ashley: it is time go over to the new yk library with a book taken out back in 1958 got returned. better late than nebraska, right? -- never, right? it was delivered to the library in a manila envelope. not only that, the envelope also contained a check for $100 to cover the late fees. library records don't go back far enough to know who took the book out, but they do have a name on the check, of course, which is being kept confidential. liz: guilt is a powerful thing. now over to australia for a very expensive drink. a bartender attempting to make the world's most expensive cocktail, it is worth $12,886. what the heck is in it? well, it's named winston. [laughter] includes cognac from 1858, a bottle of which recently sold for more than $150,000. the drink also has a few other liquors and is garnished with spun sugar shaped into a vine with chocolate --

ashley: good god. liz: nutmeg souffle, oh -- [speaking french] interested in having one? needs to be ordered two days in advance, takes 16 hours to prepare. ashley: there you go, that's the statement of the day. time for the top two things to watch tomorrow. well, we're out of time. liz: just watch us. ashley: that's right. liz: money with melissa francis is next, and have a great night. ♪ melissa: i'm melissa francis. did you check your work e-mails after hours? it may be time to get paid. a legal battle could have workers making overtime for picking up their blackberry outside the office. the fallout for businesses would be enormous. we've got the details. plus, how about a lawsuit with that college degree?

yale and other top schools are suing their graduates for not paying back student loans. it is a growing financial nightmare across the country. you've got to hear this one. and turning tail in the persian gulf. the budget act is cutting the region's u.s. carrier fleet down to one. what could this mean for oil security? one of the reasons top security experts -- one of the ream's top security experts. even when they say it's not, it's always about money. ♪ melissa: all right, our top story tonight is a potential landmark legal case out of chicago. it could impact anyone with an employer-issued smartphone. a chicago police sergeant claim it is city owes him overtime pay for all of the time he's spent answering e-mails outside work on his smartphone. he says he was pressured by his bosses to be available after hours, but he wasn't paid for

that time. now as many as 200 other officers are expected to sign on to the suit, and it could cost the city of chicago millions. so should you be getting paid for answering your e-mails on your blackberry at home? with me now are arthur eye dahlia and employment expert katherine misnshu. thanks to both of you for joining us. arthur, this is something that applies to even. i think almost everybody has a smartphone now that they take home, their work gave them, you feel all kinds of pressure to be on call all of the time. what do you think? >> i think that that part of it stinks. i think it's ruined family life. i think there's a statistic that ruins marriages. the first thing people do when they wake up is check their blackberry. however, welcome to the united states of america where you have freedom. so if you don't want to feel like you have to answer your blackberry, don't. and if you lose your job because of it, then go open your own bagel store or your own hardware store and be your own boss.

no one's forcing anyone to be a police officer. melissa: i don't know about that, katherine, i mean, people feel absolutely forced to be on call all of the time. >> we're in an area right now where technology is kind of moving ahead of some of the cultural norms that have been seat. there was the 40-hour workweek for the longest time -- megyn: boy -- melissa: boy, when was that? [laughter] >> exactly. the american dream, huh? people would go home and have their leisure time, and now with smartphones and blackberries, you know, that's completely, um, that's really not the reality for a lot of americans. melissa: do they have a case? >> according to the suit, police brass pressured subordinates in the department's organized crime bureau to answer work-related calls and e-mails on their blackberries, and then they dissuaded the officers from filing for overtime. and then the cops are saying, whoa. and the only way you could be promoted was by -- melissa: are you doubting that? i mean, have you -- >> oh, no, i'm not doubting at all. melissa: you go in to work the next day, and they go didn't you

get my e-mail? >> but that is how we succeed in america. basically, it's on a merit-based system. so, yeah, the detective that does go the extra yard, he gets them a sausage and pepper gyro to calm him down compared to the guy who doesn't care. melissa: is there a difference if you're salaried or hourly? if you're salaries, you're expect today go the extra mile on and off the clock. >> exactly. i think there's an expectation particularly in management executive positions that you'll be available pretty much 24/7 to answer questions, fight fires, but with shift workers, with hourly workers there's certainly less of an expectation. and i think the distinction here in this case which will be interesting to me is whether it was, you know checking a blackberry to make sure nothing is flaring up or whether this was sustained, longer phone calls, answering big questions. melissa: why in the world are they paying for you to have a smartphone if it isn't to answer

