade for a prospectus containing this and other information. read it carefully before investing.

rahm emanuel says it shouldn't be an issue at all. yes, he was in washington as the president's chief of staff, but the man who wants to be chicago's next mayor says there was never any doubt that the city was his permanent home. but there he was today at a trial of sorts. a city hearing on challenges to emanuel's right to run. nows there a state law that says to seek municipal office, you must have lived in that city for a year prior to the election. emanuel critics say he didn't, period. emanuel says he still owns a home in chicago and shouldn't be penalized for serving the president here in washington. as you all know, chicago politics are fun, and bruising. and today's hearing was both and more. here to help us sort through the theater and the facts are cnn contributor roland martin and lynn sweet of the "chicago sun-times." this was a little bit of everything. what about your newspaper subscriptions? what about your mail?

why are you storing things in your basement, it's not really your house. >> and he said, well, things are in my basement, such as my wife's wedding dress and the jacket my grandfather wore. it was a free for all. he even had people bringing up conspiracy theories that had nothing to do with the mayor of chicago and his residency claim. >> we need a conspiracy theory every now and again, don't we, roland? >> absolutely. and i think it's hilarious to see the former chief of staff to the president to say, oh, i'm sorry, that was a little mistake we made saying we were actually part-time residents. no, we really were full-time residents of chicago after the fact he realized mayor daly was not seeking re-election. >> well, actually, i think you're talking about the income tax point, but the point is, everyone knew that rahm emanuel was only in washington at the behest of president obama. those essential facts aren't in dispute. the legal question, and i think this will go all the way up to the state supreme court, john, is whether or not the statutes

are taken in a way that says, you could be, quote, a service to the united states, and have them invalidate your residency. >> a letter of the law, spirit of the law, where do you make an exemption for military service or serving a president. >> and that's why you have judges -- this is just the first of several layers of legal hearings we'll be having. >> you've got to go back to this whole notion of, i'm serving the president of the united states. but it's a job, your wife moves with you, your kids move with you, you put them in school. i enjoyed my time in chicago, cnn asked me to move to washington, d.c., but i'm still a resident of chicago! >> roland, we've done this argument before, we'll do it again. there's part of a law in illinois that specifically talks about that if you're in service to the united states. >> and more than likely, they were talking about the military, not some guy that's chief of staff in an office. >> that's why they have judges. let's listen to just a little bit. we put together some of the more colorful, some of the more interesting, some that just seem

a little bit bizarre. >> do you have the waco? >> we put together a little bit of it. listen to this. >> governor clinton was elected president, correct? >> that's the record, correct. >> did you subscribe to any chicago newspapers on a home delivery basis in 2010 besides exhibit 31? >> you mean in 2010? >> yes. >> i read them online. >> so october 29, you decided to get the paper copy, correct, delivered to your house? >> correct. >> and you stopped reading them online? >> check them periodically during the day. >> of course that room is the kitchen. >> very good, mr. olsen. u.s. history for 200. >> now, some of the questioning is a tad bizarre, but they're trying to make the point, i guess, that's the house he rented out to somebody. >> see, these facts are not in dispute. which is why the hearing today has the circus-like qualities.

there is no issue that rahm rented the house and that the kitchen was the kitchen of the house he lived in. so that's why this hearing did have this circus-like atmosphere, because this is a good for democracy moment. anyone that filed a motion was heard today and allowed to question rahm emanuel. can you imagine that, if there was such a free for all when he was chief of staff, john. if we just had him sitting in a chair, having to sit for hours and just take our questions. >> john, as any lawyer will tell you, you never know how a judge's ruling may turn. so when you're laying this whole thing out, i've covered many case and as tedious and as boring, when they're going through piece by piece and laying it out, you never know, again. but someone could look at the law, literally, and say, you didn't live in the city as opposed to, well, i still had a house and i rented it. you never know how a judge may rule. >> so there's the legal question, which, as you know, will probably go on for weeks, if not a little bit longer, to

