without the high cost. because you can't build the business of tomorrow on the network of yesterday. >> this is "eyewitness news upclose." >> everything should have been tested. tested. tested. >> angry parents now demanding answers, their children, 17,000 public-school students in newark, getting offers to get tested for lead poisoning. allegations now that school officials might have known about elevated lead levels for years. and if they did, what took so long to take action? joining us this morning, the mayor of newark, ras baraka, who also is demanding answers. >> it is tempting to make this confirmation process simply an extension of our divided politics. >> and president obama making his choice for the supreme court, and getting ready for an epic fight with republicans in the senate to confirm his nominee.

judge merrick garland a confirmation hearing? will they even meet with him? we talked to new york's senior u.s. senator charles schumer, a member of the senate judiciary committee. good morning, everyone, and welcome to "upclose." i'm bill ritter. president obama now setting the stage for a showdown with congress by nominating a supreme court justice, the president last week choosing 63-year-old federal appeals court judge merrick garland to fill the seat vacated by the late justice antonin scalia, mr. obama praising garland for his experience and ability to build a consensus. >> to suggest that someone as qualified and respected as merrick garland doesn't even deserve a hearing, let alone an up or down vote to join an institution as important as our supreme court when two-thirds of americans believe otherwise? that would be unprecedented. >> thank you, mr. president. [ voice breaking ] this is the greatest honor of my life... other than lynn agreeing to marry me. >> the republican leaders, many

to consider anyone that president obama nominates, saying it should be up to the next president. >> it is the senate's constitutional right to act as a check on a president, and withhold its consent. >> there may be a crack in the strategy, though. several republican senators have said they will indeed meet with garland. but republican leaders insist there will be not vote before the presidential election. i asked senator charles schumer about the politics of the president's decision. >> well, i think what's happening is, when people saw the kind and the quality of the nominee... impeccable legal credentials, a lawyer above all, a brilliant lawyer, and non-political, not ideological. so that, for instance, chief justice roberts, head of the very conservative supreme court, said very good words about this gentleman. he said, "when he makes an opinion, i always -- it's hard to disagree." and, in fact, none of the opinions that he's written the

right below the supreme court -- has the supreme court reversed, asked to look at and reversed. so, he is an impeccable nominee. and what we're finding now is some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are him." as of now, seven, since he's been nominated, said they'll sit down and see him. >> and what do you make of that? >> i think it's gonna progress. i think the ice is beginning to crack, bill. i think, you know, leader mcconnell put a lot of pressure on his members that there shouldn't be hearings. but the american people want hearings. 70% want hearings. people, after they see him, may decide to vote no for one reason or another. but not to see such a man, who has such great credentials and who is a non-politician, who is nonpartisan, isn't gonna work. >> president obama says he's doing his constitutional duty. but, in fact, this was a little bit political. he didn't pick a big left-wing liberal as a nominee. he picked someone who is pretty much down the middle of the road, making it difficult,

to oppose it. that's true. but it's the substance, too, that's right. many of our judges are too political these days. the court used to be relatively non-political. you chose just top lawyers, and whatever their politics were were not the center of attention. and now it's much more divided. and going back to the old way would be a pretty good thing, i think, regardless of the political affect on what the president did. >> nonetheless, many of your republican colleagues in the senate say with justice scalia's death, the balance of power -- now 4-4, was 5-4 in favor of the conservatives -- is too critical to have a democratic appointee be in charge of this. >> well, the court has been pretty hard right. i mean, just a decision like citizens united, where, you know, the court, under a stretched theory of the first amendment, by a 5-to-4 vote, is

flow into our political system and poisoning it, and no one has to report if they gave the money or not shows that the court moved pretty far out of the mainstream. i think a person like garland, like sandra day o'connor, who was appointed by ronald reagan, would move it back to the mainstream. >> and that's what you think some of these republicans who are now deciding to meet with judge garland are coming to conclude? >> yes. i think they're seeing that this guy's not political, that he's a down-the-middle guy, and that they ought to see him and make a judgment. and if they see him, my view, i think they'll like him. i think they'll see he's a non-politician. and they'll go to mcconnell and whisper in his ear, "i think we ought to have a hearing. it's hard not to do it on someone like this." >> you brought up the fact that the opinion polls showed americans, by overwhelming majority, want these hearings, want a nomination to the supreme court to be heard, advised, and consent by the

