with downy infusions, let the scent set the mood. feel the difference with downy. if it's thursday, democrats are still deadlocked despite president biden's flurry of white house meetings. the road to resolving the standoff is as murky as ever as the clock continues to tick towards a government shutdown and default on u.s. debt. plus the white house grappling with an escalating humanitarian crisis at the

southern border as america's special envoy to haiti resigns, slamming the administration's policies as inhumane. later, new developments in the coronavirus pandemic as we await word from the cdc on how and when pfizer's booster shots might get rolled out and who will be first in line to get them. ♪♪ welcome to "meet the press daily," i'm garrett haake in washington where it is another busy day at the capitol and at the white house. after the president met yesterday with dozens of democrats from the house and senate in an attempt to salvage his agenda and avert a government shutdown and avoid a catastrophic default. based on everything we've heard so far from lawmakers who were in these various meetings, there has opinion very little in the way of specific or tangible progress. going into the meetings yesterday democrats were facing three big road blocks, the

first, they didn't know what moderates like joe manchin would support, and they still don't. manchin told reporters that biden gave him a clear directive yesterday, find a number, pick a price tag you can support but we still don't have that from the west virginia senator. the second road block, progressives led by caucus chair jayapal was threatening to block the president's infrastructure bill in a house vote on monday and they still are. the third road block, it was unclear how much appetite eared side progressives or moderates had for further compromise on the overall package and that's still unclear. to make matters a bit more confusing this morning senate majority leader chuck schumer joined house speaker pelosi's weekly press conference and gave a vague encrypted announcement about the way forward, seemingly to reassure moderates concerned about the size of these packages. >> the white house, the house and the senate have reached agreement on a framework that

will pay for any final negotiated agreement. so the revenue side of this we have an agreement on. okay? thank you. a framework. an agreement of a framework. >> we have no details on what this agreement of a framework even looks like and neither do top democrats that we've spoken to. it shows you just how far democrats still have to go, that in the wake of all of these meetings at the white house leadership announced an unspecified framework to pay for a bill of unknown size that hasn't been entirely written and that their caucus doesn't agree on. it's tough to really call that progress, and this morning we heard from top progressive lawmakers in each chamber reiterating their demands. no bipartisan bill before reconciliation and no watering down of the reconciliation package, either. >> every single one of our members intends to vote for that bill as long as we first complete the reconciliation package because, of course, that was the deal that came out of the senate.

it's the reason that every democratic senator including progressive champions in the senate voted for that because they were given that assurance that in the house the two would move together. >> what we are trying to do is negotiate and i think at the end of the day we are going to come up with an agreement. you asked me about compromise. i have compromised. the bill that should have been passed in my judgment was a $6 trillion bill. if you take climate change into consideration, that's the kind of money that we need. we've already made a significant compromise. >> so the bottom line here, going into yesterday's meetings between biden and congressional democrats, neither infrastructure nor the reconciliation package yet had the votes for passage and they still don't. where can democrats go from here? can president biden bridge all of these divides? joining me now is mike memoli and ali vitali. ali, i will start with you on this announcement.

if you and i walk into a cheesecake factory and ask for menus we have agreed on a framework for lunch but have not agreed on lunch. what is this framework and what does it mean, if anything? >> reporter: i'm happy to follow up on that cheesecake factory framework after we finish here, but in terms of this framework we heard announced during speaker pelosi's press conference, you could read it as the illusion of progress. we know there's been a lot of standing still as these two parties or two sides of the same party pretty much remain entrenched on where they stand on infrastructure. this could be a way to show, hey, there's still going going on behind the scenes, even if it's nothing that actually has a tangible impact on the eventual results here. the other way to read it, though, is that this is a step backwards because the ways and means committee already took steps to pass the legislative text on these kinds of pay for's. so we could be a few steps back from where the party thought it was. by and large the thing that was

notable to me, she didn't talk about what the price tag was, she's talking about paying for something that has this nebulous and confusing price tag but didn't commit to having monday as the day they would definitely vote on the bipartisan bill. a lot of deadlines floating around, but that's one that's artificial and entirely leadership made. that's a concession they made to moderates that that's when they could see a vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill. it's not likely that they're going to bring that up if it can't pass so i thought that that was pretty notable. there's a lot of bad news floating around up here in terms of how this could ultimately shake out. one line, though, that i am starting to see emerge is head of the progressive caucus, prim la jayapal seemed to allow on andrea mitchell ease show she would be up for basically keeping the price tag lower by shortening the time frames that are in this bill effectively her reasoning on that would be allowing the policy priorities to exist for a shorter period of time, that would allow moderates to say the price tag is lower, but it would also allow

