rachel. >> any budget committee with that meme would make me sign up for that budget. >> such a compliment to get on national television. you would make a good budget committee staffer. a part of me felt a little serotonin, thank you, good. >> thank you. good. >> also, i am sending you some personal financial information later that i'd like you to help me with. >> perfect. >> because you alone could get that comment. thanks, my friend. much appreciated. and thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. here's an interesting thing. sort of a personal thing, but also a news thing. right before president trump was impeached the first time, i published a book called "blowout." and the weird, surprising to me thing about "blowout" is that it ended up being oddly well timed. i had no idea it was going to be well timed when i set out to write it, but that's how it landed. it with a book about the oil and gas industry and the political power and geopolitical power of that industry. and a big chunk of that book was

all about the craziness and corruption in ukraine. and of course, then, right at the time the book came out, all the craziness and corruption in ukraine ended up being the setting, like, the playing field for what president trump got impeached for the first time he got impeached. i did not intend it to land that way. it was foretuittous, and i hope, helpful to people trying to figure out that landscape while we were looking at that first impeachment. well, now, of course, mr. trump is being impeached for a second time, and it's kind of uncanny a lot of the things that i wrote about in that book that came out during the first trump impeachment. they're sort of coming home to roost now. the whole reason i wrote that book is because i think we were pretty consistently underestimating the sway of this one industry, how much sway the oil and gas industry has over politics and whole governments, both here in the united states and around the world. and so, i thought it would be helpful. i thought there was a need for

kind of a rip-roaring, round-the-world explainer for how that one industry can sometimes explain a lot of what otherwise doesn't make sense about politics. if something's happening in politics and geopolitics that just doesn't make sense on the surface and what we're taught to look for in terms of political currents, it helps to look at this industry and see if maybe they are the hidden hand there, particularly when politics fails or when governments are really bad. the whole book was like, hey, this is a place to look. and of course, it's one thing to say, here's the hidden hand at work here, here's the unknowledg unacknowledged power that's really making things possible or impossible that's calling the shots here. but then it's a further thing to understand that dynamic well enough so that when that hidden hand weakens, when that power behind the throne collapses, for some reason, you can anticipate what kinds of changes that might mean. understanding the real power at work means knowing what might happen when that power goes

south, when it shuts off. so, this book, "blowout," when it came out during the first trump impeachment, i meant it to be sort of a heads-up for the oil and gas industry being a sort of secretly powerful political entity, but also a heads-up that if and when the bottom ever fell out of that industry, be prepared. be ready to go! because when the bottom falls out of that industry, a lot of things are going to change. a lot of things that they, as an industry, were blocking, are suddenly going to become possible. a lot of bad government, for example, is going to fall apart, once the power behind bad government loses its zhuzh. that was the sort of warning i was trying to sound about the oil and gas industry during the first trump impeachment. well, now, of course, we're in the second trump impeachment, and what do you know, the bottom actually has fallen out of that industry. i mean, right after "blowout"

was published, right after trump impeachment numero uno, what happened? of course, the coronavirus crisis hits worldwide. that immediately walloped the oil and gas industry like nothing ever in its history has ever hit them before. the floor just dropped below them. at one point early on in the coronavirus crisis, the price of a barrel of oil was negative. it cost less than zero dollars to buy a barrel of oil, meaning if you owned a barrel of oil, not only could you not charge somebody money for taking it from you, you would actually have to pay somebody to take that barrel of oil away from you because it was worth negative dollars. and over the course of the pandemic, it hasn't really gotten better. i mean, the price of oil has pinged around, but it's a disaster for that industry. yesterday, exxonmobil just posted its worst quarterly earnings in 40 years. i mean, not long ago, exxon was the most profitable corporation in the history of corporations,

for multiple years running. this quarter, they lost over $20 billion. and this is now four straight quarters for them losing money. this was the richest company on earth by a mile forever and ever. now they're a company that loses more than $61 million every day they stay in operation. they're losing $61 million a day. this was the headline this morning in the business section of "the new york times" -- "after a bruising year, the oil industry confronts a diminished future: big oil companies lost billions in 2020 because of the pandemic. they face broad questions now about how they will adapt to climate change and regulations." so, that book that i wrote, "blowout," tried to document how the oil and gas industry has undercut democracy, hollowed out democracy, both in parts of the united states and around the world. it was about how the strength and the incredible financial resources of that industry has stopped us from making even the easiest reforms and fixes when it comes to the climate.

