and gm knew it. as soon after this decision, company officials quietly redesigned the switch but they never changed the part number. hingly, when they approved a new switch in 2006, they did it still knowing that the news which did not meet specifications. the company even put more cars with bats which is on the road . between 2000 3-2014, gm learned of hundreds of reports of ignition switch problems through customer complaints, lawsuits, warranty claims, press coverage, field reports and even more internal investigations. , gm did time again nothing. the company continued to sell cars knowing they were unsafe. it i know we have a lot of family members here and i want to express my deepest sympathies to them. i want to tell them something more. we will get to the bottom of this. we will figure out what happened and we will make sure it does not happen again. ms. barra fork coming. i know every member of this committee is concerned about this. thank you very much. >> we will now recognize mr. upton fo

and gm knew it. soon after this decision, company officials quietly redesigned the switch but they never changed the part number. and an astonishingly this committee learned that when gm approved a new switch in 2006, they did it with still knowing that the new switch didn't meet specifications. the company even put more cars with bad switches on the road from 2008 until 2011. and we still don't know all the information about this. between 2003 and 2014, gm learned hundreds of reports of ignition switch problems through customer complaints, warranty claims, lawsuits, press coverage, field reports and even more internal investigations. but time and time again, gm did nothing. the company continued to sell cars knowing they were unsafe. i know we have a lot of family members here, mr. chairman, and i want to express my deepest sympathies to them and tell them something more. we'll get to the bottom of this. we'll figure out what happened and we'll make sure it doesn't happen again. mr. chairman, i want

gm's requirements?> thank you. >> we are working very closely with our supplier, our executive director responsible for switches is personally looking at the performance of the new switches. we will do 100% end of line testing to make sure that the performance, the safety, the functionality of these switches are safe. >> thank you. gentleman's time expired. miss barra, you're being asked a number of questions. i just want to be clear, did you review the documents that gm submitted to the committee? >> no, i did not. there were over 200,000 pages my understanding. >> how about the document mr. waxman is talking about? >> i saw this for the first time a day ago. >> now recognize miss blackmon for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. miss barra, you have mentioned several times in your comments today's gm, so my assumption is that you are going to run gm in a different manner than it has been run in the past and that you are making some changes. i want to ask you just a little bit about time line, hel

and gm knew it. soon after this decision, company officials quietly redesigned the switch but they never changed the part number. and an astonishingly this committee learned that when gm approved a new switch in 2006, they did it with still knowing that the new switch didn't meet specifications. the company even put more cars with bad switches on the road from 2008 until 2011. and we still don't know all the information about this. between 2003 and 2014, gm learned hundreds of reports of ignition switch problems through customer complaints, warranty claims, lawsuits, press coverage, field reports and even more internal investigations. but time and time again, gm did nothing. the company continued to sell cars knowing they were unsafe. i know we have a lot of family members here, mr. chairman, and i want to express my deepest sympathies to them and tell them something more. we'll get to the bottom of this. we'll figure out what happened and we'll make sure it doesn't happen again. mr. chairman, i want

or new gm. there is lot of talk and discussion which company do we sue. i think they're both and all going to be sued as a whole. >> yeah, a big part of it will be how gm manages this going forward. we only have to look as far back as few years ago when toyota was in a lot of hot water. deaths involved there as well. toyota managed it very carefully. they did a successful job managing it. if you look at their sales the way they recovered in terms of market share and sales, toyota is doing, you know, doing better than ever. general motors is in slightly different position in the sense that when toyota's, when toyota's scandal happened, toyota was really at top of its game. gm is right now in the position where they're still trying to regain some of the public's trust. there are some, there are some members of the public out there who are still, who still have issues with the bankruptcy. gm is still trying to reach out to those buyers and then this happens. so it is somewhat of a tougher job for g

gm filed for bankruptcy in june 2009, emerging as new gm about six weeks later.t new gm, the company as it exists today may not be liable for accidents that occurred prior to july 2000 nine. is that your understanding? towe at general motors want the right thing for our customers and that's why we feel this is an extraordinary situation. get to the long to answers and understanding about this part. that is why we hired mr. feinberg. we feel he has had extensive experience and he will bring his experience and objectivity to assess what are the appropriate next steps because we understand we have civic responsibilities as well as legal responsibilities. >> are you saying the hiring of mr. feinberg indicates gm will give some kind of settlement with those individuals and families whose loved ones lost lives? >> we have just begun to work with mr. feinberg. our first meeting will be on friday and it will take 30 to 60 days to evaluate the situation. decisions, made any we have just started the process. >> does that include people who might have been injured as well.

