♪ >> from washington, the mclaughlin group the american original. for over three decades, the sharpest minds best sources, hardest talk. >> issue one. obama goes wild. >> im very proud that my department of interior has put forward a comprehensive plan to make sure that were protecting the refuge and that were designating new areas including coastal plains for preservation. and im going to be calling on congress to make sure that they take it one step further: designating it as a wilderness, so that we can make sure that this amazing wonder is preserved for future generations. >> president obama is pushing congress to restrict vast areas of the national wildlife refuge

also known as anwr including offshore areas, from future energy development. by declaring these lands wilderness, permanent development of any kind including roads would be prohibited. environmental activists have reacted with elation. from their perspective, alaskas wildlife refuge is a national treasure that must be preserved at all costs. but alaska lawmakers are furious. they believe the federal government is impeding american energy independence. heres 14-year senior senator from alaska, republican lisa murkowski echoing the position of ronald reagan in 1987 recommending oil development in the refuge and denouncing the barack obama designation of alaska as a wilderness. >> we feel that this is a frontal attack on the state of alaska and our ability to develop resources for the good of alaskans and for the good of

the country. this is not just about alaska. our oil comes to you guys, down here. >> if you think senator murkowski sounded angry, listen to how 40-plus years in congress alaska representative don young describes the president. >> he lectures the legislative body, youre not important, im the king. disgusting for the nation, disgusting for the people. this man this person has gone completely wacko. this is an attack upon the state, attack upon previous laws, attack upon the nation. >> newly elected senator dan sullivan thinks the environmental lobby is living in another era. >> we have ways in which whether its ice roads, ice pads for drilling only in the winter. where we do these things shoot 3d seismic that literally has zero impact on

the tundra. literally. and you know we need to make that element of the debate people are more aware of. >> in 1980, congress specifically set aside portions of the arctic wildlife refuge for future oil and gas exploration, including acreage that president obama has now unilaterally designated as a wilderness area. question, why is president obama broken the 1980 anwr compromise? pat buchanan? >> john, barack obama is liberated. he sees himself liberated by the defeat in last november. he's going to go basically with his ideology. he's going to go with his political base the liberals and environmentalists and all the rest of it. and i do think this is a real -- this is a very negative decision. none of us wants to see anything spoiled but you can drill in the anwr and also preserve the anwr, john. and in my judgment, i think

this is going to last for about two years but that area is going to be opened up. but look what he's done. prudhoe bay is drying up. you have this enormous pipeline coming down from the anwr to the valdez with all that oil we can use. i really think it is a very small-minded, narrow-minded decision on the president's part. >> oil is $44 a barrel. we don't need any more oil. president carter set aside that land, that water in alaska in 1980 and a democratic congress validated it. president obama is just trying to add another layer of security. there aren't that many places left on the planet anymore as they are as originally they intended to be. the president also this last week opened up the atlantic coastal areas off of virginia and florida for drilling in the future, which would be 50 miles off the coast and you have all

the senators there saying that that's a good idea. nobody is going to be doing any drilling there either because again, we don't need more oil. we have found other alternative, cleaner ways of energy. and it is not just an environmental movement i think most persons would like to see parts of our country preserved for future generations. >> tom rogan, how did alaska get into the union? >> alaska joined the union in 19 -- >> 58. 1867 now, william seward, the greatest secretary of state to ever -- >> who is answering the question, you or tom? >> the original purchase $7 million from russia? >> i think it was $15 million. >> how much was it? >> i don't know. >> ok. the main point though, is that it goes to the fact of the alaska purchase and the entry into the union has been an economic boom for the nation.

it's also a vast area for people to, you know, opportunities in terms of tourism. the issue we have here is that the reason alaskans, including native -- i don't know the exact politically correct term, but people in alaska who are native to alaska support this kind of activity, is that it provides a lot of job opportunities and wealth. and look oil prices eventually are probably going to go up so it will become economically profitable because of technology changes, the actual costs, the capital costs, the cost of maintenance are lower than they once were, so there are opportunities through them. i think that should be up to as much as we -- if we can balance the environmental side, which we increasingly can, and we can get an economic benefit, if it is in the longer term, that's something to do. >> have you heard of the transatlanta pipeline? >> yeah. >> i visited. i was out in the snow, in fact. i had the pilot land the plane and i walked along it and i --