well, now that mighty industry is sucking wind. and so, stuff is changing. it seems like a whole new world is possible. i mean, listen to this from today. this was senator chuck schumer, who as of today, is running the united states senate. this is him announcing today what they are getting to work on in the united states senate, now that the democrats have control as of day one. >> senate democrats are not going to waste any time taking on the biggest challenges facing our country and our planet. it's long pastime for the senate to take a leading role in combating the existential threat of our time -- climate. climate change touches virtually every aspect of our economy and involves virtually every aspect of public policy. so, as the biden administration prepares a whole-of-government approach to combating climate change, the democratic majority will pursue a whole-of-senate

approach as well. >> a whole-of-senate approach, now that the democrats are in control of the senate. he's assigning every committee in the u.s. senate to start moving climate legislation. they are moving on it. this past week, the biden administration unveiled multiple efforts they are going to pursue all at once, including through executive action, to make the country take a big shift on climate. long, long overdue, easy measures. today, pete buttigieg, one of the best communicators in a generation of democratic talent, was sworn in as secretary of transportation in the biden administration. among other things, secretary buttigieg will be overseeing the transformation of the huge fleet of all federal vehicles to all electric vehicles. general motors just announced that they will no longer make internal combustion engines for their cars and suvs within the next 15 years. and i'll tell you right now, the best super bowl ad you are going to see on sunday is the will ferrell acre fina kenan thompson

ad about gm switching to electric cars and the groundbreaking new battery they're putting in like 30 models of cars. their whole fleet is going to be electric in less than 15 years. it's happening, all at once, and now very quickly. when the worst opponents of us getting it together on climate are collapsing economically or are so rocked back on their heals economically, and politically, honestly, that some of even the big oil companies are trying to decide now if they might switch sides and maybe try to be good guys on this issue, for once. when your opposition collapses like that, it's time to run the field. and a democratic president is in office who is committed to this as a top priority, and the american people voted the democrats into control, both the united states house and the united states senate. when democrats campaigned on the fact that they were going to move on this issue -- it's happening! and it is happening in part because the bad guys on this

issue have collapsed. it is happening in part because of the suddenly sagging fortunes of what previously, what until a year ago was the richest, most destructive industry on the planet. that's what that book that i wrote, "blowout," is about. the full title is "blowout: corrupted democracy, rogue state russia and the richest, most destructive industry on earth." and apparently, this book is going to come out again every single time that donald trump gets impeached. it came out in hardback when he was getting impeached the first time. and now this week, it's just come out in paperback for the first time, if he gets impeached a third time, i will have to release it on a wax disc. the audio book was also nominated for a grammy, if that's of interest, in case you'd prefer to hear it, rather than read it. but anyway, if you go to msnbc.com/blowout, it's all there, in case you were interested. but it does -- it feels a little uncanny. and as i mentioned, today,

republicans and democrats in the senate did finally sign the rules that allow the democrats to take charge there, take charge and start running all the committees. democrats won those two georgia senate races nearly a month ago, which is what gave them 50 senators, which is what gave them control of the senate, but republicans have dragged their feet in actually allowing the democrats to take over and start working in the senate. it was a week and a half ago that mitch mcconnell, the top republican in the senate, actually dropped whatever his supposed objections were that were the excuse for him not allowing democrats to take over. but even after he publicly dropped that objection last monday, he still dragged it out another week and a half. it wasn't until today that he finally relented and agreed to sign over power to the democrats. so, it is a month late today that democrats started running the u.s. senate. i mean, they should have 24 months in power in the senate until the next election, but republican senator mitch mcconnell succeeded in eating

one of those 24 months, so they're only going to have 23 months to get done what they want to the do. which gives them, i think, quite -- permission? is that the right word? it gives them reason, at least, to go as fast as possible. the republicans stole a month from them, so now they get to go double time. now they get to start. and on the other side of the capitol, in the house, it's, of course, a real split-screen moment right now. on one side of the screen, there's house democrats moving ahead with the whole governing thing, voting tonight to move forward president biden's big covid relief bill, to start working on that legislation as of tonight. on the other side of the screen are house republicans who have spent all day and now all night having a big fight within their party about which republican members of congress they should punish for unconscionable acts and how they should be punished and exactly what counts as unconscionable anymore. tonight, republican congresswoman liz cheney of