get through the courts. but because you have this open process, one of the challenges for rahm here, as we all know, he can be short-tempered sometimes and get a little feisty. yet he kept his composure, rolled his eyes, but he didn't lose his cool. >> i've seen him through house races. there's the good rahm, the gooder rahm, then the bad rahm. >> and the devilish rahm. >> what you saw today, he knew all the cameras were on him, that it was live stream. one, it was very amusing. he sat there, somewhere between a smirk and a smile, and he knew that some of the questions were so from left and right field, it wasn't about him. and he just let them do their thing. he is disciplined enough to not let any of this get to him, because he saw it for what it was, high chicago political theater. >> there's nothing wrong with that. >> no, we all love theater. >> let the people speak. let the people ask questions. >> i go back to it.

it's just so funny, all of a sudden, here's the other piece. trust me, if any of rahm's opponents were in the exact same position, i guarantee you his attorneys would be on the other side doing the exact same questioning. so it's not as if, oh, it's poor me, i'm rahm. >> the guy he served here in washington, barack obama, did that when he ran for office. >> that's how he started his career, that's just part of the chicago political culture. rahm challenged in 2004 a rival on the democratic primary. he challenged his nominating petition. so even though this might sound a little weird to people who are listening, like why are they having this fight, it's because part of the political culture is, there are rules about getting on a ballot and we're going to hold your feet to the fire to make sure you have dotted every "i" and crossed every "t." >> the law's the law. >> which is why this is going into court. >> we'll continue to track the hearing. could go on for two more days? >> that's correct. >> lawyers are saying, great legal fees. >> it is good for the lawyers.

thanks for coming in. when we come back, a lot more to come in the program tonight, including judicial conflict. the judge who issued the big health care ruling yesterday. there are some on the left who says he should have recused himself because of a conflict of interest. we'll break it down with our jeff toobin. also, when i was in atlanta yesterday, i spoke to two african-americans who were longtime democrats who just decided they are going to become republicans. and at the end of the program, pete dominick breaking down a brand new ipad app. we'll see if pete has the technical skills. it's the only complete multivitamin with ginkgo to support memory and concentration. plus it supports heart health. [ bat cracks ] that's a hit. one a day men's.

♪ an accidental touch can turn ordinary into something more. moments can change anytime -- just like that. and when they do men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis for daily use. cialis for daily use is a clinically proven, low-dose tablet you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. tell your doctor about your medical condition and all medications, and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. [ man ] don't drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache, or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours.

if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if cialis for daily use is right for you. for a 30-tablet free trial offer, go to cialis.com. how's it going in there, hon? um, almost ready. [ car alarm blaring ] [ blaring echoes, fades ] oh! [ male announcer ] relax. pam helps you pull it off. [ male announcer ] relax. if you live for performance, upgrade to castrol edge advanced synthetic oil. with eight times better wear protection than mobil 1. castrol edge. it's more than just oil.

welcome back. before we get to some other important news, this quick political story. break out your calendar. cnn along with the new hampshire union leader and our affiliate, wmru-tv will air the first debate of the 2012 season. that's right, the 2012 season. the republican primary debate is scheduled for june 7th, 2011, so mark your calendars. mark your calendars. a big debate in new hampshire. can't wait. and with that, let's check in with joe johns for the latest news you need to know right now, before you back for new hampshire. >> i can't believe we're already talking about that! it seems like ten minutes ago.

>> well, the candidates are out there, joe, we've got to cover them, let's have a debate. other news tonight, wikileaks founder julian assange remains in a london jail even though a judge granted him bail today. swedish prosecutors who want to question assange on rape allegations are challenging the bail ruling. "the new york times" reports north korea's new plant to enrich nuclear fuel is significantly more advanced than iran's nuclear facilities. obama administration officials reportedly suspect pyongyang has a network of other secret sites. a virginia man and afghan native is accused of threatening to place pipe bombs in d.c.'s metro system. he allegedly revealed his plans on facebook. he was arrested last week. and richard holbrooke is being remembered as the diplomat, who in the words of bill clinton, made the world safer and stronger. even as he was being sedated for surgery, holbrooke said he was worried about the war in afghanistan. he died yesterday at the age of