and yet, you know, we heard the republicans say, "we don't want anyone that barack obama nominated." but the democrats have played this game, too. joe biden did it at the end of campaign. you did it at the end of the second george bush's campaign. you know, it's hard to make that argument when the democrats have done it too, right? >> right. well, look, what i said is if you don't like the justice, don't confirm him. but no one has ever said don't have a hearing. that's sort of unprecedented. and, you know, once you have these hearings, they're a little bit magical. the american people see who the nominee is. the congressmen and senators see who the nominee is. and so, as a result, the last four nominees, two nominated by a democratic president, two nominated by a republican president, have all gotten in with a bipartisan vote. and, so, having the hearings is important, and i've always believed we should have hearings. it's up to a senator to vote no. that's what i said a few years back.

but have the hearing. >> and, in addition, the judge himself, the nominee himself or herself, they're in the door. it's up to them, you know? the president may have opened the door for the nomination, but they have to determine whether they get the job or not. >> they have to make such a good impression that they have to overcome the partisan divisions that we've seen in the congress, and the last four did. >> if -- play chess here for a second, political chess. if the republicans do not hold a hearing into judge garland, and if hillary clinton appears to be the nominee, and then defeats the republican and appears to be heading towards becoming the next president, or even after the election, does that, then, put the republicans in a situation where they want to have -- they don't want hillary clinton to propose a more liberal judge. they'll take this middle-of-the-road judge. are they gonna be in that catch-22, then? >> yeah, i think so.

this to happen today, that they've said, "well, in the lame-duck session, maybe we'll approve garland if hillary clinton should win." but that undercuts their whole argument. their whole argument is "let's wait for the election and let the next president decide." and if you're sort of calibrating that, "well, the next president should decide if it's a republican, but the next president shouldn't decide if it's a democrat." that argument sort of falls apart. >> and there's a more sort of actuarial look at this, too. judge garland gets effusive praise from both sides of the aisle, but he's 63 years old. to me, that appears young. >> yes. >> but for a supreme court justice, that's one of the older ones appointed. you know, a new president might pick someone who's in their late 40s. >> oh, absolutely a new president could pick someone younger. although, you know, picking a justice who was 63 30 years ago and picking a justice who's 63 today is different, 'cause we do live longer. you know, i'm a little older than judge garland. i feel like i'm 40. >> that's it. it's the baby-boomer exemption

happening. >> yeah, exactly. [ laughs ] >> but you're absolutely right. life expectancy is older. people are healthier in general, and i appreciate that. as long as i have you here, let me talk about politics. we saw -- it was a fascinating week this past week. marco rubio dropped out. john kasich did win his first state in his home state of ohio. what do you predict for the republicans? how long can this go on? will they go to a contested convention in cleveland? >> yeah, i think it's gonna be very hard for them to go to a contested convention. if they had a third, a third, a third, that's one thing. but if trump comes close but doesn't get the nomination, and the next person is far behind -- and that's what it looks like will happen -- i think they'd risk a whole blowup like the democrats had in 1968 if they tried not to pick trump. so, if i were a betting man, i'd give trump a strong edge to be the nominee. i think it's too great a risk for them to deny him the

>> and yet you have so many mainstream republicans, and the republicans -- the very conservative republicans who support ted cruz, who say, "anybody but donald trump." he's got a very high disapproval rating. >> yeah, look, i think if trump is the nominee, you're gonna find a whole lot of republican voters -- i've heard it in for hillary. there are a handful of democrats who would probably vote for trump over hillary, but many more republicans would probably cross over and vote for hillary over trump. so, i think things, at the moment -- and they change quickly -- are looking pretty good for the democrats. >> let's talk about your democrats, then, and dig a little bit in the weeds there, as well. bernie sanders, how much longer does he stay in the race? the new york times reporting on thursday that obama's privately telling donors that it's time to unite behind hillary clinton. >> well, look, i think that bernie sanders -- i'm a hillary supporter, but bernie sanders has had these very strong beliefs.