wyoming -- she's third ranking republican in the house leadership -- she survived a vote among her colleagues on whether they were going to oust her from leadership because she was one of ten house republicans who voted to impeach president trump for his role in inciting the violent attack on the capitol january 6th. even though she survived the votes, dozens of her house republican colleagues tonight voted that she should be kicked out of her leadership job for daring to cross donald trump, but they could not drum up enough votes to get it done, and so liz cheney will stay in her role as the number three house republican. and make of that what you will. only ten republicans in the house voted to impeach donald trump, but tonight, 145 republicans voted to keep liz cheney in leadership, despite her vote. tonight's vote was also secret ballot, so maybe republicans are more okay with impeachment when they don't have to answer publicly for their votes? or maybe lots of house republicans just secretly like liz cheney but they don't want to talk about it publicly? like i said, make of it what you

will. but the other colleague of theirs, who house republicans are grappling with tonight, is, of course, the freshman congresswoman from georgia, marjorie taylor greene. and if you are a living, breathing sentient human who's consumed any news coverage in the last few days, you are likely more than familiar with congresswoman greene and all of the things that have been unearthed about her and her views and her public statements recently, from harassing and mocking a teenage survivor of the parkland school shooting, because ms. greene believes that shooting was a hoax with actors and nobody really died, to endorsing social media posts that advocate putting a bullet in house speaker nancy pelosi's head, to pro pounding a conspiracy theory that the california wildfires were not a naturally occurring thing or even the product of normal arson. no, in fact, she says they were started by lasers from space controlled by shadoy jewish groups, and it should really be looked into, all of which comes

on top of what was already famous about her, that she's an energetic adherent proponent of the qanon conspiracy theory, which is the same conspiracy about satan worshipping pedophiled child blood-drinking lizard people that motivated lots of the rioters who attacked the capitol on january 6th. that is a theory that she has propounded. it is a theory that, among other things, predicts a violent resurrection of the trump presidency and the public execution of hundreds of prominent democrats and celebrities and figures from the news media. public executions. they want them in public. they want everybody to see them. in the wake of the january 6th attacks, democratic members of congress have said they feel physically unsafe around congresswoman greene, including one congresswoman who asked her office be moved away from greene's office over concern for her safety after a couple run-ins with her. and as you know, this doesn't really have to be hard for house

republicans. they do have a playbook they wrote themselves for handling something like this. it's a playbook they've used very recently. it was only two years ago that republican congressman steve king of iowa found himself wondering aloud to a "new york times" reporter, what's so wrong with the words white nationalist and white supremacist? why did those become such a bad thing? and even though steve king had been saying stuff like that and acting that way forever, this time, republicans decided they had just had enough, and the house republican leader, kevin mccarthy, got his caucus to strip steve king of all his committee assignments. he was kicked off all of his committees, basically just treated as a pariah from there on out. he had no actually work to do in congress whatever. he ended up twiddling his thumbs in house for the rest of his term, and then there was a republican primary against him last summer in which he was soundly defeated, and that was it for steve king's political career. they know how to do this. and democrats now control the house. they basically said to

republicans, look, you know how to do this. take care of this problem with marjorie taylor greene saying nancy pelosi should be shot and sandy hook didn't happen and parkland didn't happen and it's jews controlling space that account for the wildfires. i mean, take care of this problem you have with marjorie taylor greene the way you did with steve king. she wasn't musing aloud about whether words are good or bad the way that steve king was. she has been publicly pro pounding a theory that not only led to a violent attack on the capitol but that at its heart is about executing democrats for being democrats. so, democrats have been saying, listen, do what you did with steve king here, strip her of her committee assignments, or i guess we'll have to do it for you? democrats have been particularly incensed that republicans put ms. greene on the education committee, somebody who believes that mass school shootings in recent years have been a hoax and that no kids really died.

put her on the education committee. but this time around, house republicans have not been able to bring themselves to use the steve king playbook. maybe it was the supportive phone calls that congresswoman greene claims to have received from donald trump, but house republican leader kevin mccarthy, after having met with her yesterday, in which she was reportedly not contrite at all in that meeting with anything she said. mccarthy put out a statement announcing no action on congresswoman greene and instead attacks democrats for their criticism of her. and so, tonight, the house rules committee approved a resolution that will strip congresswoman greene of her committee assignments. again, the same punishment that befell steve king. the full house is going to vote on that tomorrow. that means that all house republicans will now be forced to go on the record, voting to support marjorie taylor greene or not, voting to go on the record as to whether or not you can serve as a republican member

of congress after calling for the execution of the speaker of the house. very few republican members of congress are actively defending marjorie taylor greene or the things she's done, but mostly arguing process, saying if democrats remove her from her committees, that's bad, that's a bad thing for the other party to do, because whatever party controls congress, that party can then remove the other party's members from the committees. the democrats don't seem swayed by this argument. here was rules committee chairman jim mcgovern of massachusetts at tonight's hearing. >> if the president's going to be, that if somebody advocates putting a bullet in the head of a member of congress, and if that is going to be the new determination as to what it takes to throw people off of committees, i'm fine with that. i'm fine with that. yeah, i'm fine with that. can we all agree on that? can we all agree that if you call for putting bullets in the heads of other members of