progressives to say they got the policy items that they want and also be able to build upon them because the thinking is once people see the fruits of that policy, they're not going to want to get rid of t privately i've also heard key moderates say that that is something they would be up for, it's a way to keep the balance with really tight margins, but we're only starting to see slivers of that emerge as pretty much everyone remains entrenched here. >> i've noticed that, too, from jayapal, she says she wants to keep negotiating on this. they are not going to negotiate that bill up, the only direction the price tag can go is down. that's an interesting development the way that the language around that has changed. mike, the president was in meetings basically all afternoon yesterday, he had the leadership meetings, moderates, progressives all meeting separately. does the white house feel like those meetings were successful in some measurable way? >> garrett, to extend the cheesecake factory menu analogy, if we know one thing about it it's that those menus are awfully long, there's almost too

many options on the table with those menus and that's the frustration and concern at the white house that they were trying to address in these meetings yesterday, which is you have publicly these two sides, progressives and moderates, staking out very clear positions on process, but especially as it relates to the moderates in the caucus they're not really sure what they want substantively and that's part of what the president's message was yesterday. try to get out of them commitments specifically about what policies do you support, what policies don't. what about the price tag concerns you? how can we rectify that? what the white house said today is that the president sees his role in this entire process as that of a unifier. i think back to the campaign that i covered as did you as well, garrett, the idea that joe biden is a unifier i think voters interpreted it as unifying republicans and democrats, bringing them together, not necessarily bringing together moderates and progressives within his own caucus, but that's the position that the president is in right now and i think ali is right to focus in on the possibility of

shortening the time frame as a way of lowering the price tag. one way to read what chuck schumer announced today is that they're speaking to the concerns of moderates about the price tag. that's what they're really worried about at the polls next november is the sticker shock of this. so i think progressives feel confident once you extend new entitlements which is a lot of what we're talking about here in terms of the substance of the president's build back better agenda, free community college, free pre-k, it's going to be hard to unwind those. if the costs of getting those implemented is to shorten the time frame to lower the price tag for moderates they will buy that because in the view of progressives it's going to be hard to unwind them once they've been offered. that's a window into a possible compromise and the president's role today after those meetings yesterday, white house staff is following up with different groups one-on-one to sort of make sure they are on a path towards those specifics. unclear if the president himself will have any meetings today, the white house press secretary in the briefing that just ended

a few moments ago not ruling that out. >> it shouldn't be lost that speaker pelosi has stopped talking about the price tag of the bill and trying to focus on the things that are in it and getting all those programs on the books is much harder than extending them later. i think you're spot on on that. mike and ali, thank you. i'm joined by one of the lawmakers who met with the president yesterday, california democratic congresswoman barbara lee. congresswoman i should ask you about the news of the last few hours right at the top. what do you make of this framework announcement today? is this anything real or an effort by leadership to show progress towards this ultimate goal? >> well, it's very real and there is progress. yesterday at the white house we had a very productive and very candid conversation about the urgent need to deliver for the american people and i think the speaker is absolutely correct in putting together a framework with everyone, progressives and moderates. you must remember we have over 200 democrats now ready to vote

for both bills. so i see this as progress. these are tough negotiations, no one said they would be easy, but we have a deal, we have a path forward and the speaker is trying to put all of that together in a frame work so that we can vote on both bills and having said that i do think we need a bit more time to make sure that everything is put together because we must be unified as democrats on behalf of the people. >> you're talking about productive and candid conversations but the meetings yesterday were progressives in one group and moderates in another. at some point aren't you both going to have to be in the same meeting to really move the ball forward here? >> why, sure, but the president is exercising extraordinary leadership. he asked us what we wanted, what was important, he asked moderates what they want, what's important to them. and we're all democrats and so we all naturally have different points of views, but i think the president is trying to find

common ground and he's doing it in a way that i think ultimately we're going to have both bills voted on and they're going to be bills that are for the american people that provide -- and i know both sides, all of us are together on providing immediate relief for the american families. >> he gave the moderates a homework assignment, joe manchin was pretty clear, he told joe manchin to go find a number that he would be comfortable with and bring it back to him. did the president leave progressives with an assignment, an ask, a specific ask of your group to come back to him or come back to moderates with something specific? >> well, the president knows what we have put into and want into the build back better bill. that's his agenda, remember. >> right. >> the president campaigned on this agenda. he campaigned on making sure that the child tax credits were fully fundable -- refundable and permanent. he campaigned on making sure