speeches we've heard at our tuesday democratic lunches every week for years. and i think he's gonna stay in the race for a while longer, talking about the issues he so strongly believes in. but i don't think he's gonna be destructive. i don't think he's gonna try to hurt hillary. and, in fact, at the end of the day, if she's the nominee, and i believe she will be, i think bernie will try to bring particularly the younger voters into her camp. i think he's gonna be a positive force at the end of the day. >> is she a stronger candidate because of all this, or is she gonna go battered and bruised into the convention in philadelphia? >> i think she's a stronger candidate. bernie's message, middle class, fighting to make the system better for the average person, i think is -- a lot of it is consistent with what the average person feels, and i think he's strengthened the democratic party, not weakened it. >> can we talk about some other or -- everything's political. >> yeah, i want to talk about leg room in my seats.

your staff told us that you want to talk about leg room. what were you pushing for for the airlines? >> well, it drives me nuts when you get on an airplane -- i'm a little less than 6'1", and i can't fit in these seats. and sometimes i end up taking, you know, the magazine and the little folder of where the exits are, and the airsickness bag out of the pouch in the seat in front of me so i get an 1/8 more inch leg room. leg room was about 35 inches 10 years ago. it's now 31. the seat width, for people who are having trouble that way, was 18.5 inches. now it's 16.5. you go on an airplane now, you feel like you're in a can of sardines. so, the faa bill is coming up, and i'm proposing legislation that would require the airlines to go back to the old amount of leg room -- 35 inches, the width 18.5. they're making huge amounts of money, so this is not something,

little bit on the number of seats on the plane, that they'd be in real trouble. >> they reconfigured the seats, of course, because -- >> after i called for this bill -- after i called for this, i have gotten thousands, thousands of letters and phone calls about it. seems i'm not the only one who's bothered by this. >> i want to talk about housing in new york city just for a minute, because this morning i met with some housing advocates and activists. and i said, "i'm interviewing senator schumer later, and if you had one question to ask, what would you ask him?" and they came up with this. and we went around the table. what's the best way to solve the housing problem -- and it's a crisis, they called it -- in new york city for affordability? they said, "what's happened to the hud money? 90% of it has been cut, or thereabouts. a huge amount of it. and the hud support for low-income housing is almost nonexistent now in new york, and it used to be huge." >> you bet. they're on the money. it's a program that's called section 8, and it allows people of lower incomes to find a decent place to live.

the last 15 or 20 years. but it is going up. it went up in this last budget. and i was able to get more section 8 vouchers for new york than we've had in the past. we have to fight to have it go further up. because, you know, we cannot become a city where the average person can't afford to live. i had to fight hard to save stuyvesant town in manhattan, to save starrett city in brooklyn from becoming sort of semi-luxury-type apartments. so, we got to preserve what we have, but to help more people, we need section 8 in the hud budget to go up. they're on the money. >> u.s. senator charles schumer from new york wrapped up in high drama involving the three branches of government -- congress, the president, and the supreme court. he meets with judge garland this week. when we come back, high drama with local government. worried about lead contamination in new jersey's biggest city. so, just how bad is it? we talk to the man now heading an enormous effort to test thousands of school kids for

>> welcome back to "upclose." lead in the water. that phrase these days, after the lead contamination of the drinking-water supply in flint, michigan, really taking on a greater and troublesome meaning. it turns out hundreds of schools across the country, indeed, have lead-tainted water. children at risk. but unlike flint, it's not the water supply. it's the pipes in schools. among the districts now in kind of a crisis to try to solve the problem that parents are just worried sick about is the city of newark. and this morning, the mayor of newark, ras baraka, joins us. mr. mayor, thank you for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> is it a crisis?

it seems like it from the outside, as a reporter. >> well, it definitely, you know, has elevated to a level of crisis. i think the problem is the fact that there has not been any real information given out to the public, and people are unsure about what's happening that makes it a crisis level. at this point, no kids are drinking water that's tainted with lead. we've been able to supply water to all of the schools that have been affected by this. but ultimately, there is an infrastructure fix that needs to new jersey. probably around the country, as you pointed out. the city of camden has had lead since 2002. they've been having bottled water since then. we found out now, recently, that newark had high levels of lead in its water for a very long time as well. probably as far back as camden. and the problem is folks have been trying to take care of it one their own without informing the public, without informing city officials. and i think that that is really