safety comes first at gm. my question for you, what's changed at gm? isn't it true throughout its corporate history, gm has represented to the driving public that safety has always been their number one priority. >> i can't speak to the statements that were made in the past. all i can tell you is the way we're working now, the training we've done, we've changed our core values, we're leading by example. we're -- one of the process changes we've also made in addition to when the technical community makes their decision about a safety recall or a recall, we are going to be reviewing it. the head of global product development and myself, to see if there's more we want to do -- >> hasn't the core values of general motors always been that safety comes first? >> i've never seen that part before. >> isn't it true that throughout the history of the country it's made representations like this to the driving public as a way of inducing them to buy your vehicles? >> today's general motors, all i can tell you is today's general motors we are focused on safety. we

got from the local gm dealer. and if you look at it, on the outside it has a slogan, safety comes first at gm. so my question for you, and i think the question these families back here wants to know is what's changed at gm? isn't it true that throughout its corporate history gm has represented the driving public safety has always been the number one priority? barra: i cannot speak to statements made in the past, all i can tell you is the way we are working now, we have changed our core values, the decision-making we are leading by example where one of the processes we have made with addition to win the technical community makes their decision about a safety recall or a recall, we will be reviewing it. to see that there is more we want to do. >> hasn't the core values of general manners always been the safety comes first? barra: i've never seen that part before. >> isn't it true that throughout the history of the company is made representations like this to the driving public as a way of inducing them to buy your v

here is the issue for gm. it looks like there are multiple moments in the company face conflicts of interest. you said it yourself yesterday ms. barra. gm has a culture based on costs not safety great many people are wondering if gm did not initiate a recall because gm could not survive one in 2006 or they did not initiate a recall because the government owns 60% of the company. it is possible that gm has an explanation for why it took so long to pull these cars off the road however after yesterday's hearing i'm afraid we are not going to get many answers today. i hope gm is in a position to speak to what happened more specifically. that is why we called you here and i think gm should take the opportunity to explain their actions and help this committee get to the bottom of what happened happened. there was also another side of the story and this is whether the national highway traffic and safety administration received all the information from early warning reports to determine if further investigations were

never mind old gm, new gm. it is gm. i would like to see all the cars off the road that have all these issues with them. and other people made to feel safe while they're driving as well as to get legislation behind this and get the laws changed on how all of this is handled. gerri: lori, to you, mary barra said old gm and new gm are different because old gm had a cost culture. new gm has a quality culture. did you buy that? >> i'm less interested in the words. i'm more interested in the actions. and i'm very, very interested in seeing, you know truer form happen. when the maximum penalty that a large corporation like gm would pay is $35 million, when they made $3 billion last year, that's nothing. that is nothing at all. that definitely must be increased. gerri: what is your idea of an appropriate fine or penalty? >> i think it should be discouragement of profits. in other words if that particular model and, you can conceal the defect, brought you x-amount, x millions or even billions of dollars, that that profit should

that is not the way we do business in today's gm. >> well, how does gm balance cost and safety?we don't. today if there's a safety issue, we take action. if we know there is a defect on our vehicles, we do not look at the cost associated with it, we look at the speed in which we can fix the issue. >> was there a culture in gm -- >> general motors ceo mary barra answering questions before the house energy and commerce subcommittee. we'll continue to monitor the hearing and have more when we come back. dg retirement account. before he opened his first hot chocolate stand calling winter an "underserved season". and before he quit his friend's leaf-raking business for "not offering a 401k." larry knew the importance of preparing for retirement. that's why when the time came he counted on merrill edge to streamline his investing and help him plan for the road ahead. that's the power of streamlined connections. that's merrill edge and bank of america. their type 2 diabetes... ...with non-insulin victoza. for a while, i took a pill to lower my blood sugar, but it didn't get me to my go

