tv Around the World CNN June 7, 2013 9:00am-10:01am PDT
for insurance. but obviously a lot of questions that the reporters have. we don't know whether or not if he'll take them or about the widespread reports of the administration listening in or at least collecting -- not listening in but collecting phone records through verizon. >> yeah. john king's standing by. john, in the context of what this is meant to be about today, are we likely to be hearing anything about the elephant in the room? >> well, the main event, michael and suzanne, is about health care. then the president goes on the main reason he's in california, very important, very sensitive meetings with the president of china. but as you know, washington and the country is now having this big privacy debate. we know the administration because of some controlled leaks in recent days is now having broad access to telephone records, e-mail records, even to credit card transactions, "the wall street journal" says. remember, this is a president who said when he took office he said especially in the campaign back in to e 2008 that he
thought the george w. bush administration had gone too far and now eight, ten, 11 years after 9/11 it was a time to step back and reconsider what we're doing. well, today, george w. bush and dick cheney are saying i told you so because they predicted when this administration came to power and look at the issues and would continue many of the programs. now they have expanded them and you have this interesting collection of criticism. libertarians, republicans, liberal democrats saying mr. president, you've gone too far -- >> john, the president is about to speak now. let's listen in. >> i just wanted to see all of you. and i want to thank everybody who's here. i think there's only one problem, and that is that my remarks are not sitting here. you know, things by friday afternoon -- things get a little challenged. i'm going to have a -- i'm going to answer a question at the end of the remarks, but i want to
make sure we get the remarks out. people? oh, goodness. oh, somebody's tripping. folks are sweating back there right now. well, good morning everybody. this afternoon i'm going to be in southern california to meet with president xi of china. before i leave northern california, i wanted to take a minute to address something that's happening with the affordable care act in this state. and i wanted to meet with the group of people who are doing some very important work on behalf of california's middle class families. these leaders from california's government, the california endowment and major spanish language media outlets have joined together to help implement the affordable care act here in california and to educate folks about how to sign up and shop for quality
affordable plans. and their efforts have already shown some excellent results in the biggest insurance market in the country. there are two things people need to know. first of all, if you're nearly one of the 85% of americans who already have insurance, either through medicare or medicaid or your employer, you don't have to do a thing. you've just got a wide array of new benefits, better protections and stronger cost controls that you didn't have before and that will over time improve the quality of the insurance that you've got. benefits like free preventive care, checkups, flu shots, mammograms and contraception. you are now going to be able to get those things through your insurance where they previously were not -- didn't have to be provided. protections like allowing people up to the age of 26 to stay on
their parents' health care plans, which has already helped six million americans including six million young latino americans. cost controls like requiring insurance companies to spend at least 80% of the money that you pay in premiums in your actual health care costs as opposed to administrative costs or ceo pay. not overhead, but that money has to be spent on you. and if they don't meet that target, they actually have to reimburse you. so in california we're already getting reports that insurers are giving rebates to consumers and small business owners to the tune of $45 million this year. so already we're seeing millions of dollars of rebates sent back to consumers by insurance companies as a consequence of this law. all of that is happening because of the affordable care act. all of this is in place right
now already for 85% of americans who have health insurance. by the way, all of this is what the republican party has now voted 37 times to repeal, at least in the house of representatives. and my suggestion to them has been, let's stop refighting the old battles and start working with the people like the leaders who are on stage here today to make this law work the way it's supposed to. we're focused on moving forward and making sure that this law works for middle class families. and that brings me to the second thing that people need to know about the affordable care act. if you're one of nearly six million californians or tens of millions of americans who don't currently have health insurance, you'll soon be able to buy quality affordable care just like everybody else. here's how, states like california are setting up new online marketplaces where beginning on october 1st of this year you can comparison shop an
array of private health insurance plans side-by-side just like you were going online to compare cars or airline tickets. and that means insurance companies will actually have to compete with each other for your business. and that means new choices. see, right now most states don't have a lot of competition. in nearly every state more than half of all consumers are covered by only two insurers. so there's no incentive to provide you a lot of choices or to keep costs down. the affordable care act changes that. beginning next year once these marketplaces are open, most states will offer new private insurance choices that don't exist today. based on early reports about nine in ten americans expected to enroll in these marketplaces live in states where they'll be able to choose between five or more different insurers. so, for example, here in
california 33 insurers applied to join the marketplace, covered california then selected 13 based on access, quality and affordability. four of which are brand-new to your individual market. so what's happening is through the affordable care act we're creating these marketplaces with more competition, more choice. so the question is what happens to cost? now, a lot of the opponents of the affordable care act said, you know, they had all kinds of skies falling, doom and gloom predictions that not only would the law fail, but what we'd also see is costs would skyrocket for everybody. turns out we're actually seeing that in the states that have committed themselves to implementing this law correctly, we're seeing some good news. competition and choice are pushing down costs in the individual market just like the law was designed to do.