work questions at home in i mean, that's why they're paying for it. if you don't want to be tracked home, you refuse the phone. but, i mean, that is supposedly why you have it, so they can reach you and have you been responsive. >> we need it during the day as well. melissa: how? >> you know -- [inaudible conversations] >> you're right, you're right. and, of course, they're making all kinds of personal call, but we won't even go there. melissa: right. >> this lawsuit cannot -- they can't win. melissa: you don't think? >> when i say they can't, there's going to be an enormous amount of pressure from the unions and from labor. if a judge allows this to happen, the total economy of chicago -- melissa: and everywhere else, oh, yeah. >> it's gonna crash. if every fireman, police officer, sanitation person, everyone who works for the city government and then it spills over into the private sector, i'm getting overtime because at 8:00 i'm checking my e-mail, we're done. melissa: katherine, there is a benefit to it. when i leave work, if i go pick up my son or in the middle of the day, i'm in pocket.

i can respond. i know what's going on. someone can reach me and say come do this immediately. >> she's leaving work in the middle of the day. melissa: i go over to my son's recital in the middle of the day and come back, i can answer questions about an upcoming show. >> exactly. because we've been, you know, sort of conditioned to think that working from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. is the right way to do it, but for a lot of people, they might be more creative at other times, and i think it's a positive trend that we're seeing people working late at night if that's what they prefer. it's just a matter of figuring out what's the best way to do that and make sure people are compensated. melissa: what do you think the chances are that this -- 1 to money -- that this will occur? >> that's so cool. i'm going two at best, and that's like if there's a judge who's beholden to big labor -- melissa: wait, here it comes. we're trying or very hard here. all right. oh! what do you think, katherine? give us your best money meter. >> honestly, i'm going to go 4,

and i don't think it's checking of e-mail. i agree with you, i think that's too far, but if they can convincingly say that they were denied promotions or given promotions based on extensive out of the office work -- >> and who would be the losers? the citizens. because now you have the chief of organized crime calling a detective at home saying do this, do that. sorry, boss, i'm off the clock. my guess is the majority of detectives don't do that. and that's because they're great detectives. melissa: you're just on fire today. i don't even know what to do with you. [inaudible conversations] i was going to say -- >> very intelligent woman here, i've got to bring my a game. >> and you have. [laughter] melissa: on that note, i have to go to our question of the day. this is all too much for arthur. should you be getting paid for the time you're spending at your blackberry after hours? i admit i was surprised so many of you said no. one viewer made this point, do you get docked for personal conversations? that's what we were saying earlier. that was a really smart remark.

all right. we want to hear from more of you, like us at facebook.com/melissafrancisfox or follow me on twitter @melissa a. francis. let's switch to another story, boeing's dreamliner disaster. reports that boeing is working on changes to its 737 batteries -- 787 batteries which would prevent heat and fire from spreading. they say the plane could be back in the air as early as march. boeing has not commented, but the faa did allow a dreamliner to fly for the first time today since the fleet was grounded last month. so could you be boarding a dreamliner soon, do you want to? peter bowles is former national director of the ntsb. peter, welcome back. what do you think of these latest developments? >> well, i think the ntsb announced today that they have zeroed in on one cell within the battery and that a shorter cut occurred there. they still don't know what caused the short circuit, but

they're zeroing in. it's taking time, it's complex. boeing clearly has got to work on the containment of this battery. you know, there are reports that the fire breached the current containment. they're going to have of to strengthen that, they're going to have to redo that. now whether they have to change the batteries or not, still up in the air. melissa: so if this turns out to be the cause, what does that tell you about who's financially liable for everything that has happened because, of course, there are already or airlines lining up wanting to sue boeing for the money they've lost. >> well, the airlines certainly want to get compensated for their down time time of their very expensive aircraft. the battery manufacturer, you know, which was apparently initially cleared, is not cleared. they're looking at whether it was of a manufacturing flaw, perhaps contamination. if it zeros in on that, that's actually pretty good news for boeing. they can fix that. if it's a broader question, boy, then it's a problem for boeing. melissa: is it bad news for this

type of battery? i mean, it's really getting a bad rap here, and it's been a problem in electric vehicles. >> well, it is bad news for this type of battery in this application. you know, when you're at 39,000 feet, you really do not want one of these batteries cooking off because, you know, you cannot put that fire out. the only thing you can do is vent it, prevent it from spreading and get the plane down. so it is a challenge, but, you know, these batteries are the future of aviation. melissa: are they still the future though? this is this lithium ion technology which has been a problem in electric cars as well. i know there are a lot of good points to it, but does it make you question the technology and the safety of it overall? >> well, you know, aviation still remains extraordinarily safe. but you've -- if you want greater distance, greater fuel economy, greater reliance on technology to get you there safely, then these batteries or