this gm is not the old gm. it's not even the pre-2014 gm. what you're doing now is incurring both legal and moral responsibility for the actions that you take in, or failing to take. and i will tell you that the more i hear and see in these documents, the more i learn about what happened before the reorganization and in connection with the reorganization, the more convinced i am that gm has a real exposure to criminal liability. in fact, i think it's likely and appropriate that gm will face prosecution based on this evidence. and i think the more that you can do as leader of gm to come forward and do the right thing now, the better it will be for the future of the company. so i hope to continue to work with you, and hope that you will review the legislation that's been offered. because going for it can make a real difference. thank you, madam chair. >> senator ayotte. >> thank you, madam chair. as i understand it at this point, nobody within gm has been fired as a result of him the issue that comes before us today on the ignition switch, and

gm filed for bankruptcy in june 2009 emerging as new gm about six weeks later. so that means that new gm, the company as it exists today, i have been told may not be liable for accidents that occurred prior to july 2009. is that your understanding, miss barra? >> we at general motors want to do the right thing for our customers and that's why we feel this is an extraordinary situation. as i have said, it took too long to get to the answers and the understandings about this part. that's why we've hired mr. fineberg. we feel mr. fineberg has had extensive experience and he will bring his experience and objectivity to assess what are the appropriate next steps because we do understand that we have civic responsibilities as well as legal responsibilities. >> are you saying that the hiring of mr. fineberg indicates that gm will give some kind of settlement with those individuals whose -- the families whose loved ones lost their lives? >> we are -- we have just begun to work with mr. fineberg. in fact, our first meeting will be on friday. it will take probably 30 to 6

or the old gm?>> general motors was formed in 2009. >> said the old gm in 2005 were not aware they used the cost-benefit analysis to determine if fixing the problem was not, quote, and acceptable business case? and if there's a safety issue there shouldn't be a business case calculated. >> but you don't know anything about this? >> that's why we have hired an investigation. we are going back over a decade. >> as people know, the commerce committee does order of arrival so to remind everyone we do it different, senator rockefeller does order of arrival. i will respect him in that regard. i respect him anyway. i respect him in all regards. [laughter] [laughter] but i will respect him in that regard. so next will be senator klobuchar. >> thank you senator mccaskill for holding this hearing. as far as one of the families involved in this is a young woman who was killed named the tosha from minnesota. i met with her dad yesterday. i talked to her mom were to her mom's husband yesterday and this young gir

competition from japan and then bankruptcy and other head winds have far reduced gm' gm's size d important but as mary barra reports, it still is important to consumers. >> general motors quickly expanded gobbling up competitors like oldsmobile, pontiac and cad cadillac. in 1962, it gobbled up the majority of the market. numbers were in decline long before gm filed for bankruptcy in june 2009. prompting a 49.5 billion taxpayer bailout. the company that emerged may be smaller and leaner but make no mistake: gm remains a powerful force in the global economy. it employs 219,000 workers and a network of 4500 dealers worldwide. with 70% of sales now coming from outside the u.s. in china, brazil, u.k. and germany, gm brought in revenues of $154.2 billion in 2013. and its stock remains widely peld with -- hell with nearly a thousand institutional investors, banks and insurance companies, in short bad news for gm to expel bad news for millions -- spell bad news for millions around the world. mary snowy, al jazeera. >> we have hired tony lucas, that's what gm exec mary barra said time after time. t

gm knew about this problem as far back as 2001. gm used the switch in vehicles anyway. the committee sent you a letter about this issue and documents were received yesterday that show that these in adequate switches were approved by gm in may of 2002. i have a document here in tab 54 in the binder as well. this document shows that the force required to turn the ignition switch was too low. that specification is clearly marked not okay. does this document show that dm officials were aware that the ignition switch did not meet company standards in 2002. >> if if this was provided to the company english engineers. >> in 2004 they were coming up with ways to fix the problem. this is at tab 8 from 2004 shows that gm did reject alternative designs. it memgss s mentions one year lead times and says the tooling costs and piece prices are too high. it concludes thus none of the solutions represent ares an acceptable business case. other documents present the piece cost increase as 57 cents per unit. do you know who would have made the decision about whether to make this change i