that women have child care so that they can get back into the workforce. he campaigned on supporting our care economy for our caregivers. he campaigned on really making sure that there are good paying union jobs and climate initiatives which provide for good paying union jobs on the green industry -- in the green industry, excuse me. so i think that what the president campaigned on is what we expect to see in the bills and that's his agenda. and so democrats have to come together and unite around the biden agenda and that's what we're doing. >> he also campaigned on running a more functional government and i wonder about this vote that we could see on monday if there's not a deal. your colleague stephanie murphy said this would be really disappointing and embarrassment move for my colleagues, progressives, to bring down one of the president's priorities that was negotiated in a bipartisan way, has broad support, does good things for

america because they feel as though they need to make some kind of statement. is she wrong if progressives end up being the ones who vote no and block the infrastructure bill on monday? >> oh, no, we have to go become to the agreement that was made and the deal that was made in the senate. remember the agreement that the build back better bill and the infrastructure bill would go together and that the build back better bill would go first. so the extension of the deadline was only after the fact. we have the agreement and the deal made. so we're working within that framework. so i don't believe right now we have the votes and that's why we've asked for the extension, the speaker has put together a framework for us to come together and the president is in the process of negotiating what he can make sure brings -- what he campaigned on and that is bringing some immediate relief to the american people in terms of their economic conditions they're in as it relates to

covid, but also remember we have decades, i mean, decades of really horrible infrastructure. led in pipes, we have decades of making sure that people close the gaps and that our government closed the gaps in terms of just ensuring that poverty is reduced. we have decades of repairing the damage and making sure that everyone has equity and racial justice in terms of moving forward to build back better and i say also bolder. >> i want to get into another topic with you in the time we have left, congresswoman. you were part of another meeting yesterday between the congressional black caucus and the biden administration on the issue of these haitian migrants at the southern border. i'm curious what came out of that meeting and whether you have confidence in secretary mayorkas and the team the administration has in place and their plan in dealing with that issue so far. >> well, i can tell you that the white house -- they're horrified at what is taking place at the

border in terms of the horse patrols and it's my understanding that they've been temporarily suspended. i'm horrified. i know everyone is horrified and just as an african-american woman to see these reins being used as whips, to see these border patrol officers on horseback doing things to people that is dehumanizing, that shows us that they're being treated like animals and that is just so offensive and disgusting to have taxpayers pay for this taking place. so let me tell you we were very clear about what we think should happen. we were very clear about how horrific this is and, again, the administration understands this and they also are very, you know, shattered by what they saw at the border, but we have to get become to the policies as it relates to making sure there's

due process for haitian asylum seekers and that they are not treated in a different way and that we have the humanitarian support, they need food, they're living in squaller right now, they need food, water, places to sleep and we want -- i personally want the deportations to stop. come on. you know, these haitians have been living in brazil and chile. they left after the 2010 earthquake. now they are being sent back to a country they don't even know. they are in many respects stateless so it's wrong to do what they're doing and we need to halt those deportations and we need to put them through the proper asylum processes which we have in place. they need to be treated like everyone and i guess i just have to say black lives matter, this is exactly what we mean when we talk about that because there's such a disparate treatment in how they're treating black haitians and how they treat other asylum -- it's really bad.

>> congresswoman, i can hear the passion in your voice and it speaks to the fire hose of news we're getting from capitol hill that i have now even run out of time to ask you about police reform which i wanted to get to, another key issue. there's just too much going on on capitol hill. i hope you will come back and we can talk about it in the not too distant future. congresswoman barbara lee, thank you very much. >> thank you for having me. coming up, senator schumer says there's a framework to pay for reconciliation that's been agreed to but top senators say they haven't seen or signed off on anything. i will ask senator jeff merkley what he knows next. later as the mysterious havana syndrome deepens the official in charge of the state department's response is leaving her job as diplomats and senators say that people who are suffering are being denied medical care. you're watching "meet the press daily." you're watching "meet the press daily. in] [fast upbeat music begins]

[music stops] and release. [deep exhale] [fast upbeat music resumes] [music stops] introducing fidelity income planning. we look at how much you've saved, how much you'll need, and build a straightforward plan to generate income, even when you're not working. a plan that gives you the chance to grow your savings and create cash flow that lasts. along the way, we'll give you ways to be tax efficient. and you can start, stop or adjust your plan at any time without the unnecessary fees. talk to us today, so we can help you go from saving...to living. with downy infusions, let the scent set the mood.

feel the difference with downy. riders, the lone wolves of the great highway. all they need is a bike and a full tank of gas. their only friend? the open road. i have friends. [ chuckles ] well, he may have friends, but he rides alone. that's jeremy, right there! we're literally riding together. he gets touchy when you talk about his lack of friends. can you help me out here? no matter why you ride, progressive has you covered with protection starting at $79 a year. well, we're new friends. to be fair. eh, still.