these types of batteries are the future. and i don't think, you know, this has been two events. now, boeing predicted there would only be, you know, an event every 10 million miles or so. this is out of 100,000. is there a problem? there is. but this is still the future of air use, i believe. melissa: yeah, peter or, thank you for continuing to be our expert on this story. we appreciate it. >> i appreciate being here. thank you. melissa: so now let's turn to today's market moment. mediocre u.s. economic data caused a selloff early, but the major indices came back. the dow saw a three-digit swing intraday today for the fourth time this month. the blue chips declined 42 points with the nasdaq and s&p also posting slight losses. next on "money," taxpayers spent tens of billions of infrastructure projects as part of the stimulus. so why is president obama's transportation secretary calling america one big pothole? i want my bridge to nowhere back. plus, ivy league grads stiff

their schools on their student loans, but the colleges aren't taking it sitting down. wait until you hear what they're doing. more "money" coming up. ♪ twins. i didn't see them coming. i have obligations. cute obligations, but obligations. i need to rethink the core of my portfolio. what i really need is sleep. introducing the ishares core, building blocks for the heart of your portfolio. find out why 9 out of 10 large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which incdes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. risk includes possible loss of principal. hello! how sharp is your business security? can it help protect your people and property, while keeping out threats to your operations?

it's not working! yes it is. welcome to tyco integrated security. with world-class monitoring centers and thousands of qualified technicians. we've got a personal passion to help your business run safer, smarter, and sharper. we are tyco integrated security. and we are sharper. all stations come over to mithis is for real this time. step seven point two one two. rify and lock. command is locked. five seconds. three, two, one. standing by for capture. the most innovative software on the planet... dragon is captured. is connecting today's leading companies to places beyond it. siemens. answers. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 after that, it's on to germany. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 then tonight, i'm trading 9500 miles away in japan.

tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with the new global account from schwab, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 i hunt down opportunities around the world tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 as if i'm right there. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and i'm in total control because i can trade tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 directly online in 12 markets in their local currencies. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 i use their global research to get an edge. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 their equity ratings show me how schwab tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 rates specific foreign stocks tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 based on things like fundamentals, momentum and risk. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and i also have access to independent tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 firms like ned davis research tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and economist inteigence unit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 plus, i can talk to their global specialists 24/7. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and trade in my global account commission-free tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 through march 2013. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 best part... no jet lag. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 call 1-866-294-5409 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and a global specialist tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 will help you get started today.

or a charity case. a trouble maker. worthless. just a stupid mistake. i don't think i'm a lost cause. i'm just a kid. youth villages believes that no child is a lost cause. not a single one. because a stable loving family can help any child succeed. and we have an 80% success rate that proves it. if you agree, find out how you can help. at youth villages.org

♪ i'm on a highway to hell -- melissa: that kind of sums it all up. is the u.s. just one big pothole? ray lahood says, yes. he is making waves on his way out the door. take a listen to what he said. >> for all the talk within the republican party about helping small businesses, there are a lot of small businesses that are in the road construction business, the bridge construction business that would benefit from a bold infrastructure bill, a bold transportation bill, a five-year bill with some very bold ways to fund it. and i don't think you'd be turning off people in america, because they know that america's one big pothole right now. melissa: what? how is this possible given the billions in taxpayer stimulus money, remember that? shovel-ready? all that nonsense? it was supposed to go towards

transportation project. i'm not crazy, right? you remember that. our money power panel is here to react. james freeman is from "the wall street journal," blake -- [inaudible] is president of american loss management and stephen hayes from the weekly standard as well. i mean, i'm at a loss, james. i thought -- i wanted to sort of reach through the radio there and sort of shake him. a bold plan? bold. that's a euphemism for really expensive and blowing all of your cash. where did all the shovel-ready money go? >> yeah, that's a good question. and i think it is a kind of the best defense is a good offense. he's expecting people to say where did the money go, so now he's pretending that he's kind of apart from this problem and decrying it. but, yeah, $800 billion stimulus they sold us, about 10% of what you could call infrastructure. and of that not much went to fix those actual roads and bridges that are in trouble because they figured out shovel-ready means it's already had all the environmental reviews, it's already got all the permitting.