is gm -- >> we have hired mr. feinberg to help us assessed the situation. >> there is no money involved at this point? >> we have hired him and begin working with him on friday. >> he has not been given ability to compensate vick tip. >> we are going to work with him to determine what the course of action is. >> might that include compensation? >> we haven't made a decision yet. >> we thank you for your time today. gm has cooperated with this investigation. let me make a couple of requests. members will have other questions for you and we hope that you respond to those within a timely manner. we also plan to conduct interviews in the recall part and may be requesting more records will you make those available to us? >> we will absolutely cooperate. >> we would like to be notified when you get your internal report and review that report as well. >> we will notify you. >> thank you very much. >> i thank you ms. barra. you will be dismissed but while this is taking place. we are going to take a five minute break to a

here's how gm is making the case. the new gm is different from the old gm. the new gm will soon ask a federal bankruptcy judge to protect the company from dozens and dozens of lawsuits over a huge recall because they claim it started over the old gulf of mexi mexico -- the old gm that we bailed out with our tax dollars and the new gm has nothing to do with it according to a legal filing. the problems extends from faulty ignition switches that triggered crashes that killed at least 13 people. gm officials admit the company did indeed know about the problem not just for a few days, at least a decade before it finally recalled 2.5 million vehicles in february. the automakers new ceo testified before congress earlier this month. she apologized and blamed the slow response on that other company, old gm and this new company, new gm, is seeking advice on how to compensate the victims. just yesterday at the new york at all t auto show said they're focusing on a new product unit to focus on driver safety. is the new gm not responsible for what the old gm did? judge n

but there is a cultural issue here at gm. certainly the old gm.are trying to say this is the new gm. >> yeah. the senate hit that point again and again, and it's impossible to believe that all of a sudden gm this company that is over 100 years old is going to wake up one day and turn over a new leaf because of this crisis. you could tell from berra's testimony that that wasn't going to happen. she was really reluctant to hold the old gm responsible, and they are not going to be able to move forward until they decide what happened in the past was wrong. >> good to see you. thank you for being with us. well there's controversy on a campus over a class that some way is a lesson in organized labor. we'll look at that coming up. [ male announcer ] it's here -- xfinity watchathon week, your chance to watch full seasons of tv's hottest shows for free with xfinity on demand. there's romance, face slaps, whatever that is, pirates, helicopters, pirate-copters... argh! hmm. it's so huge, it's being broadcast on mars. heroes...bad guys... asteroids. available

lawmakers want to know what took gm so long, and did gm put money ahead of lives. for her part, barra attempted to reassure those lawmakers along with investors and drivers that gm cars are safe and that she and the company are terribly sorry. eamon javers has more on today's heated testimony barra's performance and what's next for gm. >> reporter: gm ceo mary barra arrived on capitol hill this afternoon to apologize for gm's failures leading up to the automaker's recall of 2.6 million vehicles for dangerously defective ignition switches. >> nothing but the truth. >> reporter: the audience included grieving family members of people killed in switch-related accidents. >> today's gm will do the right thing. that begins with my sincere apologies to everyone who has been affected by this recall, especially the families and friends who lost their lives or were injured. i am deeply sorry. >> reporter: but in the face of tough questions about what gm knew and when about the problem, barra repeatedly said she did not have the information. citing gm's ongoing internal inves

but there is a cultural issue here at gm. certainly the old gm.y are trying to say this is the new gm. >> yeah. the senate hit that point again and again, and it's impossible to believe that all of a sudden gm this company that is over 100 years old is going to wake up one day and turn over a new leaf because of this crisis. you could tell from berra's testimony that that wasn't going to happen. she was really reluctant to hold the old gm responsible, and they are not going to be able to move forward until they decide what happened in the past was wrong. >> good to see you. thank you for being with us. well there's controversy on a campus over a class that some way is a lesson in organized labor. google and the world brain >> it would be the worlds greatest library, under one digital roof. but at what cost? >> google could hold the whole word hostage... google and the world brainal ja. >> evey saturday, join us for exclusive, revealing, and suprizing talks with the most interesting people of our time. >> thinking differently is actualy punished...