the 13 insurance companies that were chosen by covered california have unveiled premiums that were lower than anybody expected. and those who can't afford to buy private insurance will get help reducing their out of pocket premiums even further with the largest health care tax cut for working families and small businesses in our history. so about 2.6 million californians, nearly half of whom are latinos will qualify for tax credits that will in some cases lower their premiums a significant amount. now, none of this is a surprise. this is the way the law was designed to work. but since everybody's been saying how it's not going to happen, i think it's important for us to recognize and acknowledge this is working the way it's supposed to. we've seen similar good news, by the way not just here in california, but in oregon and washington. in states that are working hard to implement this law properly we're seeing it work for people,
for middle class families, for consumers. that's not to say everything's going to go perfectly right away. when you're implementing a program this large, there will be some glitches. there are going to be some hiccups. but no matter what every single consumer will be covered by the new benefits and protections under this law permanently. bottom line is you can listen to a bunch of political talk out there, negative ads and fear mo mongering geared towards the next election, or you can actually take a look at what's happening in states like california right now. the fact of the matter is through these exchanges, not only are the 85% of people who already have health insurance getting better protections and receiving rebates and being able to keep their kids on their health insurance until they're 26 and getting free preventive care, but if you don't have health insurance and you're trying to get it through the individual market and it's too expensive or it's too
restricted, you now have these marketplaces where they're going to offer you a better deal because of choice in competition. even if those lower rates and better insurance that you're getting through these marketplaces, you still can't afford it. you're going to be getting tax cuts and tax credits through the affordable care act that will help you afford itd. that's how we're going to make sure millions of people who don't currently have health insurance or getting a really bad deal on their health insurance are finally going to get it. here's my final point, to take advantage of these marketplaces, folks are going to need to sign up. so you can find out how to sign up at healthcare.gov, or here in california you can sign up at coveredca.com. coveredca.com. because quality care is not something that should be a privilege, it should be a right
in the greatest country on earth we've got to make sure that every single person that needs health care can get it. and we've got to make sure that we do it in the most efficient way possible. one last point i'm going to make on this because there are a lot of people who currently get health insurance through their employers, the 85% who are already out there, and they may be saying, well, if this law's so great, why is it that my premium still went up? well, part of what's happening across the country is in some cases for example employers may be shifting more costs through higher premiums or higher co-pays there may still be folks out there feeling increased costs not because of the affordable care act because those costs are being passed down from insurers or companies
still jacking up prices unnecessarily. this doesn't solve the whole problem, but it moves us in the right direction. it's also the reason why we have to keep on implementing changes in hour our health care system works to continually drive better efficiency, higher quality, lower cost. we're starting to see that health care cost inflation has gone up at the lowest rate over the last three years that we've seen in many, many years. so we're making progress in actually reducing overall health care costs while improving quality. but we're going to have to continue to push on that front as well. that's also part of what we're doing in the affordable care act. the main message i want for californians and people all across the country starting on october 1 st if you're in the individual market, you can get a better deal. if you're a small business that's providing health insurance to your employees, you can get a better deal through these exchanges. you've got to sign up. healthcare.gov or here in california coveredca.com.