like you, my hands are everything to me. but i was diagnosed with dupuytren's contracture. and it got to the point where things i took for granted got tougher to do. thought surgery was my only option. turns out i was wrong. so when a hand specialist told me about nonsurgical treatments, it was a total game changer. like you, my hands have a lot more to do. learn more at factsonhand.com today. welcome back. speaker pelosi and leader

schumer caught some members of their own caucus by surprise this morning when they announced what they call an agreement on a framework that will pay for the reconciliation package. virginia senator mark werner a finance committee member was not affair of any agreements and told me colleague i'm almost as anxious to get that information as you are. joining me now is oregon democratic senator jeff merkley who is probably also anxious to get that information and if he already has it i'm anxious for you to share it with me. what do you know about this that chuck schumer announced today? what in it changes the state of play? >> garrett, we do not have the details on what was agreed to, but the key part was that the house previously had not planned to pay for the entirety of the package and the senate had insisted that they would pay for the entire package so we would not drive inflation, and that was an important premise. and this statement, that whatever the size of the package there's agreement between the house and senate it will be

completely paid for that's what's significant right now. >> we should take the fact that chuck schumer gave this announcement standing side-by-side with speaker pelosi as an agreement, then, as you're saying with senate democrats say this whole thing will be paid for, house democrats now agree they will find the revenue to make those two line items match up? >> that's right. >> okay. >> my colleague from oregon who heads finance was very involved in this. there's been a big menu of options based on the premise that every american paying their fair share, not letting people use so many tax deductions, if you will, the richest people in the world like jeff bezos, richest americans pay nothing while ordinary americans pay a lot. >> got it. this is very helpful. so let's talk about this vote that's coming up on monday in the house. you're one of a group of democratic senators who are now urging the house to reject a bill you voted in favor of, a bill that the president of your own party supports. i understand the politics around this, but how do you explain

that as a strategy to someone who is not in washington, d.c.? >> it's quite easy. there's two things that were agreed would go on the track together, but we often use the term that they were welded together. we would send one and the other -- it wouldn't be voted on until we send the other. now the other hasn't been completed in the senate so the house needs to wait until the senate acts. and this other piece that we are talking about, these are big things to america. this is the expansion of medicare to cover dental and eyes and hearing. it's big here. it's the biggest tax break for working americans in the history of the united states with a child tax credit. will lift half of america's children that are in poverty out of poverty. it's two years of preschool which experts tell us is the best dollar for dollar investment in the success of our children. it's saying that we're not going to let the ship sail on infrastructure and leave climate chaos on the dock. that we are going to make the

pivot to fighting to transition boldly to renewable energy because carbon dioxide and methane are destroying our planet and we see it all over the country. these are important things, these have to be welded together. so the house has to wait. if they hold a vote next monday, defeat it on the premise that the partner bill has not arrived yet. >> would they have to be welded together if there weren't what seems to be a trust deficit among democrats. they're not welded to keep the other party in line. you're talking about welding two pieces of legislation together to keep joe manchin and more moderate members of your own party in line here. i mean, what is going on in the democratic caucus that there is so little trust that everybody is pulling in the same direction for the same agenda? >> well, when we did the first bill, the infrastructure bill, we had an agreement over $3.5 trillion structure for the second bill. that's spending over a ten-year

period. $350 billion a year to invest in key things to shore up the foundations for families. since then a couple members have said we are not sure we want to do that and some have said and we're not sure about taking on climate, either. my home state is burning. i drove through six towns that were incinerated this last year from fires. we have farmers who for the first time in 105 years are getting no water allocation because of the extended drought and it isn't just an anomaly, it is the trend over the last three decades compared to the previous three decades with climate chaos. we have fishermen whose shellfish can't reproduce unless we artificially change the acidity of the water. our state is in big, big trouble. we have to meet the moment on climate. while people come from different states, they are going to find that there is 80% of this bill they agree with.