>> gm, the recall belongs to the old gm. i think what gm has done is addressed it head on. the company itself has been very transparent with the investment community, with testifying in front of congress. i think as you go forward, the big thing for them is get it out of the news, take care of your customers. >> i sort of get that but i sort of don't. the recall may belong to the old gm and i understand that because mary barra wasn't at the helm at the time but the compensation to victims, the optics, the potential market share loss, that belongs to the new gm? >> but the liability, if there are lawsuits, belongs to the old gm. >> can you explain that to me? i'm sorry that i'm being very -- >> absolutely. these are incidents that took place prior to july of 2009. so as a result, that belongs to the old general motors. if you are going to go after the company in that regard, it should go to them. the new company did not have anything to do with that. it is their responsibility to take care of their customers and they're doing that with the recall and trying to apiece custome

today's gm will do the right thing. >> jon: today's gm is not a shirker. [ laughter ] and in fact, they hired a lawyer that specializes in cases where victims are compensated so they probably have a great plan to make this right. >> are you saying that the hiring of mr. feinberg indicates that gm will give some kind of settlement? >> it will take probably 30-60 days to evaluate the situation. we've not made any decisions. we've just started this process with mr. feinberg. >> and that might include people who have been injured as well. >> we've not made any decisions. >> jon: we don't know what he will say. maybe our lawyer will recommend we dangle money in front of people and not give them anymore or maybe the families owe us money. we have to wait and see. this is up to now the pleasant cruise of a story encounters a problem and careens into a ditch. why would gm have the ability to in any way wait and see how they feel about settling the cases with the clearly wronged families? how are they not auto matticly liable for damages? >> under the terms of the emergence from federal bankrupt

>> gm did establish a fund to help handle some of these suits and victims and that gm is not going to walk away from this. they are taking some responsibility. what happens in the long run, was there a culture in gm which had people feel that they weren't to send information up and down and across a chain of command? that's what this comes down to. the data was there, but they weren't connecting the dots. we don't know if people were passing that information on to each other and reviewing it appropriately. there are a lot of top-level engineers and bright people within nhtsa. how did they both miss this? it's a huge failure to communicate and knowing what's taking place. >> i have that piece of paper for you where we had one of these engineers signed the paper in 2006 and claimed in a deposition he didn't know anything about it. that's a paper trail that goes back to 2006, is it not? >> gm knew that the part they had was not acceptable. they knew that this part did not meet specs in terms of the energy and strength it took to turn the key on and keep it in the on position, not move to

a car that gm knew for years was dangerous, anddefective.r daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers, wives and husbandsre gone because they were a cost of doing business gm-style. >> and understandably very angry mom. several lawmakers are pushing for change and a backing legislation that would require the automakers to report potential prlems like this earlier, and t department of transportation would also have to the publish the information earlier. nbc news is going to have more on the gm safety scandal, and there is a report that suggests that at least one enneer was aware of the ignition probl years before the company e recalled any cars. that is on t news right after this broadcast. >>> we have breaking news. there an arrest in the murder of a mother of five in ashburn. the loudoun county sheriff's office has arrested a man who is accused of killing his wife, michelle castillo who was found dead in her home on march 20th. the neighbors say that the mother was a triathlete, and deeply involved in the church, and the missiona

>> yes. >> is it common practice for gm to accept a part that does not meet gm's specifications?o. but there's a difference between a part meeting or not meeting specifications and a part being defective. >> under what scenario is accepting parts that don't meet specs allowable. >> an example will be when purchasing steel. you'll set a specifications but because of the suppliers you'll assess performance, functionality, durability, the aspects of the part, or in this case steel, that is necessary to live up to what the performance and durability to safety needs to be. that's an example of when you would have a part or have material that doesn't but is set out from a safety, functionality perspective, performance as well. >> is that switch acceptable? >> i'm sorry? >> is the switch acceptable? >> what timeframe, i'm sorry? >> at the beginning. it didn't meet specs of gm. is that what you would consider acceptable? >> as we clearly know today it's not. >> in 2006 gm changed its ignition switch and put in a new spring to increase the torque. am i correct? >> i didn't hear the last p