all right? thank you very much. i'm going to take one question and then remember people are going to have opportunities to also answer questions when i'm with the chinese president today. so i don't want the whole day to just be a bleeding press conference. i'm going to take jackie's question. >> mr. president, could you please react to the reports of secret government surveillance with phone and internet? and can you also assure americans that your government doesn't have a massive secret database of all their personal online information? >> yeah. you know, when i came into this office, i made two commitments that are more important than any commitment i make. number one, to keep the american people safe. number two, to uphold the constitution. that includes what i consider to be a constitutional right to privacy and an observance of
civil liberties. now, the programs that have been discussed over the last couple of days in the press are secret in the sense that they're classified. but they're not secret in the sense that when it comes to telephone calls, every member of congress has been briefed on this program. with respect to all these programs, the relevant intelligence committees are fully briefed on these programs. these are programs that have been authorized by broad bipartisan majorities repeatedly since 2006. and so i think at the outset it's important to understand that your dually elected representatives have been consistently informed on exactly what we're doing. now, let me take the two issues
separately. when it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls. that's not what this program's about. as was indicate d what the intelligence community is doing is looking at phone numbers and durations of calls. they are not looking at people's names. and they're not looking at content. but by sifting through this so-called metadata, they may identify potential leads with respect to folks who might engage in terrorism. if these folks -- if the intelligence community then actually wants to listen to a phone call, they've got to go back to a federal judge. just like they would in a
criminal investigation. so i want to be very clear, some of the hype that we've been hearing over the last day or so, nobody's listening to the content of people's phone calls. this program, by the way, is fully overseen not just by congress but by the fiza court. a court specially put together to evaluate classified programs to make sure that the executive branch or government generally is not abusing them and that it's being carried out consistent with the constitution and rule of law. and so not only does that court authorize the initial gathering of data, but i want to repeat if anybody in government wanted to go further than just that top line data and for example wanted
to listen to jackie combs phone call, they'd have to go back to a federal judge and indicate why in fact they were doing further probing. now, with respect to the internet and e-mails, this does not apply to u.s. citizens. and it does not apply to people living in the united states. in this instance not only congress is apprised of it, but what also is true is the fiza court has to authorize it. so in summary what you've got is two programs that were originally authorized by congress, have been repeatedly authorized by congress bipartisan majorities have approved them, congress is
continually briefed on how these are conducted, there are a whole range of safeguards involved and federal judges are overseeing the entire program throughout. we're also setting up -- we've also set up an audit process when i came into office to make sure that we're after the fact making absolutely certain that all the safeguards are being properly observed. now, having said all that, you'll remember when i made that speech a couple of weeks ago about the need for us to shift out of a perpetual mindset. i specifically said one of the things we're going to have to discuss and debate is how are we striking this balance between the need to keep the american people safe and our concerns about privacy. because there are some
trade-offs involved. i welcome this debate. and i think it's healthy for our democracy. i think it's a sign of maturity because probably five years ago, six years ago, we might not have been having this debate. i think it's interesting that there are some folks on the left, but also some folks on the right who are now worried about it who weren't very worried about it when it was a republican president. i think that's good that we're having this discussion. but i think it's important for everybody to understand, and i think the american people understand, that there are some trade-offs involved. you know, i came in with a healthy skepticism about these programs. my team evaluated them, we scrubbed them thoroughly. we actually expanded some of the oversight, increased some of the
safeguards. but my assessment and my team's assessment was that they help us prevent terrorist attacks. and the modest encroachments on privacy that are involved in getting phone numbers or duration without a name attached and not looking at content that on, you know, net, it was worth us doing. some other folks may have a different assessment of that. but i think it's important to recognize that you can't have 100% security and also then have 100% privacy and zero
inconvenience. we're going to have to make some choices as a society. and in evaluating these programs they make a difference -- to anticipate and prevent possible terrorist activity. and the fact that they're under very strict supervision by all three branches of government and that they do not involve listening to people's phone calls, do not involve reading the e-mails of u.s. citizens or u.s. residents, absent further action by a federal court that is entirely consistent with what we would do, for example, in a criminal investigation. i think on balance we, you know, we have established a process
and a procedure that the american people should feel comfortable about. but, again, these programs are subject to congressional oversight and congressional reauthorization and congressional debate. if there are members that feel differently, then they should speak up. and we're happy to have that debate. okay? we'll have a chance to talk further during the course of the next couple days. thank you, guys. thank you. i don't welcome leaks because there's a reason why these programs are classified. i think that there is a suggestion that somehow any classified program is a
quote/unquote secret program that means it's somehow suspicious. but the fact of the matter is in our modern history there are a whole range of programs that have been classified because when it comes to, for example, fighting terror, our goal is to stop folks from doing us harm. and if every step that we're taking to try to prevent a terrorist act is on the front page of the newspapers or on television, then presumably the people who are trying to do us harm are going to be able to get around our preventive measures. that's why these things are classified. but, that's why we also set up congressional oversight. the folks you all vote for as your representatives in congress and they're being fully briefed on these programs.