congress, that's the line. republican members of congress, does that seem like a reasonable line for you? we'll set that as a threshold? is that okay with a precedent? i think democrats are okay with that being a precedent. i guess we'll find out when all members of the house have to vote on it tomorrow. but house democrats are trying to walk and chew gum at the same time. they have teed up this vote tomorrow on kicking this radioactive republican member off of her committees. at the same time, they are moving ahead on a big covid relief bill. the house voted tonight to take the first step toward passing president biden's covid relief bill can after he held a phone call with house democrats today and hosted senate democrats in the oval office. his message to them was, act fast and go big. the president reportedly saying that, basically, the main thing congress has to be worried about with covid relief is not doing enough, not going big enough with this effort, saying they are definitely not going to shrink it down or dilute it, even if republicans continue to complain that they don't like it.

and one reason, the main reason democrats want to go big is, of course, because they think it is good policy. it will help the most americans in the most direct and sustainable and robust ways possible. that's why they don't want the bill to be less effective than it can be. but the other reason i think they feel comfortable saying, let's go big, right now, is that it's very popular what they are trying to do. i mean, president biden, as a brand-new president, is pretty popular individually. but his popularity is nothing compared to the popularity of the covid relief that he and democrats are pursuing right now. there's a new quinnipiac poll out today that finds that 68% of americans support this $1.9 trillion covid relief package that the president has put forward. 68% support. the $1,400 in direct aid stimulus checks that are an essential piece of that package, that's supported by 78% of americans. ask americans if they support increasing the federal minimum wage to 15 bucks an hour, something the president has said

he wants in the bill -- support for that among americans is at 61%. this is a wildly popular covid relief bill, every aspect of it. and with congressional democrats working as of tonight to get it passed into law with the senate putting in procedures that will allow democrats to pass it even though republicans say they hate it, that is what they are doing to get relief for the hardship from the pandemic, to fund vaccination efforts, to get schools to open safely and all this other crucial stuff. it is incredibly popular, every aspect of it. and so, yes, they are emboldened by mass public support for what they're doing to not compromise and weaken their proposals, to, instead, move forward with what they want to do, with what they believe is right, and what the public is behind. and it's, you know, i mean, with the crisis that we are in with covid, it's clear, at least, nobody questions why they

shouldn't just be doing this first, right? and seeing them go ahead, refusing to be slowed down, refusing to be put off track, that seems appropriate, given the size of the challenge and the public supports it. but of course, alongside legislation, the other thing president biden is doing is that he has to build out a whole new federal government response to covid because the federal government response that existed before the biden administration took over was such a disaster, to the extent it existed, it was terrible. the government accountability office just released a report today detailing how bad the trump administration's response to covid was. the "washington post" report today on that study led with just how horrified the investigators were by what they were seeing when they started looking in detail at what the trump administration actually did on covid. quote, a government watchdog study from a generally staid audit agency amounts to a wide-reaching condemnation of president donald trump's botched response to the covid-19 pandemic. the document outlines broad

administration failures so alarming that the normally circumspect auditors were deeply troubled. that constitutes an anguished cry from an office that prides itself on just the facts, dull reports. among the things that so deeply troubled the government auditors? they kept telling the trump administration how many things needed doing that were not getting done, and the trump administration just didn't respond to any of that. they didn't get any better. they didn't take any action in response to clear recommendations about stuff they were doing wrong or needed to improve. they absolutely just blew it all off. they started bad. they got worse over time, even when they were told that there were things specifically that they could do to improve. they ignored them and continued to get worse. as we have reported extensively here over these last months, one of the most heartbreaking and horrifying failures of the trump administration is what they did to the cdc, which should be our lodestar as a country as to who we follow, who we trust, who

gives us sterling, unassailable world-class public health and guidance about how to handle something like a coronavirus pandemic. i mean, it should be our lodestar, should be the world's lodestar. cdc has been, up until this administration, this past administration, they've been the premier public health agency in the world, the world gold standard. and what the trump administration did to it was repulsive. for an agency so needed, for an agency that should have been at its apex of its capacity to meet the most challenging moment in public health in 100 years. the trump administration cut them off at the knees. the mismatch between what was needed and what they did is revolting. i mean, from the white house reaching down to the level of individual scientists working in the field to assess an outbreak at a south dakota meat processing plant, telling individual scientists to change their language so the meat plant wouldn't actually be told by cdc what they should do to keep their workers safe.