as far as the eye could see either from above or on the ground going right up, in fact, to where that station is right on the water up there, where they're taking the oil out, you don't even see any oil anywhere. it's an immaculate environment. >> remember the ex-on valdez? >> it was a huge spill in valdez. >> exactly. >> one of the worst we ever had. >> aside from valdez. which is not in the area. valdez is way down. >> here's the thing. the technology now enables you to be more effective and more environmental -- the risks of it of course. there's a calculation of risk and one of the big gripes i have with the president's point of view, although i respect his opinion on the environmental side, he's not honest in the sense that the regulatory framework behind the scenes in terms of permitting or e.p.a. surprise regulations at the last moment means it's very difficult for companies that have to have a long-term plan because it takes a number of years to make the decision to

invest a lot of money. so there's a lot of waste there. there should be more clarity. if he's going to say it, these are the regulations and they're not changing. >> we're practicing oil independence in this country right now. >> from the bush administration before. the party -- >> what do you say, mort? >> i happen to -- i'm a little bit astounded by this decision because this is something that is really critical to the national security of the united states and to this economy. yes, there is a surplus of oil but from the large parts of our past and our future, we're going to need this kind of energy. i absolutely do not understand and cannot understand his decision on this thing. >> oil is eventually runs out. if we want this planet to continue beyond our lifetime, we have to find alternative fuels. we are doing very well on that time. >> it is much more expensive energy bills. >> it's fine to keep that in

the ground for the future. we don't need it now. and a political fight about money that alaskans -- politicians want returned to their constituents. >> what we ought to do is punch all the holes into the ground and take a very tiny area, find out how much oil is there and if you don't immediately need it don't start pumping it but let's find out exactly how much is there and then -- tom makes a good point. you have all these regulations that's on land and we have very few problems -- >> much more expensive energy bills. >> why don't we drill off the virginia and florida coast. >> i don't think we should. >> where all the politicians are supporting it. >> i don't think we should. >> euro posed to it? >> there are millions of people there. have you been to the north slope? there's a couple caribou there. >> how much u.s. troops? >> the alaskans are expendable. >> there is a big air base we go in and out of. >> 20,000.

>> when did we get alaska? >> 1867 by seward and in 1958 -- >> what do you mean, ue arrested? >> the greatest secretary of state that ever lived, he got his throat damaged when they assassinated lincoln. >> well, what do you say? >> listen, this is an enormously important decision and not just for alaska but frankly for the united states. there's a huge -- we don't know this for sure and i agree with what pat is saying, let's test it. but in all likelihood there's a huge amount of energy we can use that would make us a lot less dependent upon the middle east and god knows where else. >> we're independent now. >> i think the seven million figure might be right. $15 million was for the louisiana purchase by jefferson. >> two very important purchases. >> not bad. >> the environmentalists won this one and hope there are a lot more on a planet that -- >> 20,000. i think ocean protection is a much more big environmental

concern with the toxicology in the ocean and its future. >> i'm for that, too. it's not either/or. >> it can be. >> no, it's not either/or. >> the pricing for renewable energy. let's see what california people are paying in energy costs with the renewable regulations and it will be a lot more. >> we got more yield out of this program than anyone i met. >> exactly. >> barack's new buddy. >> president obama has a big fan, narendra modi, the leader of the worlds most populous democracy, 1 billion 250 million people, and potentially, the worlds next superpower. india. visiting the vast nation earlier this week, president obama was met by indian prime minister modi with an airport hug a sure sign of presidential rapport. president obama was also honored by an invitation to participate in indias republic day parade the first us president to do so. after viewing indias

military hardware the two leaders agreed to a landmark deal that will expand defense trade and allow us companies to help india develop its civilian nuclear power. within ten years, mr. obama also hopes to increase us-india trade to $500 billion dollars annually. >> question, how long have these agreements been under investigation, eleanor clift? >> it was during the george w. bush administration that this country basically gave our endorsement to the development of nuclear weapons in india, and so the terms of that and are terms of how american nuclear industry would deal with that have been really in various terms of negotiation for years. truth is, the u.s. nuclear industry died in 1979 with three-mile island and it's really just kind of come to

life, spurred on by president obama in the last three years as an alternative to greenhouse gases and in its attempt to help the climate. so this is a big breakthrough, and i think u.s. industry not only the nuclear industry, sees india as a huge commercial opportunity for american business and the personal rapport that modi and obama clearly have will come in handy because india is a nuclear power in a very volatile area so this is a very good relationship. >> a budding relationship with india is not the big story of the week, though john. what is is the deteriorating relationship of the united states and its partner israel over a number of issues, including this boehner invitation to netanyahu to come to the congress of the united states where obama spoke and trashed america's policy on iran. it has split this city and it has created a real firestorm. there is good news coming out