69. he was acerbic, interesting, the smartest guy in the room. >> and a giant in diplomacy. and a lot of americans don't always follow foreign policy, if you remember one thing, he helped get rid of the one of the scumbags of the 20th century with melossovich. a big challenge for the administration, filling the afghan/packston portfolio that was richard holbrooke. we're beginning to get from the census bureau, we're starting to get some of the data. this data, politically, is huge. it will tell us how many house districts does this state game, how many does this state lose. we get all that. but some of the early information you get from the census is on demographics. here's a graphic. look at this. this is poverty in america by county. the lighter the color, the less poverty. for example, i'm going to circle this area up here in the northeast. first, i have to turn that on. there we two. you circle up here. see how light that is? higher up here.

out across the country, as you keep an eye on this, as we go through this, now we want to look at income. it makes sense, incomes are higher in the areas where we saw lower poverty. incomes are lower down here where we saw the higher poverty. that's your look across the country. here's one more. this all tracks pretty steadily. home values, well, guess what. where people have higher incomes, you have the higher home values here. out on the west coast as well, down where you saw all that poverty, you see much lower home values here. fascinates data. go to the census website, our website, catch a link. beginning to see this data and we'll track it as the face of america, the demographics of america are change. this is vital data to see and it affects politics, it affects just about everything else. when we come back, two african-americans, longtime democrats in georgia politics just after the midterm elections, will republicans make big gains? what did they do? switch parties. they'll tell us why on the other side. we asked people all over america where the best potatoes come from.

the best potatoes? idaho. idaho! idaho. and how do you know you're getting idaho potatoes? well...uh... uhm... heh.. (sighs) not all potatoes come from idaho. so if you want the best, you have to do one important thing. always look for the grown in idaho seal. i knew that. i knew that. look for the grown in idaho seal. when it comes to investing, no one person has all the answers. so td ameritrade doesn't give me just one person.

questions about retirement? i talk to their retirement account specialists. bonds? grab the phone. fixed-income specialist. td ameritrade knows investors sometimes need real, live help. not just one broker... a whole team there to help... to help me decide what's right for me. people with answers at td ameritrade. get up to $500 when you open an account.

we all know republicans made huge gains at state legislative level in last month's elections. and since then, a dozen state lawmakers across the country have switched from the democratic party to the republican party. lower level switches are harder to track.

but two here in georgia generated headlines recently. hall county commissioner ashley bell and former state committee member, andray walker, say the democratic party is drifting too far left and they feel more at home as republicans. andre walker and ashley bell are here with us now. let me start with the simple question. why? >> well, i'll tell you, john, this is a decision that my family and i had to come up to. six or seven months ago, we decided we had to take a close look at where the democratic party was going. i'm an elected official. i represent a district that was carried strongly by john mccain. i only have about 20 to 25% african-american vote. my district's already pretty conservative. i've been a conservative democrat my entire life. but when i looked at the party after this last election, we realized there were no conservatives left in the democratic party. >> state party, national party, or both? >> let's say both. both, i would say, it's fair to say, if you're a conservative, you've been put on the outside of the democratic party. so i had to make a choice, would

i rather be a party where i could rally the base, or would i rather be in a party that really questions a lot of my stances of where i am. >> so answer the critic who says, this is opportunistic. that you have a republican wave, republicans clearly in the state of georgia and across the country are making gains, and what better way to get some headlines and a higher profile than for an african-american democrat to say, i switch. >> you know, that's just not the case, in my case, because i'm not an elected official. i don't have a seat to protect. i don't have a seat at all. i'm just a regular citizen. i run a political blog. and i decided to switch over to the republican party, purely for ideological reasons. i felt in my gut that it was time to go. >> what kind of a test do you have for the republican party? if you go back to the last two presidential elections, it's 9 or 8 or 10% republican vote for the african-american party? do you have a test, now that you're in the republican party, say, you better listen? andre? >> i don't thinks there a test. i think when it all boils down