they may not agree with the climate provision, child tax credit, they agree with 80% of it, that's the premise for how a party works together and so we need to use that premise, bring all the democrats together, get this bill written, get it sent to the house and the house can pass both. >> all right. all right. i'm with you now. so i want to talk about something that's about to be a senate problem here in the next couple weeks and that's the debt ceiling. speaker pelosi addressed this today and called the debt ceiling vote a tradition that some people doubt is even necessary. listen to what the speaker said. >> unless we pass legislation to keep government open and lift the debt ceiling to remove all doubt and full fate in credit of the united states of america is not in question as the constitution says. the house -- the congress has taken up a tradition of having to vote on that. there's some doubt as to whether that should be the case, but in the here and now we put forth a

proposal. >> do you agree with that? is that policy fan fiction that a vote on the debt ceiling could just be avoided? i know you have a plan to overhaul it. i know a lot of members in both parties think it's functionally useless. >> to understand this you have to view that essentially you get a credit card bill and you've already made the expenditures now you have to pay your credit card and someone says we're going to stop you from paying your credit card and you're going that's going to destroy my credit and they say we don't care, we're going to use this to blackmail you and drive you into financial chaos. that's what republicans are trying to do in the senate is drive america into financial chaos as a political weapon. it's just wrong. it was wrong for democrats to do it to republicans and in 2011 mitch mcconnell said this is just wrong. they were in the majority so they had to deliver on solving the problem and so mitch mcconnell said here is what we should do, the president should be able to raise the debt ceiling on his own subject to

the possibility of congress if they disagree overriding it. voting to override it. democrats said that's fair. that's right. we will do that. and so that is what we should do so that we aren't each party isn't trying to blackmail each other, threatening to destroy the credit of the u.s. this touches so many americans because so many auto loans -- >> for sure. >> -- tied to the national interest. you destroy and drive up the interest rates of america you raise the cost for every american. it's not just shooting yourself in the foot it's lopping off your leg. we need to finish it with a credit app. let's call it the mcconnell credit act, but what was right in 2011 is right now. >> the people even remember policy arguments from 2011. >> i think so many people in washington think that politics started four or five years ago.

you don't have as much consistency as folks like you and i might prefer. senator merkley, thank you for coming on. >> you are so welcome. thank you, garrett. coming up, the cdc is set to vote any minute now on how and when pfizer's booster shot will get rolled out and who gets to actually get t you're watching "meet the press daily." tou y'rg "meet the press daily. has plans built just for you whether you need a single line or lines for family members, you'll get great value on america's most reliable 5g network. like 2 lines of unlimited for just $27.50 a line. that's our everyday price. plus, our plans always come with unlimited talk, text and data included. so, switch to t-mobile and get 2 lines of unlimited for only $27.50 a line. that's half the price of verizon or at&t. only at t-mobile. the leader in 5g. consistency as folks like you "meet the press daily."

without my medication, my small tremors would be extreme. i was diagnosed with parkinson's. i had to retire from law enforcement. it was devastating. one of my medications is three thousand dollars per month.

prescription drugs do not work if you cannot afford them. aarp is fighting for americans like larry, and we won't stop. that's why we're calling on congress to let medicare negotiate lower prescription drug prices. ♪ feel stuck with credit card debt? move to sofi and feel what it's like to get your money right. ♪ ♪ move your high-interest debt to a sofi personal loan. earn $10 just for viewing your rate — and get your money right. ♪ welcome back. the cdc advisory committee is poised any minute now to vote on

recommendations for implementing a third shot of the pfizer vaccine. today's vote is one of the last hurdles to clear before millions of eligible americans can go out and get a booster. it follows last night's decision by the fda to officially authorize a third shot of the pfizer vaccine for certain vulnerable populations that received their second dose at least six months ago. those eligible groups will include americans 65 years and older, adults at risk for severe covid-19 either due to their jobs or to certain underlying health conditions. now it's up to the cdc advisory committee to iron out the specifics. the committee's recommendations won't be binding, though, and they will be sent over to the cdc director for one more stamp of approval before we actually start seeing shots in arms. joining me now is vaccine expert and pediatrician dr. peter hotez who directs the center for disease development at texas children's hospital. this is the second day of this meeting and based on what we've heard so far how do you think the cdc group will vote and how

soon could eligible people potentially start showing up at their local pharmacy for shot number three? >> i think there's a high likelihood, garrett, they will go along with fda's summary recommendations. you know, i know there is a lot of confusion about this and part of it, i think, is that there's not consensus in the scientific community about what the goal of vaccination is. i think there's one group that feels strongly that the goal of vaccination is exclusively to prevent severe illness, hospitalizations and deaths and they make a strong case for that, but then there's another strong case that the hope is that by vaccinating you can restore the ability with the third immunization you can restore the ability of the vaccine to actually stop infection and, therefore, interrupt transmission if enough americans can get vaccinated and there's a number of us who feel that's important as well. and then there's a third component about preventing long covid and so i think that's why you're seeing a fair amount of back and forth, but i think in