>> when you say folks trying to take care of it on their own, you're talking about the school systems, right? >> right, the school system. and i think the confusion in newark and around, that people are not aware of, is that the city of newark is not in control of its own schools. that for 20 years, we have had a state-operated district. and people believe that the city is responsible for testing the water at the schools, and that's really not the truth. actually, the testing of water in schools or any place is done by private folks. the city tests the public water source, along with the state d.e.p. so, the city -- the district, however, tested the water this year and found high levels of lead, and they reported it for the first time. this superintendent reported it the first time, out of all the superintendents that were there. water supply. it is the antiquated piping system. >> absolutely. >> there's lead in those pipes. that's the problem. >> and, see, with the water source, if we find any issue

by law to send out letters or notices to parents and community about what's in the water. i mean, recently, we might find elevation of other kinds of chemicals in the water, and we have to treat the water. and the d.e.p. manages that process, along with the city, to make sure that we inform parents. the loophole in all of that is we don't test people's private homes, we don't test public buildings, we don't test other kinds of buildings. so, ultimately -- 'cause once it goes into your pipes in your own structure... >> you're responsible for it. for it. and, you know, and therein lies the problem, especially if you have old infrastructure, old buildings, old homes. >> and if you're in a city where a lot of people can't afford to replace those pipes even if they find lead in them. >> absolutely. absolutely. so, if you live in a housing authority -- maybe a housing project, if you're a senior on a fixed income and you've been in your property 50, 60 years, or folks who are barely paying their mortgage, it may be difficult for them to fix pipes.

that's happened at your school district this past week was this note sent out by the union saying that, you know -- they were instructed a long time ago, this custodial staff, to run the water several minutes before the students arrived, knowing that there was a problem with lead in the pipes, and getting some of that corrosive stuff out of there. did that surprise you? >> well, it's alarming. what did surprise is that i was in the district for almost 20 years. for more than 20 years, in fact. >> you were a teacher, right? >> i was a teacher, a vice principal, a principal. i moved up into the ranks. and not one time that i've been in the district that i ever heard anything about elevated lead in the water. and i would imagine that at least the teachers -- as a teacher, i would be identified or told, as a vice principal, as a principal i'd be notified. but nothing at all. >> i know you want to get solutions, and there's thousands of kids getting tested, and now you're -- this last week you said you want every single water tap at every school, more than

but -- and i don't want to lay blame here, but there's got to be some responsibility here, just like there is -- we saw in congress this past week, they're looking into what's the problem in flint and who's to blame. >> right. >> where did things fall through the cracks, or the pipes in this case? >> well, newark is an old city. it's like all of these cities around america. over 2,000 cities they're saying now. it's an old city. the infrastructure's old. we're one of the oldest cities in america. i mean, it is clear and obvious that we need investment in infrastructure. it has not happened. people have been calling for it nationally. we've been calling for it in the state side for a long period of time. we have to raise the dollars to improve the infrastructure in these places, in old buildings and old schools. people know that part, that the infrastructure needs to be replaced, upgraded, and have not done anything about it. so, you know -- and our kids are now suffering as a result of that. >> is this a city problem? is this a state problem? >> it's all of our problem. it's a state and a city problem. it's our problem because we live with it. we have to live with it. i mean, these are our children,

our buildings. so it is a city problem. that's why we're testing the kids, because it belongs to -- in fact, we were testing kids prior to this, 'cause we already have high, elevated cases of lead because of old lead-based paint and all kinds of things in old buildings in the city as it is. >> and especially in some of the housing projects, there are, in fact, lead paint in them. >> so, we already have a lead-abatement program. we already have testing. all these things already existed in the city. this just compounds the issue with the water. >> let me springboard on something you said earlier. newark has not had control of its schools since 1994. you gained partial control back about a year and a half ago. are you suggesting that if you had had control of the schools, you would have known about this problem? >> sure, i think so. i absolutely believe that. i mean, when the folks in charge, when the people in charge answer to the people in the community, they feel responsible to the neighborhood, to the community, to the city officials, and not to folks in trenton. they feel responsible to them.