to it, issues such as keeping taxes low, reducing the size of government, making government more efficient, i think that resonates across the board, regardless of what folks look like. >> john, the issue is that -- the reason that andre and i are here, because the story is african-americans switch party. but the reality is that a lot of people in the african-american community are conservative. we have just entered an era where we see republicans who are african-american getting elected all across the south. this is a trend. for myself, this was personal. it was my wife and my family sitting down deciding that, look, we've always been conservative. now, where do we feel comfortable? do i really want to argue with democrats as a conservative democrat ideologically, or would i rather argue with them as a republican. and i just decided it was better off for me to do it as a republican. >> and then what happens as a conservative in a -- a former conservative in the democratic party, you're mocked and ridiculed. and why would you want to consider to put yourself through that. it's much easier to go where

you're welcomed with open arms, as both of us have been. we've had elected officials reach out to me. i know ashley's had the governor-elect reach out to him and welcome him with open arms. and that's great. >> did you vote for barack obama? >> yes. >> did you vote for barack obama? >> no. >> you did not? >> i voted for john mccain. >> the president is the leader of the democratic party. has he done anything right? >> yes. i think he -- these bush tax cuts are much needed. poor families and small businesses are going to be in a lot of trouble and a lot of pain if these tax cuts were not extended. i think he did a practical thing by making sure that these tax cuts went forward without putting that burden on the american taxpayers. >> and i agree. i think it was good that the president stepped up and stood up to the left wing of the democratic party, because those guys can be very vocal. but ultimately, you know, it's the people in the center as well as more conservative folks across the nation that are going

to decide the elections. >> just this week, we're dealing with the big debate. some legal decisions have been, yes, the obama health care law is constitutional. there was one in virginia this week that says, no, it's not. what about the health care bill? should the government be able to say, there's an individual mandate. if your employer doesn't give you health care, you've got to go out and get it. >> i don't think so. i really don't. you know, when it comes down to it, i think that, you know, there's nothing conservative about having the government say that you have to have health insurance. >> absolutely not. you know, i've always been a big supporter of the fair tax. i think the less you get government out of our lives, the more free we are -- it's all about individual opportunity and individual chance to purchase affordable health care on the market. the government mandating you to do it, it's a slippery slope, once they starting mandate one thing, what's next? >> have you -- let me just ask it this way. what kind of feedback in the african-american community, where overwhelmingly they are democrats, what kind of feedback do you get?

are you getting criticized, are you being called a traitor? >> we have started a great discussion. it's one of those things where many african-americans inherit this party. many of us grew up, you don't think anything about it. but for the first time, you can say, i'm in my 30s, i have totally different ideas about life and social concerns than i did in my 20s. and making an independent decision, i can look at both parties and say, on my social values, republican. on my fiscal values, republican. i am 100% comfortable being republican. >> and no one's called you benedict arnold or anything like that? >> not within the african-american community. not in that way. >> where? >> on blogs. people don't have names, we just blog. >> ashley bell, andre walker, we appreciate your time. >> thanks, john. >> thank you. >> that interview conducted last night when i was in atlanta, georgia. now let's take a quick look. we're continuing to track the tax cut debate.

that's debbie stabenow speaking on the floor tonight. the debate continues late into the tonight. but we're now told to expect the final vote tomorrow morning. we'll stay on top of that one and bring you the latest news as that one comes. when we come back, did the virginia judge who struck down the key points of the health care law have a conflict of interest in case? we'll take a look at that controversy when we come back.