the end acip will likely go along with the fda recommendations. >> where do you fall on that question of what the purpose of vaccines is because he think the longer we are in this pandemic the more important that question is. is it to prevent severe infection and death, is it to try to prevent as many people as possible from getting sick at all? how do you view that and how do you think that informs the policy discussion? >> well, i want it all. i want to vaccinate -- i want to vaccinate our country out of this epidemic and i feel it is possible. it's a very high bar. it's going to be 90% immunization with three doses of both mrna vaccines and two doses of the j&j vaccine but i counter we've done this before. we've done it to eliminate polio and measles and i think we can do it with covid-19. i think the conflating part of all of this in addition is the global equity argument. they're saying how can you justify that when the rest of

the southern hemisphere is not vaccinated? and to that i say, look, the mrna vaccines were never intended to vaccinate the world with a brand-new technology you just cannot make enough of it and that's why where our vaccine comes in, a low cost similar levels of protection, easily accessible vaccine that there's no limit to the amount you can scale and so we've been frustrated not having more help from the u.s. government and the international bodies on our own, we've been scaling up production with biological e, an amazing organization in india and bio pharma in indonesia, but that's the answer that we cannot rely exclusively on mrna vaccines, if we do that we are not going to vaccinate the world until 2023 or later. >> i was struck by something in the fda commissioner's statement last night when we were talk being who would potentially be eligible here, the idea of 65 plus and the vulnerable, but that could be because you're sick or because of your job, they talk about people who are health care workers, teachers, day care staff, grocery workers,

homeless shelters, prisons, among others. is this third shot if and when it's authorized -- to me you could almost make the case for any person who works with other people could go out and say i feel particularly vulnerable in this environment. would this approval on that level functionally be if you are worried about covid and transmission in your workplace you can go get a third shot? >> yeah, i mean, you're right, the way those fda recommendations came out last night, it's almost like a back door way of their original efficient to put the question before the committee should we do universal third immunizations for everyone over the age of 18. that was a pretty strong rebuke from the verpac committee but this is a back door way of doing the same thing if it goes through because as you say it just has -- you know, the leakiness in terms of underlying

comorbidities or different professions almost gets you to that place. we will see if acip goes along with it and there's other consequences if they don't, then that looks like there is a war between fda and cdc and that would be very damaging as well. >> nobody wants to see that. all right. dr. peter hotez down in texas, thank you very much. >> thank you. and up next, growing tension at the state department over the mysterious havana syndrome. plus the abrupt resignation of the u.s. special envoy to haiti over what he calls the inhumane decision to deport haitian migrants. you're watching "meet the press daily." ian migrants you're watching "meet the press daily. so the national eye institute did 20 years of clinical studies on a formula found in preservision. if it were my vision, i'd ask my doctor about preservision. it's the most studied eye vitamin brand. if it were my vision, i'd look into preservision preservision areds 2 contains the exact nutrient formula recommended by the nei to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression.

i have amd, it is my vision, so my plan includes preservision. bogeys on your six, limu. they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual so they only pay for what they need. woooooooooooooo... we are not getting you a helicopter. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ you don't get much time for yourself. so when you do, make it count with crest pro-health. it protects the 8 areas dentists check for a healthier mouth. the #1 toothpaste brand in america. crest. need to get your prescriptions refilled? capsule pharmacy can hand deliver your medications - today - for free. go to capsule.com. we handle your insurance. all you have to do is schedule delivery. go to capsule.com to get started in 15 seconds today.

(vo) unconventional thinking means we see things differently, so you can focus on what matters most. that's how we've become the leader in 5g. #1 in customer satisfaction. and a partner who includes 5g in every plan, so you get it all. when our daughter and her kids moved in with us... our bargain detergent couldn't keep up. turns out it's mostly water. so, we switched back to tide. one wash, stains are gone. [daughter] slurping don't pay for water. pay for clean. it's got to be tide.

welcome back. when it comes to which party controls congress next year redistricting will be a huge factor. there's still a long way to go before any maps get approved, but the once in a decade process is beginning and this week lawmakers in texas are meeting to redraw the state's congressional map as well as the

districts for the state house and senate and board of education. texas will be gaining two congressional seats thanks to the population increase of nearly 4 million people over the last decade and according to census data people of color make up about 95% of that growth. in fact, texas his population nearly tops that of its white population. all of this should benefit democrats, right? not so fast. with republicans still in control of both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's mansion texas new congressional map may be a deeper shade of red than turning any more blue. i'm joined by the president of the national democratic redistricting committee and dave wasserman. dave, i will start with you, lay it out for me, what do you expect texas' new congressional map to look like? >> texas is the perfect example of how republicans are up against some demographic realities in the states that they control in the sun belt. as you mentioned, non-whites were 95% of the growth in texas