have the ability to set these protocols, and not the state. control. we just have some say-so over financing. but anything that the school board decides can be vetoed by the superintendent. >> by the state. >> and the state, right. >> got a lot to talk to you about, you stick around for another segment? >> sure. >> all right, we'll continue our conversation with newark mayor ras baraka when "eyewitness news upclose" continues. stay with us. all across america families are coming back to time warner cable for a whole new experience. that's because we've been working hard to give you better service, and it shows. we came back for internet speeds so fast even the kids are impressed. oh she's impressed. we're catching up on movies and shows on demand just as fast as we can watch them. for $89.99 a month you'll get 100 meg ultra-fast internet,

and unlimited calling. twc's home wifi is so strong we can use all our devices at the same time. so we can all watch whatever we want. and that's kinda cool. call now. for $89.99 a month you'll get internet, tv and phone. there's no contract, no risk and our money-back guarantee. come back today and we'll give you free installation with our exclusive one-hour arrival window. feels good to be back. come back today. you'll get free installation, tv equipment and epix included. and now get a $300 reward card. call today, and welcome back. in new york state, we believe tomorrow starts today. all across the state, the economy is growing, with creative new business incentives, the lowest taxes in decades, and new infrastructure for a new generation attracting the talent and companies of tomorrow. like in rochester, with world-class botox. and in buffalo, where medicine meets the future.

today - at business.ny.gov >> welcome back to "upclose." continuing our conversation this morning with the mayor of newark, ras baraka. mr. mayor, let me just follow up on the control of the schools a little bit. you're suggesting that if you had had control of the schools, which newark hasn't had for more than 20 years, 22 years, you might have known about this. will you get control of the

>> i think we're on the path to get local control very soon. there's a law, a state law in new jersey, qsac, that governs that now. we are where we're supposed to be in terms of the measures. we were there before, in fact, but it was -- they violated it. but we're there now, and i think we have enough leverage and enough folks in place in order to get local control very soon. >> it's the trend around the country, local -- new york city certainly has that now, mayoral control of the schools. you want that for newark, get more local control. one person could change that yesterday, today, tomorrow, with a signature, right? >> absolutely. the governor can make a decision that, "uh-huh. it's time to turn the schools back over to the residents." and they should do that. >> and have you talked to him? what's your relationship like with governor christie? >> well, i haven't talked to him since he started running for president, but, you know, prior to that, we had a discussion right before he left about local control, in fact. and we organized something called the newark educational success board, which was supposed to lead us or guide us into the transition towards local control.

of the bargain in newark, have been working all across ideology and differences to bring the city together to get us to our local control, and i think we're there. we just need the governor to hold up his side, which is to make it happen. >> just want to get this right. you said you have not talked to the governor since he started his campaign for president, which was in early summer, late fall -- late spring, and you haven't talked to him since he ended it, which has been six weeks? >> right. no. i've seen him at a ribbon cutting for a new school, but we haven't had a conversation about the schools, about other kinds of things. we have been dealing with the front office. we had snow emergencies. >> right. >> we had development issues. so, the front office and the state has been very helpful to us. but no conversation with the governor. >> very briefly, a lot of your critics were afraid you were gonna be anti-business when you were elected in 2014. they have found that that's not necessarily true. the state of newark in 30 seconds. can you give it to me? >> well, we're moving forward. you know, there's over $1 billion worth of development

of residential construction happening downtown now. there's development going on in ever ward of the city. the excitement is back in terms of where newark is going and what should happen. so i'm excited about newark's future, its prospects. we are on the road going forward, and it's exciting not in our city. >> now if you could just get those old pipes that are contaminated with lead cleaned out and replaced. >> that's right. that and a few other things, you know. but the lead pipes are at the top of the list right now. infrastructure improvement. transportation improvement. roads. all of that stuff. >> mayor ras baraka of newark, thanks for joining us on nice to see you. >> all right. thank you, mr. mayor. and that'll do it for this edition of "eyewitness news upclose." if you missed any of today's program, you can catch it again on our website, abc7ny. thanks for watching this morning. i'm bill ritter. for all of us here at channel 7,

>> buenos d^as y bienvenidos. good morning and welcome once again to "tiempo." i'm joe torres. new york city is stepping up its efforts to help undocumented immigrants who are victims of crimes -- help in the form of special visas. we'll talk to the commissioners behind this push and the specific requirements needed to qualify for those visas. that's coming up a little bit later in the show. right now, however, a topic that we have discussed quite extensively here on "tiempo" -- the financial crisis in puerto rico. senate democrats, led by robert menendez of new jersey, recently put out their version of a plan to tackle the island's growing debt crisis. it calls for the creation of a financial stability and reform board to provide much needed