we can just do it now, throw the money out there. that usually means roads that don't need stuff done because they were just recently paved. so that's why a lot of the money went out, you know, it went out quickly. it didn't go where we needed it. melissa: steve, this is like you're on the way out the door, and everything's a mess. you just turn and blame someone else, i guess? i can't make sense of this. >> yeah. i think james' last point is a key point. the money didn't go where we needed it. i didn't like the way the stimulus was crafted, but if you were going to spend that money, more of it should have been on actual infrastructure programs which we know that we're going to need to fund at some point. so about $27.5 billion of that total 787 billion went to roads and bridges. there was some other money that went to other kinds of infrastructure projects. but it wasn't really that great a percentage of the original stimulus. i think what ray lahood is lamenting now is that he didn't

have even more money to do this because we know that ray lahood is in love with spending on these kinds of projects. remember, he was the secretary who sent back when scott walker sent back money for high-speed rail that wisconsin residents didn't want, ray lahood said, in effect, you're going to take it whether you want it or not. melissa: let's talk about where some of that stimulus money went. for example, just drilling down on the numbers, $13.7 billion that was for infrastructure went to hud. part of that went to rental assistance contracts for private property owners. $1.5 billion went to homeless prevention activities. is that infrastructure? i mean -- >> you know, it clearly isn't. and, you know, the crazy thing about, you know, secretary lahood is he has this bipolar personality on one side where complaining about having problems with potholes and on the other turn we want to build these high-rail projects, you know? he seems to have this really this controversy about being

able to determine between needs and wants, you know? we need to have roads without holes. we may want to have a nice rail project, but we don't really need it. melissa: right. no, that's a great point. and, i mean, james, let's talk about that, for example, where some of this money went, in all seriousness. some of it went to funding projects that were already on the books. so in other words, federal money just replaced state and local money that was going to get spent anyway. that's part of the problem. >> yeah. and also the a lot of the stimulus didn't go to roads at all. 15 million for an airport to nowhere in alaska while major transportation hubs got nothing. and all of these rail projects, a lot of that money is going to end up going to a train to nowhere in the central valley of california. melissa: right. >> there's no market for this. and it's not even clear they'll ever complete it. so it's just -- it's amazing that he's now turning around and wondering why more money wasn't spent on roads. melissa: no, that's true. i mean, steve, we're talking about the $9.3 billion that went for amtrak, there was 1.3 that

went for iowauation projects. -- aviation projects. there's where your money went. if you wanted to fill potholes, i guess, maybe you should have done it instead of shipyards and homeless prevention. >> right, exactly. and remember, when governor walker returned that $4 billion in money for the wisconsin high-speed rail project that nobody wanted, he tried first to have it repurposed. he said, you know what? we've got pothole problems here in wisconsin. our highways are terrible. can we use this money for that, and lahood was emphatic that money -- melissa: he was? >> that would be unprecedented, we can't use this for potholes. if you want the money, you will use it for here-speed rail. melissa: so what do you think about that? it's amazing he sort of has amnesia about this. it's amazing that in that interview on npr he wasn't challenged on any of these issues. he just skated along freely. >> yeah. you know, he's got this really incredible vision, but the sad thing about it is the u.s.

budget can't really support his vision. and you know, i think the sad part is he talks about stimulus, and the stimulus is going to help the small businessman, but the reality is we've really completely lost all of our trust in any type of stimulus making it down to that businessman. and so, you know, the whole premise to where he's headed is really, doesn't have any credibility. melissa: james, last word. 21 billion went on tax incentives for energy efficiency for renewable energy projects. i mean, maybe a great thing, but should potholes have come first maybe? i mean, maybe -- >> yeah, you know, it's a shame government doesn't work because this is actually the right, general structure for tax. ideally, it's a gas tax that pays for roads. so the user is paying. and, unfortunately, it doesn't go to roads. melissa: it doesn't work, right. that's the essential problem with government. it doesn't work. all right, guys, thanks. appreciate your time. time now for today's fuel gauge report. a huge winter storm is barreling down towards the northeast. have you heard about this? didn't stop natural gas futures from nose diving today.

natural gas stockpiles fell far less than anticipated last week, and lower oil refinery demand, crude hit a two-week low settling at $98.83 a barrel, and opec's production fell compared to december. output shed by 200,000 barrels to 30.45 million a day. lower production by saudi arabia -- we'll place the blame there. all right, so it doesn't take an ivy league education to know you are supposed to pay your bills. but students who aren't paying back student loans are now getting slapped with lutes from their -- lawsuits from their schools. plus, could legalizing marijuana help the deficit go to pot? new legislation would generate tens of billions of dollars in tax revenue. the congressman behind it all joins us to explain. do you ever have too much money? ♪ to grow, we have to boost our social media visibility.

more "likes." more tweets. so, beginning today, my son brock and his whole team will be our new senior social media strategists. any questions? since we make radiator valves wouldn't it be better if we just let fedex help us to expand to new markets? hmm gotta admit that's better than a few "likes." i don't have the door code. who's that? he won a contest online to be ceo for the day. how am i supposed to run a business here without an office?! [ male announcer ] fast, reliable deliveries worldwide. fedex.