the next story about gm.ing out unrelated to this faulty switch, spilling out that are adverse to its own reputation. and just yesterday's story about all the problems apart from the faulty switch that the cobalt caused the dealers, the chevy cobalt. and that's what gm has got to be worried about. if i was gm i would move to settle it by paying awe huge fine to the justice department. i would settle it with the victims' families who were ripped out from the bankruptcy before 2000, i would set the existing cases. i would go all out because it's being undermined by a thousand cuts of its own causation. and it just can't to late that kind of reduced sales. >> ralph, as you know the wheels of justice often turn slowly. i'm sure the company would like to get these issues solved. you also can't rewrite history. i'm wondering now at this point with mary barra as ceo. they're looking to establish a trust to begin paying out victims. what is the right thing for john mccain to do beyond settling with the government whe

it's a new gm.elieve her when she says she only found out about this problem on january 31st of this year? >> i don't have any reason to believe that miss baraa would be lying about when she found out about this, but it is disturbing that gm knew about this defect in the ignition switch for 14 years and did nothing about it. there were people killed. there were people in accidents. and obviously this was a grave oversight at the very least. >> and so the -- what did you make of the answers you were getting? your frustration was pretty evident there, in the clips we played. why do you think you were getting the kinds of answers you were getting from her? >> i was frustrated and actually i was perplexed because the questions i was asking miss barra were questions that were provided to the committee by gm, and so gm gave us this timeline and then miss barra sat there and said she didn't know about these things. i realize that she's ordered a full investigation, and i'm supportive of that, but i also do

that leads me back to gm under all these lawsuits bankrupt gm or someone from the outside either way it is not the same it will be the same one we rescued we will speak with the lawyer who says that gm better read what it says to do the right thing and then the stepdad of a girl that died in one of the vehicles but first to richardson on what went down at the capitol. >> get apology from the ceo who promise to get to the bottom of this end up number of references to the ongoing investigation gm is conducting to figure out what happened the questions that you asked the ceo could not is a them but referred to the ongoing investigation she even to make available to congress or the up public. number of lawmakers were frustrated with mary barra some of the words that they used to describe the new gm is overwhelmed. >> we will not except parts that don't meet your ability to function ability requirements. >> just answer that gobbled the coup that is not and acceptable answers river did you review the documents? >> no i did not. there were over 200,000. >> could do what when? that includes

the notion that there's an old gm and a new gm. it's important in the hearing to actually understand that what had happened at gm since the bankruptcy in terms of this issue, they had one of their lead engineers lie under oath last april and was confronted with the clear evidence that there had been a cover-up, and he had lied. he is still working there today. it took them almost a year to issue a recall. and that's all the new gm. so i think there's tough questions that need to be answered that she's not going to be able to avoid by just saying, "i'm waiting for the investigation." >> you feel like there's a cover -- i'm struck by the fact that she says she didn't know about this until 2014, basically the day she took over in january 2014. that seems mind boggling. it does sound like if only a small group of people knew about this, doesn't that scream cover-up to you? >> well, i think that's exactly what happened here. i think -- the interesting thing is, mary barra came from the engineering sector. she is an engineer. and what th

i'm learning that this is the new gm, this isn't the old gm. the new gm means post bankruptcy and they don't want to recognize liabilities from before they filed the bankruptcy in 2009. and so now i understand now i understand the testimony in more clarity since they clarified they aren't going to recognize. i wish they would change their decision on it. >> wouldn't that unleash terrible pr assault on the company? >> it will create more lawsuits. traditional rank ruptcy laws therefore it should be wiped out. the reality is there is many exceptions to that and hiding liabilities is one of those. >> what are you looking to come out of this? what is your goal in terms of the liability for gm. >> if it comes out that gm knew of this defect and made decisions that it was not cost effective, because some of our early doum reviews is showing in 2004 they knew there was a defect yet they said that it wasn't a business model that worked to change it out. that shows me there might be a light here. i want gm to survive this. i think they will hurt this re