over the last decade and republicans currently control 23 of the 36 congressional districts. texas is gaining two more seats so republicans want both of them, but they've got to play as much defense as offense here because out of their 23 seats joe biden won more than 47% in nine of them and actually the best approach the republicans might be able to take is to draw a new democratic seat in austin to try to shore up all of those eroding republican seats and move them to higher ground. the best republicans might be able to do is to add two new seats for themselves by putting one new seat in aus an and converting an existing latino seat somewhere in the rio grande valley into a trump district. >> it's always been weird that chip roy represents so much of downtown austin. from a legal perspective what kind of litigation is your group or other groups considering to try to prevent the kind of gerrymandering fire wall that dave was just talking about?

>> first, i think it's really important to remember why we redirect which is to reset the population of each district, to reflect the balance and the shifts that we saw in the previous decade, right? so you have to redo the districts in order to make the population equal to fulfill that fundamental baseline of 1%, 1 vote. which scenes the census as you noted at the top is the roadmap for how to do that and what the census data made very clear is that this country is becoming more diverse, becoming less rural, more concentrated in the urban and suburban communities which means what we should see in fair maps are districts that reflect that trend line. you should see fewer districts in the rural areas where the population loss has occurred, you should see more districts that reflect the growing influence of people of color in this country and that is what we're looking for when we look at these districts and as dave noted, the republicans have to actively work against that

because they are not in line with those voters, they are actively making a choice to not change their policies or do what they should do to compete in the elections in country and instead they're trying to wheeled their power of the pen to predetermine the outcome of the elections based on the maps and that's not fair, it's not right and that's what we will be fighting against. >> i asked about how you were going to use your power, how you were going to potentially sue or try to use the courts to prevent that. again, in what way do you think you might be able to use the courts to prevent those kind of maps? >> so courts are going to be very important, i think you will see a lot of states go into litigation including in texas and there's a lot of precedent for the legal problems with what dave outlined that the republicans are trying to do. there are legal stipulations that are very strong against racial gerrymandering, racial gerrymandering is illegal in this country so i think you will see a lot of racial gerrymandering litigation, there are also partisan gerrymandering

statutes on the books in states that make it illegal and that will be an important element of the cycle this way. >> dave, from a control of congress standpoint could you see control of the house coming down to these handful of seats in texas? >> very well could. look, the house's margin is razor thin and there are three certainties in life, death, taxes and litigation over texas redistricting. we could even see this revisited later in the 2020s given that there's such sensitivity about the way that districts are drawn with regard to race in texas. this is also a moving target because keep in mind that hispanic voters in texas shifted by double digits from clinton to trump between 2016 and 2020. so a lot of the seats that used to be carved in certain ways to elect hispanic candidates of choice, this he may have to be

altered this time around to ensure that they can still elect hispanic candidates of choice for the next decade as we see these trends take hold. >> in the suburbs of dallas and hewson respectively, are they safer in their seats under this vision of new maps? >> look, republicans are likely going to have to pack more democrats into existing democratic seats in dallas and houston, which is good news for lizzie fletcher in houston, good news for colin allrad in dallas because republicans have problems in neighboring districts. they have to shore up their own incumbents for another ten years. one creative way republicans might approach that is to try to turn lizzie fletcher's seat on the west side of houston into a hispanic majority seat which would simultaneously help republicans in neighboring districts and at least, you

know, make a case that they're satisfying the need for a new hispanic opportunity. >> by the way, do you know who is paying really close attention to these discussions? beto o'rourke and the folks who are trying to push him into this race to try to lift up some of those democratic candidates down ballot in texas. it will be fascinating to watch but i'm a homer for texas elections, i'm biased. thank you both. coming up, another setback for the administration as it struggles to get to the bottom of those mysterious ail imts that have hit diplomats and workers dubbed the havana syndrome. you're watching "meet the press daily." syndrome you're watching "meet the press daily. an influencer. she's more of a groundbreaker. just look at the way she's reshaping and reimagining her 4 acre slice of heaven. it's not hard to tell she's the real deal. renae runs with us on a john deere 1 series tractor because out here you can't fake a job well done. nothing runs like a deere.

hear renae's story at deere.com. people everywhere living with type 2 diabetes are waking up to what's possible nothing runs like a deere. with rybelsus®. ♪ you are my sunshine ♪ ♪ my only sunshine... ♪ rybelsus® works differently than any other diabetes pill to lower blood sugar in all 3 of these ways... increases insulin when you need it... decreases sugar... and slows food. the majority of people taking rybelsus® lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7. people taking rybelsus® lost up to 8 pounds. rybelsus® isn't for peopl with type 1 diabetes. don't take rybelsus® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrin neoplasia syndrome type 2 or if allergic to it. stop rybelsus® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis.