to burying cdc guidance on how to reopen schools and businesses safely, not letting anybody see it. having cdc scientific guidance edited by the president's daughter. ivanka trump editing cdc scientific guidance. really. and kellyanne conway, too, because why shouldn't she? having a director put in place at cdc who did not protect his agency from any of that, who let that happen, who did not publicly sound the alarm, who did not resign, who, in fact, personally bent to the white house's will and let the scientific work of that once-great agency be infected by the white house's nonsense, who carried their water for them, who personally helped them intervene to quash science. that's what the trump administration did to the cdc. that's a big part of what went wrong with this horrific, horrific pandemic in this country. that is a big part of how we have 4% of the world's population and 25% of the world's deaths. so, how do you fix that? first thing you do is you hire a

new cdc director. when joe biden announced that he had chosen one of the preeminent infectious disease doctors in the country, a preeminent hiv and aids researcher, to lead the cdc, the announcement was met with what can only be described as mass enthusiasm and relief from her colleagues in the medical field. one of her colleagues at harvard medical school summed it up like this, saying, quote, this news has sent me into a sort of public health euphoria. it gives me such hope to know that someone as brilliant, kind and fearless as dr. rochelle walensky will lead the restoration of our preeminent public health agency. welcome back, cdc! welcome back, cdc. we need you. the new director of the cdc joins us for the interview here live, next. the interview here live, next

it's time for the ultimate sleep number event on the sleep number 360 smart bed. can it help with snoring? i've never heard snoring... exactly. no problem. and... done. and now, save 50% on the sleep number 360 limited edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 24 months. only for a limited time.

new year's resolutions come and go. so give your business more than resolutions... give it solutions, from comcast business. work more efficiently with fast internet and advanced wifi. make your business safer with powerful cybersecurity solutions. and stay productive with 24/7 support. make this year's resolution better solutions. bounce forward with comcast business. get started with a powerful internet and voice solution for just $64.90 a month. plus, for a limited time, ask how to get a $500 prepaid card when you upgrade. switch today.

the cdc, over decades, had earned its reputation as the globally renowned gold standard for public health research and guidance, but during the coronavirus pandemic this past year, the trump administration silenced and censored scientists at the cdc, promoted the views

of political appointees who are unqualified to be making those sort of pronouncements. it was a real bastardization of the cdc's crucial role at a time that we needed them most. and so, it was clear early on that whoever the new president was going to tap to run the agency was going to have to be in charge of not just turning the tide of the pandemic, but also restoring cdc to what it should be. a tough task. president joe biden has chosen dr. rochelle walensky to run the centers for disease control. and joining us now for the interview with dr. walensky. it's a real honor and a pleasure to have you here. thank you so much for being here. >> thanks so much for having me. i'm delighted to be here with you. >> i am intimidated by the scale of the task ahead of you, not only because -- >> me, too! >> -- because of the crisis we are in -- so, good! you're human! obviously, the scale of the public health challenge but also the organizational challenge you've got, given what the cdc has been through for the past week. how are you thinking about the task ahead? >> you know, as you say, i think it's a two-pronged task.

i have to take care of the people who are doing the hard work, and they have been -- i mean, they have been for -- many of them are career public health officials, stewards of the health of this nation, and really, of the world. i have to take care of them because they're doing the hard work that is about to protect the rest of the country and that has been working to protect the rest of the country. in truth, there hasn't been massive turnover of the wonderful personnel who are working there. they have been muzzled. they have been beaten down. but they're still there and they are working hard, long hours. over 8,000 of them have been working towards covid-19 over the last year. 1,500 of them have been deployed to 250 cities across the nation and the world, and they are still there doing the work of public health and reviewing the science and making sure that science gets heard. >> i feel like i don't have the same worries that the trump

administration will do to you and do to cdc under you that, the kinds of problems that we saw under the trump administration. and so, i don't feel like we need to protect cdc and to protect your independence in the way that needed to happen during the trump administration, but i also feel like the solution to what we saw happen to your crucial agency over the last year can't just be, you know, whoo, let's never do that again, like, let's hope we always have good presidents and we always respect the guidelines in the future. i mean, are there things that need to change so that those kinds of problems don't happen again? are there protections that you and your colleagues need just in case things take an ugly turn like that again? >> absolutely. i think we need to protect our science. we need to make sure that there's no finger hold over the mmwr, over the science that's produced, that we have the final say in that science. i was very clear before i took the position that they would