♪ they said go to school and be a college kid -- melissa: the student loan catastrophe we are seeing all around us, colleges and universities now suing graduates that aren't paying back their loans. the number of students defaulting on their perkins loans, though -- that's not easy to say -- is staggering. it adds up to almost a billion dollars for the school year ending in many june 2011. joining me now to make sense of this is attorney evangeline duo mess. are they really going to make money off suing the students? it costs something to have a lawsuit, and then if the student isn't pay, they probably don't have money, so what's the point? >> well, the problem is they're required by law -- they being universitied -- are required by law to sue students who do default on these loansful. melissa: they are? >> yes, they are, by federal law. now, the second issue is if they don't pursue them and sue them, what's going to happen is those students who are making payments are going to say, hey, this

person got away with it, i'm going to stop paying. so that's the fear that they have. melissa: but, so do you think they'll be successful? >> well, the issue is -- and as you rightly raised -- most of these students are probably what you would deem judgment proof. they have no income or assets, so what are you going to get? you're going to get a nice default judgment for those students who don't show up or have an attorney show up, or you're just going to get a regular judgment that maybe you can use to line the bird cage. that's it. melissa: yeah. it doesn't seem like it's going to do that much good because already -- i mean, they already owed the money. it's not like it's a question of whether or not they owed the money. would one solution be if you could garner people's becamings or do these -- wages, or do these students not even have wages? >> many of these students can't get jobs that allow them to make money where they're actually working for someone and getting a paycheck. so many of them do odd jobs, you know, roofing, landscaping, and, you know, are they getting paid,

are they getting paid under the table? how do you garnish wages in those instances? melissa: and we hear about universities like yale being some of the ones that are thinking about going out and suing their students. so yale has a huge endowment. do they need the money this badly? >> well, yale has actually stopped. they discontinued offering perkins loans to students. melissa: why? >> because -- [laughter] of the problems they're having with repayment. melissa: what's the difference between a perkins loan and some other type of loan? >> well, the perkins loan tends to to be for low income students. the stafford loans -- provided by the federal government -- tends to be for students who are from middle income families. now, we hear about obama wanting to augment the perkins loans programs from 1 billion to 8.5 billion. now, before obama and congress decide to augment any program, what they should do is change the regulations of of the perkins loans programs so

students can, one, defer payment if they're not working for a year or two, or they can also do what stafford or loans allow students to do, and that's pay back in smaller payments based on whatever small income you have. melissa: but isn't this just a sign of the time in the larger student loan crisis? i mean, student loan default is a huge problem in this country, and it's just getting bigger at this point. >> that's one solution. the other solution is not to offer the loans. some universities what they're going to start doing, yale being one of them, it appears that they'll just start providing this type of aid in the form of grants or scholarships. melissa: all right. evangeline, thanks so much for coming on. we appreciate your time. >> thank you. megyn: next on "money," it is one way to smoke our debt crisis, legalizing pot and helping plug the deficit, the congressman behind it joins us with details. plus, the u.s. has cuts the persian gulf fleet to one.

piles of "money" straight ahead. ♪ because i got high, because i got high, because i got high she's still the one for you -

you know it even after all these years. but your erectile dysfunction - you know,that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needingo go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not 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 four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing,

stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. ♪ in the navy, you can sail the seven seas, in the navy, yes, you can put your mind at ease. melissa: we're having fun with the deejaying today. the pentagon taking action, it is postponing deployment of two

warship toss the persian gulf. that will leave just one aircraft carrier, the uss john c. stennis,ing in the entire middle east region. this begs the question what are we risking by doing this? chris armor is senior naval analyst with the institute for the study of war. chris, welcome back to the show. what -- how dangerous is this? what does this mean to you? >> melissa, thanks for having me. it's a pleasure to be here. yes, it's a big deal. when people hear about it, they simply say, okay, the cut from two carriers to one doesn't seem like a big deal million you understand the broad -- until you understand the broader context in the middle east. over the past three years, we've seen a steep decline in the american ground forces across the middle east. we've withdrawn, essentially, all of our troops from iraq, we're on the way from withdrawing from afghanistan, so really what we're talking about is the navy is there to check against iranian ambition. with two carrier strike groups in the area, we've got a very robust presence that deters iranian aggression, and it provides a credible response if they get out of line.