tell your provider about vision problems or changes taking rybelsus® with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. wake up to what's possibl with rybelsus®. ♪ please don't take my sunshine away ♪ you may pay as little as $10 per prescription. ask your healthcare provider about rybelsus® today.

mission control, we are go for launch. ♪♪ t-minus two minutes and counting. ♪♪ um, she's eating the rocket. -copy that, she's eating the rocket. i assume we needed that? [chomping sound] ♪♪ lunchables! built to be eaten. she has eaten the rocket. [girl burps] over. regina approaches the all-electric cadillac lyriq. it's a sunny day. nah, a stormy day. ♪ ♪ we see a close up of the grille ...an overhead shot. she drives hands free along the coast. make it palm springs. cadillac is going electric. if you want to be bold, you have to go off - script.

experience the all-electric cadillac lyric. welcome back. we're following multiple developments at the state department today. first, the special envoy for haiti has resigned, saying he will not be associated with the decision to deport thousands of haitian refugees from del rio, texas. and another state department official is also out of a job. this one over the so-called havana syndrome, the unexplained ailment believed to have struck u.s. diplomats, spies, and other government workers. she's leaving her position after six months on the job. this news comes after the state department is facing increasing scrutiny from within about its response to the havana syndrome. and over the level of care and benefits being provided to affected employees. joining me now with more is nbc's josh lederman who covers

the state department. josh, why is this ambassador leaving now? >> reporter: garrett, when the ambassador was named to this position in march, it was billed by the biden administration as a sign they were taking this more seriously, appointing a senior person to make sure nothing fell through the cracks. now after six months she is out of a job. while the state department says she simply maxed out the number of hours as a formerly retired employee that she was allowed to work, a number of people affected with havana syndrome tell nbc news she had lost the confidence of diplomats affected by this, that frankly she didn't think she believes them when they said they were injured by this. they were particularly incensed and secretary of state antony blinken refused to rule out that this was mass hysteria, that

these were attacks. there hasn't been another explanation put forward. i spoke with a senior state department official who told me, look, they just don't know who this is, they don't know if it was a state actor and if they called it attacks, that would imply they had figured this out. >> between that story and the resignation of the special envoy to haiti, afghanistan, so many issues, what's the morale like at the state department now? it seems like story after story, they're getting kicked in the teeth over there. >> reporter: not only do you have these folks leaving under really questionable circumstances but you also have all of these vacancies at the state department of senior positions that they haven't been able to get filled and confirmed. it really is taking an impact on the morale among our diplomats. in the case of ambassador foote, special envoy to haiti, typically, garrett, when ambassadors or diplomats retire, they do to pretty diplomatically. that's kind of their job. but here you've got a special

envoy out there saying he doesn't want anything to do with the administration's inhumane and counterproductive decision, that's his words, to deport thousands of immigrants. now you have the state department spokesman hitting back at him, saying, yeah, he did put forward ideas that we rejected because they were bad ideas, and instead of sticking with it he simply quit. so you see these disputes within the administration bursting out into the open. and it's a sign not only of some of the misgivings about their haiti policy when it comes to the situation on the border, but also the broader concerns about the way the administration is handling its foreign policy, garrett. >> that's fascinating. help could be on the way, the senate has said they'll be working late nights and weekends to try to get some of these lower level appointees particularly for the state department through. josh lederman, thank you. and thank you all for being with us this hour. we'll be back with more "meet the press daily." msnbc coverage continues after this break.

mm. [ clicks tongue ] i don't know. i think they look good, man. mm, smooth. uh, they are a little tight. like, too tight? might just need to break 'em in a little bit. you don't want 'em too loose. for those who were born to ride there's progressive. with 24/7 roadside assistance. -okay. think i'm gonna wear these home. -excellent choice. ♪ i'm a reporter for the new york times. if you just hold it like this. yeah. ♪

i love finding out things that other people don't want me to know. mm-hmm. [beep] i just wanted to say... ♪ find yourself in these situations and see who you are. and that's just part of the bargain. ♪

good to be with you, i'm yasmin vossoughian. as we were coming on the air, we are awaiting a major decision that could come at any moment now, one of the final hurdles before booster shots start going into the arms of americans age 65 and older and those at high risk as well. the fda has already given that green light. now it's the cdc's turn. even as those advisers debate the need, their own boss, does he say