hear the science from me. and it might not be good news all the time. and we had to maintain humility in terms of what we were learning, because science teaches us all the time. we will review the guidance and make sure that the guidance is up to date, that the soft language that might have been there is now turned to the hard language that the science needs to report. and you know, quite honestly, i do think i need to do -- you know, not everything was done perfectly. we need to acknowledge the places where we might have misstepped, where we can learn from what was done -- what might have been done improperly or could have been done better, and we need to review that so the next time we're in this position, we can do better the next time. >> let me ask you about the sort of layman's translation of one of the viral logical things that's starting to get more attention now, and that is the variations and mutations of the virus that seem to be affecting its transmissibility,

potentially the susceptibility to vaccines. the public, who have been listening to guidance from you about wearing masks, about the social distance, about the other things we can do to try to slow and stop transmission, is there anything that we need to do differently because of the existence of these variants that we haven't already been doing? is there any sign that any of the public health guidance we've been given about how to protect ourselves and others might not be effective against those variants? >> yeah, it's a great question. you hear the word mutation and everybody thinks of a science fiction movie, right? so, we know that viruses mutate. we know they change their genetic code often every time they replicate. mrna viruses mutate frequently. we expected mutations and we expected variants. usually when there's a variant that becomes predominant, it's because it has some advantage to the virus, whether it's because it's increasingly transmissible, whether it's because it has

increased mortality, or because it can escape our vaccines and our treatments. we know that some of the variants have increased transmissibility. there's increasing data that suggests that some of the variants -- the b117 variant may actually lead to increased mortality. and the jury's still out with regard to how these vaccines are going to work with regard against these variants. we have to follow the science, and we are learning more and more about whether our public health measures, our mitigation measures, our mask-wearing, our distancing, will be fully effective against these variants, but we have every reason to believe that they will. and the more case reporting that we are looking at with the variants that are emerging, the more we're actually finding that they were happening when masks and distancing weren't happening. so, it's, in fact, the same disease, and we believe right now that if you follow the mask

guidance, you follow the distancing guidance, the lack of gathering, and you don't gather, that you should be protected against these variants. what we know is that they'll probably be less forgiving when we don't follow that guidance. >> okay. and do you think that we should expect that there needs to be another big, scientific lift in this country, in terms of sequencing the virus when people do get infected, tracking the variants, and indeed, potentially developing vaccination boosters or vaccination adaptations that account for it? is this going to be a whole -- you know, i feel like scientists got us to the moon in a matter of a very short period of time, in terms of getting us safe and effective vaccines. do we now need to go to mars? do we now -- is it going to be a big, heavy lift to contend with the additional complications here? >> the answer is, we don't know, but we can't be wrong. and so, we're doing all of those things. we are doing increased

sequencing. we've increased our sequencing ten-fold just in the last two weeks. we are looking to moderna and pfizer to try and create boosters and vaccines, in case we need to go there, because when we need to be at mars, we need to be almost there when the time comes. >> dr. walensky, you said something today at the white house covid briefing about reopening schools, specifically about teachers. you said teachers don't necessarily need to be vaccinated for covid before schools can safely reopen. those comments caused a lot of discussion, frankly, a lot of consternation, even amongst a bunch of people i know. if you don't mind, i'd like to take a quick break right here. i'm warning you in advance that i'm going to ask you about that when we come back, if you can stick around. >> absolutely. >> all right. we'll be right back with the new director of the cdc, dr. rochelle walensky. stay with us. cdc, dr. rochelle walensky. stay with us hey, i just got a text from my sister. you remember rick, her neighbor? sure, he's the 76-year-old guy who still runs marathons, right?

sadly, not anymore. wow. so sudden. um, we're not about to have the "we need life insurance" conversation again, are we? no, we're having the "we're getting coverage so we don't have to worry about it" conversation. so you're calling about the $9.95 a month plan -from colonial penn? -i am. we put it off long enough. we are getting that $9.95 plan, today. (jonathan) is it time for you to call about the $9.95 plan? i'm jonathan from colonial penn life insurance company. sometimes we just need a reminder not to take today for granted. if you're age 50 to 85, you can get guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance starting at just $9.95 a month. there are no health questions so you can't be turned down for any health reason. the $9.95 plan is colonial penn's number one most popular whole life plan. options start at just $9.95 a month. that's less than 35 cents a day. your rate can never go up. it's locked in for life.