new gm versushe old gm debate.hey were putting money in the product and rewarded with that in the show room sticker. >> we have less than a minute left. i want to get back to mr. stevens because he declined to forecast future recall related cost. he said the charges we have taken are based on what we know today. , wedded as issues come up will deal with them aggressively and put our customers first. there's something in the translation there that there's the possibility they may be dealing with this for some time, maybe a bit longer than they thought. >> i will tell you what we have in our model. we have the 1.3 billion this quarter and then we are putting in about 2 billion to 3 billion this year. .eally for the litigation typically, companies don't want to include things like a federal fine. when i heard them say that, there may be some cost but it is not appropriate to comment on. thank you. up next, we will get you and on the markets up eight for this thursday. ♪ >> coming up on 26 minutes past the hour, that m

how did gm get to this point and what happens next? >> i think this extraordinary commitment is still needed and will be for sometime. >> with those words from janet yellen, stocks took off with a triple digit gain on the dow. >> cutting cholesterol, a new and promising weapon against the fight of cardiovascular disease and the makers we bind it. >>> the devastating problems general motors has gotten worse. gm expects to take a massive 750 million dollars charge this quarter for the cost of recalling and repairing 1.5 million cars with faulty ignition switches. that's on top of a new recall for 1.3 million recalls that may see a sudden loss of power steering and another late recall friday of trucks and suvs for potential problems with transmission coolant lines. the cheer checktive mary barra will testify on capitol hill. late today's her repaired remarks were released and says the auto maker holds itself fully accountable but can't say why it took so long to identify them. with families of the victims expected at tuesday's hearing, lo

i think most gm dealers or all gm deal remembers schooled to handle that.dition you know how the media are. they very often focus on the bad stuff. do you think they will focus on the five who come in for alternate vehicles, rather than the 999 that are fine? liz: hold on a second, david. the president is coming out to the rose garden to make a statement on the affordable care act. let's take it now to the president. >> welcome to the white house. six months ago today, a big part of the affordable care act kicked in as healthcare.gov and state insurance marketplaces went live. and millions of americans finally had the same chance to buy quality, affordable health care, and the peace of mind that comes with it as everybody else. last night the first open enrollment period under this law came to an end. and despite several lost weeks out of the gate debecause of problems with the website, 7.1 million americans have now signed up for private insurance plans through these marketplaces. [applause] 7.1. yeah. [cheers and applause] the truth is even more folks wan

berra was gm of global product development. gm has not got back to us about that particular claim. that issue barra was aware in 2011 was completely separate from the ignition issue. that tweet going out a couple of minutes ago. barra testified on capitol hill she had no prior knowledge of that ignition problem. federal government gave gm $50 billion in a bailout with a loss of more than $10 billion. gerri. gerri: rich, we spent a lot of time looking at 2011 tweet, that gm says something different entirely what we're talking about the with the gm recalls, it is surprising because the email itself resends a "new york times" story and it describes the recall that we're discussing. then on top of it, there is internal email from, one of the workers there saying, whoa oh, we took care of this. now we took a look at mary barra's comments in front of congress and she said she acted without hesitation. seems like it is at least possible at this point she knew about this far in advance, as long ago as 2011? >> well what the company is saying it is entirely separate issue. that this had to

they want gm held accountable for this. now last night the ceo of gm met with the family members. we are told it was a very emotional meeting. some were holding up fe photos of loved ones and mary got emotional herself and apologized again on behalf of general motors. she's candid in saying they don't have a good explanation of why they took so long to order a recall. so i think today you'll hear mary put on the hot seat by both republicans and democrats and also hear the head of the national highway safety administration the regulator why didn't they act? why didn't they take the information they were getting, complaints about gm cars and act on it. none of those rose to the level of a recall. but you have an awful lot of people who are very angry demanding answers and now the impact on general motors, the number two auto maker in the united states, is profound from a financial stand poind and in terms of losing customer loyalty and customers who simply believe that general motors would do the right thing. >> tom and gabe, we should point out that mary barra, we know she is going