>> some on the left see conflict of interest on that big legal ruling on the obama health care

love. henry hudson ruled congress in writing that law overstepped its powers by mandating that most americans obtain health insurance. that ruling was brought by the virginia attorney general, kenneth cuccinelli. hudson is an investor in campaign solutionses. that virginia term's clients included several critics of obama health care law. cuccinelli among them. judge hudson, owned stock in campaign solutions for 13 years. it is valued at between 15,000 and $50,000. the company founder tells cnn hudson is a passive vfr with no knowledge or investment in the firm's daily business. is this a conflict? let's ask jeffrey toobin. are there clear rules? >> there are pretty clear rules,

but this is not a conflict. you know, there's a tendency in washington to see everything as an ethics violation. hudson has no interest in this company. he was appointed to the bench because he's a conservative. they are ideological soul mates. that's not a secret, but it's also not a crime. there's nothing wrong with the fact that he owns stock in this company anymore. it was in his disclosure form. if the federal government thought it was a conflict, they could have moved to recuse him. they didn't because it's no big deal. >> you mentioned he's a bush appointee. he's a judge on the u.s. district court in the eastern district of virginia appointed to the bench in 2002 by george w. bush. he was a former circuit court judge. director of the u.s. marshal service. when it comes to recusal, common sense, we talked about this in

the supreme court sense, when it comes to a case before this before judge hudson, what's the process? >> well, the process is to, it really leaves a lot of discretion to the judge. ere are specific rules for the district court and the circuit court judges and they come down to is there an appearance of impropriety. it's different for the supreme court where there are no rules at all. it's completely to the discretion of the justices which has led to controversy in the past. frankly, i don't think this is close to the line. the fact that this investment was in his disclosure documents and the government could look at those documents and move to disclose them and didn't move to recuse him, i think it's a nonissue. >> he has to know though, as someone who has been around politics, he was appointed now and was appointed as a prosecutor, the rules may be on his side. he knows the perception that somebody would say the attorney

general who filed the case was a client of that firm, paid money to that firm, in a sense the judge made money off that. sarah palin, john boehner. he had to know perception wise, the left would grab on that. >> he had to know that. one of the things that happens in washington. when one side can't pin actual violation of a rule on the other, they say it's an appearance of impropriety, well, you know, appearance of impropriety is in the eye of the beholder. i think there is a lot to question in the merits of judge huds hudson's decision. i think it's a questionable decision, frankly. the idea that he didn't have the right to make it i think is really just wrong. >> jeff tuben. appreciate your insights on this issue. >> pete dominick take the new cnn ipad out for a test drive.

ee the gift of asphalt. experience the cadillac of crossovers, the striking srx. it's the one gift you can open up all year long. see your cadillac dealer for this attractive offer. backed by the peace of mind that only comes from cadillac premium care maintenance. the season's best sales event. from cadillac. from cadillac premium care maintenance. three. two. one. ♪ don't cha wish your work phone was hot like me?... ♪ the droid pro by motorola knows you need business on the go. with its powerful 1 gigahertz processor... ♪ da da da don't cha... ♪ its globetrotting wi-fi hotspotting swagger... it knows you want a rich web experience with adobe flash and access to over 100,000 android apps. finally a work phone worth taking home.

♪ >> you know we like technology here. we've got the magic wall, we have the touch screen behind us. cnn is unveiling an ipad app. you can flip it around. once my daughter finds out justin bieber is on here. pete dominick busy checking it out today. what do you think, pete? >> did you say justin bieber is on here? >> you got to learn to surf, my friend. you'll find it. it's in there. >> hold on. i'm watching your interview with jeffrey toobin from moments ago on the new ipad app. take a look at that. >> that's great stuff. >> look at that. very interesting. this is great. by the way, it's free, we should say, right? it's freon the iphone, the app. we can read a lot -- oh, my gosh, ryan reynolds and scarlett

johansson have broken up. does that mean i have a shot? >> remember, your wife also watches the program, pete. >> that's true. as if. oh, there's so much stuff on here, john. you can look through. i like the politics section, of course. i mean, look at this thing. this is fantastic. don't you have a big one in there? >> i do. we've loaded the ipad app. you see the wikileaks founder. jets suspend coach who tripped player. you're a jets fan. >> i'm a jets fan. but i'm not a partisan. that's a terrible thing to have done. i agree with the suspension. that's on the ipad? >> you can put top stories. you can click just in. you can set, go back up here, set your own preferences. how the tax cut deal with affect small