call today for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, so call now. (soft music) ♪ hello, colonial penn? these folks, they don't have time to go to the post office they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the services of the post office plus ups only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. as someone with hearing loss i know what a confusing and frustrating experience getting hearing aids can be. that's why i founded lively. affordable, high-quality hearing aids with all of the features you need,

and none of the hassle. i use lively hearing aids and it's been wonderful. it's so light and so small but it's a fraction of the cost of the other devices. they cost thousands less. it's insanely user friendly. you take the hearing test online, the doctor programs in the settings. you don't even need to go into an office. they're delivered to your door in a few days and you're up and running in no time. it connects via bluetooth to my phone. you can stream music and you can answer phone calls. the audiologist was so incredible she's full of all kinds of little helpful hints i love it. they're a game changer for me. i feel like i can take on anything. it feels great to be in control of my hearing. better hearing has never been this easy. try lively risk-free for 100 days. visit listenlively.com it's totally normal to have constipation with belly pain, straining, and bloating, again and again. no way. more exercise. more water.

and more fiber is the only way to manage it. is it? maybe you think... it's occasional constipation. maybe it's not. it could be a chronic medical condition called ibs-c, and time to say yesss! to linzess. linzess works differently than laxatives. it helps relieve belly pain and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. do not give linzess to children less than six and it should not be given to children six to less than 18, it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach area pain, and swelling. change your thinking to ibs-c. if your constipation and belly pain keeps coming back, tell your doctor and say yesss! to linzess. i want to be very clear about schools, which is, yes,

ace yip has put teachers in the 1b category, the category of essential workers, but i also want to be clear that there is increasing data to suggest that schools can safely reopen and that that safe reopening does not suggest that teachers need to be vaccinated in order to reopen safely. >> joining us once again is dr. rochelle walensky, the new director of the cdc. dr. walensky, thank you, again, for being here. it is a real honor to have you. those comments today at the covid briefing from the white house caused a lot of consternation, got a lot of attention. i think, broadly speaking -- i am not a teacher, but i know a lot of teachers, and i feel like teachers are worried that even if kids aren't necessarily high risk, if they get infected at school, many of the teachers feel like they are at high risk. why isn't it a prerequisite for safe reopening for teachers to get the vaccine? >> thank you for raising this, and thank you for discussing it.

i want to be very clear about what the science shows and what i believe in how we should prioritize. there's accumulating data that suggests that there is not a lot of transmission that is happening in schools when the proper mitigation measures are taken, when there is masking, when there is distancing, dedensification of the classroom, ventilation, contact tracing, hand washing, all of those things. when they're done well, the data suggests, the science suggests that there is not a lot of transmission happening in schools, and in fact, the case rates in schools are generally lower than they are in the population surrounding it. so, that's what the data and the science suggests, and that we definitely want to have the community rates of disease go down. we want to make sure that that is happening as well. but the data suggests that it's safe to go back to school, if you do all of those mitigation measures. now, that said, the advisory

committee on immunization practices has prioritized teachers as essential personnel because they are essential to our society's function. and so, they fall in the 1b category and they should be prioritized as essential workers for vaccination. that can be true, and i can believe that to be true, and i can emphasize that i believe teachers should get vaccinated, but i also think that the science tells us that if we can do the proper mitigation measures -- and i would emphasize, if we have the funding to do the proper mitigation measures as is put forth in the american rescue plan -- that we can reopen schools safely, even if all of the teachers are not vaccinated. >> is cdc going to do detailed guidance that will, if it's seen as authoritative guidance, that will be seen as effectively rules for what it takes to safely reopen schools?

>> they are working actively on that now and it should be forthcoming, absolutely. because we know that guidance is essential. >> now, i have to ask you on that point, though, we have had a political promise, a campaign promise from president biden that one of his goals for his first 100 days is that he wants schools to reopen. so, i mean, maybe i'm once bitten, twice shy here, given what's happened with the trump administration in the past year, but is it reasonable to be suspicious of cdc guidance on reopening schools, given that the president has said that schools should reopen? if cdc scientists found that scientifically, actually, it's hard to safely reopen schools, maybe we shouldn't be doing so much in-person learning, will the biden administration, will the president let you say that publicly? >> i think all of what you're saying is actually consistent. the biden administration -- and i agree with it -- believes that schools should be the last thing to close and the first thing to

open. that administration -- and i agree with it -- believes that there should be adequate funding to make sure that all of the mitigation measures are in place in schools, should be prioritized in schools, so that we can get those schools open. and then, there should be funding for testing in schools. there should be funding and resources for a vaccination of teachers. so, all of those things are consistent. and i think what that first 100-day plan tells us is this is a priority. we have to get our children back to school. >> in terms of some of the most vulnerable people and the people who have experienced the highest rates of infection, particularly on the job, we reported here last year that your predecessor, dr. robert redfield, sorry to say it this way, but he tampered with a report on covid transmission at a meat packing plant. he ordered cdc investigators to water down their findings and recommendations. thereafter, after we reported that, we learned that the meat