of india and the u.s., but i think the u.s.-israeli relationship is at hard a point as it's been since 1956 when ike ordered the israeli army out of -- >> are you faulting those who extended the invitation? >> i am. i would fault both the israelis and i would fault mr. boehner as well. you do not -- a foreign leader you do not bring him into the chamber of congress and senate to trash the foreign policy of the united states of america. >> who joined boehner? >> boehner has been joined by the republicans, bad for israel in the second sense in that boehner and the republicans are all for it but many of the democrats who are very strongly pro israel are saying why are you bringing him here to attack the president. >> who is the democrat who joined boehner? >> menendez. >> menendez is of the senate. but menendez himself is not going to vote for the sanctions bill on iran. >> but it's an effort to torpedo any effort with iran. >> sure. >> and netanyahu is being pretty blatant about it and the visit comes two weeks before he

faces re-election in his own country. so he's getting a lot of blowback from the israeli media for trying to bring america into the decisionmaking in israel. >> there's a lot of apprehension now about the deal in which this government, the obama administration is doing with iran in terms of getting some kind of handle on their nuclear weapons capabilities and development. and there are a lot of people who are very worried iran is going to be put in a much stronger position because this administration is not really willing to face up to iran. this is just another dimension of it because netanyahu and the israelis obviously are terrified because of what iran might do and this was his rationale for coming here to find some way to explain it to the american people. >> i have to say i think it was an error that boehner invited the prime minister so close to the israeli election. at any time it's fine but

imagine the british prime minister coming, i think there's a problem in terms of diplomatic protocol which is important. but i would say it's quite interesting, looking how the intelligence services are talking about this nuclear deal, i think they have either very good -- i don't have information, my inclination they have very good human intelligence. >> one other question, did the a.j.c. approve this? >> i don't know what the a.j.c. did. >> ok. next up, arabia. >> following his india visit, president obama jetted off to saudi arabia to pay his respected to the recently deceased king abdullah. but meeting with saudi arabia's new king salmon, mr. obama was less relaxed than in india. here's one reason why. >> the strategy strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us and taking you out others on the front line has

been like that for years. >> that was president obama announcing isis, the islamic estate of iraq and syria. in that speech mr. obama used yemen as an example of success for the u.s. policy. yemen borders oman and south-west saudi arabia. it has a //population of 26 million and a per capita gdp of approximately $2,500 dollars.// but in the last two weeks, the yemeni government, an ally of the us, headed by president mansour hadi, was overthrown by houthi-shia rebels supported by iran who now control the levers of power. american counter-terrorism officials fear the highly capable aqap al qaeda in the arabian peninsula will gain an advantage from the chaos. and to us allies in the middle east notably saudi arabia yemens crisis signifies weak leadership and disarray on the part of the obama administration.

>> is the chaos in yemen an indictment of president obamas foreign policy? tom rogan? >> i think it is and i think it is for a couple reasons. number one, the president referred to it, as we mentioned last week, as a testament of his counterterrorism success. a lot of the times he tries to pretend its either invasion or his policy the only options and that's not true. the situation you face in yemen now is one in which iran supported rebels, the houthi rebels control the levers of power for exerting pressure on the puns. and saudi arabia feels surrounded by iran from yemen, lebanon, syria and iraq and what it does is zrouses -- introduces a calculation of paranoia and that problem risks then funding and extremes like isis and al qaeda. >> yemen has never been an island of stability. there was an ineffective corruptive government which happened to be aligned with the u.s. because they did not like al qaeda. and so we were partnering with them and waging these drone

strikes. the houthis have overthrown that government and hate al qaeda worse than the government did because it's the whole sunni, shi'ia divide and will continue to deal with them and they'll deal with iran. and there is a conflict of interest where occasionally iran and the u.s. are fighting the same enemy and is happening in syria. >> it's not obama's fault, ok. >> exactly. >> he didn't do this, the houthi rebels have been battling in their own country in the north and battling al qaeda, our enemy. they don't like israel or the americans and we are already dealing with the houthi rebels who captured the capital there. look, whether it's syria or iraq, there are people who we don't like because we dislike the other side isis and al qaeda even more. >> what about the saudis? >> the saudis are in trouble. >> the president visited saudi arabia, by the way. >> the saudis are in deep trouble.