unfortunately, they watch what we do, they see that we're no longer being proactive in our security posture, we're being reactive to our dysfunctional budget process, and as a result, they're definitely going to be emboldened by our lack of security presence there. melissa: you say it's all about the money. does it signal that, you know, we have diminished economic strength? >> absolutely. it is all about the money. one of the things i enjoy about your show is the ability to talk to national security or issues from an economic perspective. i think it's important to keep in mind america is not an economic superpower because we are a military superpower. we are a military superpower because we are an economic superpower. our military strength derides from our economic strength. and the fact that our economy is so out of line that we can't support the military we've built, that really sends a signal to both our allies and enemies that we're no longer as strong as we once were. melissa: but is it really that big of a deal to have just one there temporarily? what if we, you know, send another one out soon? it's not like there are no

aircraft carriers there. >> no. the difference is because the strait of hormuz separates the middle east into the persian gulf and then outside of the persian gulf, typically what the navy does is keep one navy carrier strike group inside the persian gulf, inside the strait of hormuz and the second b outside the strait of hormuz either in the arabian sea or the gulf of aden or the somali bay sip. and we've got iran covered from both ax cease. if we only have one strike group there, it becomes a much more plausible scenario for the iranians to shut down the strait of hormuz. if we have a carrier strike group inside the strait of hormuz, it makes no sense at all for the iranians to shut down the strait because we've already got our ships inside. melissa: yeah, no, i'm trying to play devil's advocate here, but i did spend some time on the uss enterprise over the summer, and they were flying strike group, um, you know, over the area around the clock the entire time i was there on missions in afghanistan protecting our

troops on the ground. in other words, they were very busy. so it's unclear that we can afford to do this right now. um, is it surprising to you that we're even doing it? >> it's surprising to me that even by washington standards of dysfunction, surprising to me that we're simply reacting to the budgetary crisis. this isn't as if the united states security apparatus said, look, we're going to do a strategic pivot to asia and, therefore, we're going to reduce our carrier presence in the middle east and shift it to the pacific ocean. that would make sense -- melissa: but are you sure about that? are you sure this is all about money and it's not about a change in priorities or mission? is it really just about money? >> it's 100% about the money. the ship can't get underway because the navy doesn't have the money to safely operate it, and we're not sending that ship anywhere else. that ship, the uss truman, is pier side at norfolk. it was supposed to leave tomorrow on a six month deployment to the middle east. it's not going. if it were going to the pacific ocean instead, we could

plausibly make the claim that we had taken a strategic view of what was happening and decided that the pacific rim was relatively more important than the middle east. but that's not what happened. we're simply keeping the truman at home because we don't have the money to deploy the ship. melissa: you say it sends a signal to our enemies and allies as well. >> absolutely. there's a number of countries out there and, of course, our biggest enemy is iran in the area. and without going into too much detail, let's just review for the record or that iran's been a state sponsor or terror for 30 years, they continue sponsoring hamas, hezbollah and the assad regime in syria. they are a destabilizing regime. we need to be able to check them. and the fact of the matter is there's a number of countries in the area who don't know for sure how deep our commitment is. we told them we are commit today freedom and democracy, we told them we're committed to keeping iran contained, but then when we take an action like this, it causes them to question our commitment and opens them to ally with iran. melissa: chris, thanks so much for coming on.

important topic. >> thank you. melissa: all right. coming up on "money," a new bill that would legalize pot and raise billions of dollars to pay down the deficit. talk about smoking the debt crisis. the congressman behind the bill joins us with all the details. at the end of the day, it's all about money. ♪ did you know not all fiber is the same? citrucel is different- it's the only fiber for regularity that won't cause excess gas.

it's gentle and clinically proven to help restore and maintain regularity. look for citrucel today. impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain, and the use of medical technogy in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. twe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing.