industry, meat packing industry, had effectively drafted the president's executive order mandating that meat packing plants must stay open, even if local or state health authorities wanted to shut them down for public health reasons. that, to me, is a disaster, especially given how many thousands of people who work in the meat packing industry ended up getting infected and how many of them died. are you going to unwind all of that? should we expect a revision of that? it seems like that process was so corrupted. >> we intend to do a full review of all the guidance to ensure that it fully follows the science, it has been reviewed by subject matter experts. what i can tell you is we are stewards of public health. we want to make sure that those workers in the meat packing plants are safe. we want to make sure that the food is safe for the american people. the department of labor has put forward guidance to make sure that those workers are safe.

they are guidance that should look at infection control policies within those meat packing plants to make sure that all of the documents and guidance for the workers are actually in multiple languages so that they can fully understand them. and yes, we intend to fully make sure that the science is leading us. >> dr. rochelle walensky, new director of the centers for disease control. ma'am, let me just -- i'll just say right now, thank you for what you're doing. and i will reiterate how intimidated i am by the task ahead of you, but i will also tell you, if you get stepped on, and if you and the scientists at cdc, for any reason feel like you are not able to lead with public health or you're not able to say what you think needs to be done, if you get into some politically uncomfortable positions with the new administration, which i don't expect, but if it happens, please know that you've got an open door here to tell the public what's going on, and you will not believe how much support you will get for scientific freedom if there is any political trammell on what you're doing.

>> i look forward to being back, and i sure hope and don't anticipate that it will be for that reason. >> i am with you on that and i look forward to having you back. good luck to you. thank you so much. >> thank you. thank you. >> all right. we'll be right back. stay with us. >> all right we'll be right back. stay with us

as i mentioned at the top of the show, we are expecting a vote tomorrow on whether or not a new republican member of congress will be stripped from her committee assignments. that vote is going to take place tomorrow afternoon. this is house democrats forcing their republican counterparts to respond to what seems to be an escalating series of violent conspiracy-laden and virulently anti-semitic social media posts that congresswoman marjorie taylor greene has made. we have a pretty good idea about how democrats are going to vote on that measure, as to whether or not she should be on any house committees. but if you want an indication of how republicans are thinking about the issue, consider this.

multiple news outlets reporting tonight that during the republicans' closed-door caucus meeting to discuss this issue, marjorie taylor greene got a standing ovation in that room from as much as half of the republican caucus in that room. the house republican leader, kevin mccarthy, had the opportunity today to remove the congresswoman from her committee assignments, simply on the say so of her own conference, of the republicans saying so, themselves. he chose not to do that, even though he knows full well that if he didn't take that action, that democrats were definitely going to have the votes to go ahead and do it anyway. so, at the end of the day, she's not going to end up with any committee assignments. she is going to end up a member of congress who has no work to do and isn't invited to any of the rooms in which actual work happens. the republicans chose not to do it themselves. the democrats will. and tomorrow we will get to see every republican member of the house go on the record about where they stand on the anti-semitic conspiracy lady who endorsed the murder of nancy

pelosi. we don't yet know the timing of when that vote is going to happen yet. we don't know about the kind of debate or floor speeches that may happen in advance of it, but we know it's going to be on the house floor tomorrow afternoon. watch this space. r tomorrow aftn watch this space they have businesses to grow customers to care for lives to get home to they use stamps.com print discounted postage for any letter any package any time right from your computer all the services of the post office plus ups only cheaper get our special tv offer a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.

still having to get used to the fact that we're allowed to actually book government officials now. we were always calling them and asking them to be on the show, but now the white house doesn't intervene to stop government

officials from coming on the show to explain what it is they're doing and to face my questions. it's just, i don't know how long it's going it take me to get used to this, but i'm going to hope it lasts. that does it for us for tonight. thanks again to cdc director rochelle walensky for being here. we'll see you again tomorrow night. "way too early with kasie hunt" is up next. never in the history of congress have people been deciding where other parties are putting people on committees. >> senator mcconnell said her views amount to a cancer for the republican party. >> well, i denounce all those comments that were brought up. everybody -- and she came to the floor -- she came inside our conference and denounced them as well. she said she was wrong. she has reached out in other ways and forums. and nothing that she said has been based upon since she's been a member of congress. the voters -- the voters -- no, the voters decided she could come and serve. >> the