to the north you have the isis and iraq and you have the houthi rebels who don't like them in the south. and the east-northeast saudi arabia it's all shi'ia and the shi'ia are dominant in bahrain. >> and have a declining commodity because their oil isn't as valued. >> let's let mort get in. >> no, listen, i think we are looking at a disintegration of that part of the world, including a lot of our key allies. saudi arabia, like it or not is a key ally for the united states and we really must find some way -- look what happened when we had this tries in oil. >> can that kingdom survive? >> oh, yes, it can. >> meaning this whole turmoil and chaos in revolution? >> they're worried about it. and the way they survive is they export all the radicalism and need to be called on that. because they are what is behind a lot of the islamic extremism we see in a lot of places. >> the administration met with the iranians to launch

negotiations now underway on iraq's -- iran's nuclear program without informing the saudis, you know about that? >> yeah. >> the saudis are bristled of the administration's treatment of the egyptian president and ally hosni mubarak. what do you think of the saudi behavior? >> the saudis are losing confidence if this administration, as you say, the way they handled mubarak. the other issues you referred to. so they are trying to figure out how can we protect ourselves? they're going to get involved. >> i'll tell you -- >> moving towards some sort of detonight or engagement with iran who tear face the -- >> issue three, alexis the greek. ♪ >> the people of greece decided they no longer want an agenda of austerity and destruction. >> that is greeces new prime

minister, alexis tsipras. last sunday, the 40 year-old mr. tsipras won a stunning victory in greeces parliamentary elections. his far-left syriza party took 149 seats and along with its junior coalition partner, now holds a governing majority. syriza supporters are elated and have responded with revolutionary zeal. >> these were the most crucial elections in the history of modern greece. as young people we opened up the road: greece will change, europe will change. a prosperous future starts tomorrow. greeces new government has big plans. it is deeply opposed to german chancellor angela merkels quote-unquote austerity package of spending cuts and social security reforms, and it intends to renegotiate greeces massive debt obligations. the new greek government will also increase government spending, believing that more government is the

answer to greeces sputtering economic malaise. and theyre not alone. across europe, from britain to spain, other far-left groups are also taking notice. they believe this is a moment of systemic change away from capitalism. of course others disagree. notably chancellor merkel has hinted shes willing to accept a greek exit from the eu. >> is the european's unity about to be put to the test by greece? >> yes, it certainly is. if they're going to try to oppose angela merkel who is a dominant figure in the european union, it's just not going anywhere. if they want to withdraw, they can withdraw. they may not be the only country that withdraws but angela merkel is not going to risk german prosperity and german solenceryy and the german's willingness to do whatever it takes to stop inflation. >> that all will be at risk if they pull out of the euro

because the other countries italy, spain, portugal might do the same and is the end of the euro zone. angela merkel's austerity policies do not work. europe is not recovering and they -- basically, the greek people have been punished and the banks have been rewarded because that's the bailout as basically interest on the debt. the debt has to be negotiated down and i think it will be down because merkel does not want to lose the euro zone. >> rogan? >> i don't know what planet, honestly, the greek voters are on. the issues here. did the economic recession, the problems in the capital system unveil issues? yes. but the countries across europe spain portugal, greece, italy, is that they have these welfare states that fundamentally do not work. they spend all this money. they don't have tax a jeeps. it is their responsibility and now they're trying to blame the

economic powerhouse german taxpayers to say essentially massively overspent and haven't taken responsibility. >> all that may be true but all of it is irrelevant in my judgment. i think what eleanor said is correct. the greeks have said we've had it and we're not going with austerity and we're going to start to spend and if angela merkel will come down on us with both feet, we're departing. and i think the greeks have backing in -- i think they have it in spain and france and italy, john. and i'll tell you if the germans don't accommodate the greeks to some degree, this guy has to walk out of the euro zone and i think angela merkel ought to worry whether that pulls the string on the whole thing. >> i don't think he wants to walk. the drakma is a worthless currency. but the flaw in the euro zone is it a country can't control its currency, you really are at the mercy of the central

bankers. and so i think, you know, they're -- there's a showdown that's happening and the greek people are in the streets and they have really suffered. it's not like they're buying second homes. >> they don't belong in the zone with germans and fins, the greeks or italians or spanish don't belong there. that's not an ethnic slur. >> listen, what you have is a number of countries in europe. part of the common market, ok. they are simply not broke but running huge deficits and the only country that saves them is germany and germany is saying hey, we're not going to pay everybody's debt. and at some point, you want to leave, leave. but we're not going to pay the debt. that's a natural -- an instinctive response to the germans. angela merkel is the most solid financial player in europe and has been for decades. >> yeah, but her austerity politics do not work.

and the bank coos use a haircut instead of making the people suffer all the time. >> greece will be out of the euro zone by year end. yes or no? >> you got it. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> yes. bye, bye. ♪

next on "kqed newsroom," tackling football's concussion crisis as super bowl weekend kicks off. plus a new approach to ending homelessness in san francisco. >> you can't arrest your way out of homelessness. >> and what this device is teaching scientists about elephant seals. ♪ ♪ hello and welcome to "kqed newsroom." i'm thuy vu. today the commissioner of the national football league, roger goodell,