♪ melissa: so is marijuana the answer to all of our economic problems? we all know congress is hard up for cash, right? and some think cannabis is the cure. there's a new plan for policing pot called the marijuana tax equity act. it would follow in the footsteps of alcohol and tobacco and slap a tax on producers, importers and manufacturers. could generate up to $20 billion a year, as much as $100 billion in a decade. it could help us deal with our debt crisis. the man behind the plan is congressman earl blumenauer, and he joins us now. thank you so much for joining us. i wuss looking through this -- i was looking through this, a 50% excise tax? that's a big number. >> well, as a practical matter, the experts who have analyzed this, including people from reason and cato institutes,

suggest that once it is legalized and regulated, there will be a fairly significant reduction in the price of marijuana based on what people are doing now. we've got a big task ahead of us to be able to make sure that regulated, that we are able to have money to deal with people who are addicted to any substance, whether it's alcohol, cocaine, and the enforcement. i mean, right now in the pacific northwest and northern california, southern oregon there are huge problems with our national forests. this is, i hope in the long run it'll help make a -- melissa: okay. so let's break down a couple things you just said though. so you think this would make, first of all, the excise tax of 50% would make sense because the price would drop as soon as there was a free market for it. but at the same time don't you think demand would go up dramatically if all of a sudden it wasn't legal, so maybe the price would just settle out where it is right now anyway? >> it's not clear how much it's going to be affected.

bear in mind there are 18 million people, the experts tell us, who use it every month right now. but the point is this is not a permanent number, and this is something we're putting in because you have to start someplace. but there are, there are billions of dollars that are being lost in terms of revenue, billions of dollars that are being spent on enforcement. we need to fix that. melissa: okay. um, you know, of course people worry that it's a gateway drug, and that you would increase addiction. you know, would a lot of this money end up going, you know, to solve the problem of addiction, and, you know, you'd make the problem bigger, and whatever revenue you got would have to deal with that? >> we've got a serious problem with addiction right now in this country with cigarettes, with tobacco, with cocaine, with meth. having money available for treatment is important. but right now we have a system that makes no sense. we arrested two-thirds of a million people in 2011 for using something that half of americans think should be legal, and in

two states you just had large majorities vote to completely decriminalize it. we need to get off this merry go round, be able to regulate it -- melissa: but you don't think legalizing it would make the addiction problem worse? yes or no? >> i don't think there's any evidence that suggests that. you're lead -- going back to this notion of reefer madness in the '30s. the fact is, there are millions of people who use it now. melissa: yeah. >> i'm not -- we have people who are using it for medical purposes, hundreds of thousands of people. the american public is changing in its attitude. of we're spending a lot of money on something that's not working. being able to have a system that allows individual states to do what they want to do, the federal government get out of the way, tax and regulate it, i think we'll all be better off. melissa: i wasn't aware of reefer madness, but that sounds fascinating. [laughter] are you worried that you create

a black market at the same time? that if you tax it too much, maybe -- >> we have a black market right now. melissa: oh, i know. but you're trying to eliminate it by making it legal. >> we are funneling, we are funneling billions of dollars to criminal syndicates including mexican drug cartels. if we go in, regulate it, manage it, i think that we'll make a huge difference in terms of the money we're not spending on a failed enforcement. we're not sending money to mexico and other underworld areas. we bring it out in the open. and i'm perfectly happy as time goes on to make adjustments. if it needs to be raised or lowered, that's fine. but what we need now is a system -- melissa: i hear you. before we run out of time, do you think you have the support right now to get this done? >> i think support is building. it's not going to happen probably this year, but over the next five years we're going to dramatically change our policies regarding this. we'll enable states to go their own way like we do with alcohol, and we'll save money, and we'll

be better off. melissa: congressman, thanks for coming on. interesting stuff. >> my pleasure. melissa: they work a hard grind to make a buck, but out-of-work strippers are usually out of luck if they want to collecting unemployment checks, until now. we're going to explain. you can never have too much money. ♪ i'm a conserti investor. but that doesn't mean i don't want to make money.

i love making money. i try to be smart with my investments. i also try to keep my costs down. what's your plan? ishares. low cost and tax efficient. find out why nine out of ten large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. risk includes possible loss of principal. all stations come over to mithis is for real this time. step seven point two one two. rify and lock. command is locked. five seconds. three, two, one. standing by for capture. the most innovative software on the planet... dragon is captured. is connecting today's leading companies to places beyond it. siemens. answers. it's delicious.

so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ robert ] we created lelzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side. but we can still help you see your big picture. with the fidelity guided portfolio summary, you choose which accounts to track and use fidelity's analytics to spot trends, gain insights, and figure out what you want to do next. all in one place. i'm meredith stoddard and i helped create the fidelity guided portfolio summary. it's one more innovative reason serious investors are choosing fidelity. now get 200 free trades when you open an account.

otherworldly things. but there are some things i've never seen before. this ge jet engine can understand 5,000 data samples per second. which is good for business. because planes use less fuel, spend less time on the ground and more time in the air. suddenly, faraway places don't seem so...far away. ♪

♪ physical, physical, i want to get physical ---3 [laughter] ml mel lori, you're supposed to be dancing. yeah, there you go. much better. it is time for fun with spare change. today we are joined by our business a-team, lori rothman and adam shapiro. so exciting. all right, first up, we've got a scandalous one for you. a man in oregon is suing the u.s. government, and an irs agent alleging the agent forced him into having sex by threatening a 40% sex penalty. >> he has leverage. melissa: how did he come up with that number? >> he said it all started when she called him saying he was being audited. she supposedly continued to send him flirtatious texts, and she unexpectedly showed up at his house. i mean, like, this sounds like the plot for a really bad, you know, sort of late night -- >> she was a government employee -- [laughter] he was a tax dodger. melissa: i don't know that i

even believe this story. did this happen to you, adam? are you the guy in this story? i don't know. >> i'm thinking of so many inappropriate things that would get me fired. melissa: go ahead, it's cable! >> it's painful. the story's painful. >> i just feel like we're not hearing the whole story. how -- melissa: is it not believable to you? >> it's totally ridiculous. how did this particular irs agent zero in on this guy? melissa: i was wondering that myself. >> she must have had some physical not only -- melissa: you think she was so appalling? do we have photos of these people? no. >> i don't think she was -- the guy actually did the deed with her. melissa: right. and afterwards he was saying he was forced into it. also how'd she come up with 40%? >> totally arbitrary. melissa: 40, 40%. yeah, no. all right, anyway. next one, um, this girl knows how to work a deal. a high schooler proposed a deal with her father that she would

deactivate her facebook account from now until her classes end in june -- grow up a little -- if her dad pays her $200. he agreed, and he will pay her $50 in april, the final 150 in june, and he gave her a password. she gave her password to her father so he could deactivate her father -- >> she needs an agent. that was awfully low. i mean, it's almost six months. she's 14, almost six months of no facebook? let's face it, this is how teenagers, this is how some adults communicate these days. melissa: i don't know, i think she's smart. did you see that pew study that everybody's getting off facebook anymore? i think the kid's not using fatebook anymore, and she cleverly just hosed her dad. >> she's shorting facebook. >> i think it's a huge idea. you and i have small children, i'm a huge fan of bribery, i think the social media and the video games, i think it's really creating an issue that kids aren't being socialized that really the way probably the three of us were, playing

outside in the backyard. melissa: i don't think it's bribery, i think you call it positive reinforcement. i'm rewarding you with $200 for staying away from -- >> i find it -- melissa: takes on a whole different -- >> i agree with you that it's annoying that people spend all day doing this on the device, but it is socializing. it's just a new way to socialize. that's how you socialize. they don't do it the way you and i did it. >> have that anonymity behind it -- >> well, if she's socializing with 48-year-old men pretending to be 15-year-old girls, that's a problem. but it doesn't sound like that's what's going on here. >> detracting from her studies and her friends because all they're doing is talking about fun things -- >> when you were coming up, it was on the phone, right? be i bet you had your own phone line. >> yes. >> i bet you were on the phone every day. right? do you think that stuff on facebook is any different? >> yeah, i don't -- >> you can access it all the time, 24/7. land lines, did anyone even have

a cell phone that wasn't this big when we were younger? >> no, we had land lines. but i think kids today -- kids today get a hard, they're getting a hard -- look, she needs to do her studies. $200 she should be asking for more. >> and that's a great motivator. melissa: moving along. >> let's move to the strippers. melissa: they can receive unemployment after a lawsuit made its way to the state supreme court. originally, the dancers were not eligible for unemployment because they were independent contractors, obviously, and they earn their money through tips. so the club just -- it was like a rental space. [laughter] what are you guys doing? after one stripper filed the suit, the law in kansas has now changed and says if the girls have to follow house rules, they're being treated as employees, they should have the right to sue for unemployment. >> absolutely. oh, i agree 100%. look at, the career span of a stripper is not that long to begin with. they need as many benefits as they can possibly -- [laughter] >> can you imagine what happens when they get audited by the