and if in fact there was -- there were abuses taking place presumably, those members of congress could raise those issues very aggressively. they're empowered to do so. we also have federal judges that we've put in place who are not subject to political pressure, they've got lifetime tenure as federal judges and they're empowered to look over our shoulder at the executive branch to make sure that these programs aren't being abused. so we have a system in which some information is classified. and we have a system of checks and balances to make sure that it's not abused. if in fact this information ends up just being dumped out
willy-nilly without regard to risks to the program, risks to the people involved, in some cases on other leaks risks to personnel in very dangerous situations, but it's very hard for us to be as effective in protecting the american people. that's not to suggest that, you know, you just say trust me, we're doing the right thing. we know who the bad guys are. and the reason of that's not how it works is because we've got congressional oversight and judicial oversight. and if people can't trust not only the executive branch but also don't trust congress and don't trust federal judges to make sure that we're abiding by the constitution, due process and rule of law, then we're going to have some problems here. but my observation is is that
the people who are involved in america's national security, they take this work very seriously. they cherish our constitution. the last thing they'd be doing is taking programs like this to listen to somebody's phone calls. and by the way, with respect to my concerns about privacy issues, i will leave this office at some point, some time in the next three and a half years. and after that i will be a private citizen. and i suspect that, you know, on a list of people who might be targeted, you know, so somebody could read their e-mails or listen to their phone calls, i'd probably be pretty high on that list. it's not as if i don't have a personal interest in making sure my privacy's protected. but i know that the people who
are involved this these programs, they operate like professionals. and these things are very narrowly snarro narrownarro narrowly circumscribed. in the abstract you can complain about big brother and how this is a potential, you know, program run amuck, but when you actually look at the details, then i think we've struck the right balance. thank you very much, guys. that's it. thank you. >> the president of the united states walking off stage there in san jose, california, a health care event. but what the president ended up talking most about at the end he said he would take one, he came back for a second question about big news in the headlines in recent days. government eavesdropping, government surveillance, government gathering you might say millions of phone calls and e-mail records and "the wall street journal" reports credit
card tractions as well. i'm john king in washington. let's discuss what we just heard with candy crowley, jessica yellin in california with the president. jess, i want to start with the very telling moment. the president said he was going to take one question, he gave a very lengthy answer about the surveillance programs, defending them saying this is a necessary tool, not big brother gone wild. he said he welcomed the debate. and as he walked off stage he was asked do you welcome the leaks, because these are secret classified programs. this information now thrust into the public debate. he came back to answer that one. break down the difference between welcoming the debate but not the leaks. >> john, i'm not surprised by anything the president said today or by his sort of comfort with this program. he has been stall worth all along in saying he thinks government has a role in changing the way privacy is defined these days, essentially in protecting our security. and that is the difference for him between discussing, debating
this program and leaks. as we've seen throughout the debate about national security leaks, especially with attorney general holder, this president abhors leaks. and he has been aggressive in prosecuting or seeking to prosecute people who have leaked from inside the government and his attorney general's been aggressive about going after sources of leaks, continues to do so as we know. but the president a constitutional law professor formally enjoys the discussion, it doesn't seem to keep him though from engaging in the practice. he is continuing the bush-era surveillance program, updated as you have noted in an unabashed way. and he is not ambivalent about this. and it doesn't seem to bother him or his administration because they think that they are proper guardians of these -- of our privacy and that they are handling it within the rule of law. as you know, congress reauthorized this law just last december, john.
>> candy, help me though. if he welcomed this debate, he mentioned his speech he gave a few weeks back at national defense university that was largely about the drone program and he gave that speech and he specifically focused a lot on the drone program after the administration came under so much criticism for its use of the drones and its definition of how it could use the drones. the president only touched on surveillance in that speech very briefly. he did say this telling line about america being at a cross roads a dozen years after 9/11. the president said we must define the nature and scope of this struggle, or else it will define us. in some ways aren't these leaks defining this for the president? if he welcomed this debate, why didn't he initiate it before somebody leaked it against him? >> because the fact is if it comes in, this president has an agenda he'd like to get to in the second term. and it's proving difficult because he has been interrupted by any number of things. and this is the latest interruption. it is also an uncomfortable conversation, i think, for this administration. precisely because when he was
campaigning, he criticized george w. bush -- then-president george w. bush and said you don't have to give up. this is a false choice between civil liberties and security. but you just heard him say, yes, we're going to have to give some things up for security. and it's the difference between campaigning and being president. things just look different when you get into the oval office. the whole weight of trying to keep the country secure does, i think, really feel on their shoulders and fall on their shoulders. so i do think this is a president who clearly has changed his mind around the nuances of a program that is going to necessarily infringe on what some people think are civil rights. and let's face it, you know, although he said, oh, gosh, this is a different debate and these republicans didn't seem to have a problem when george bush did it. the fact is libertarians and progressives always had a problem with the patriot act. and they will continue to have a problem. and this re-emerges that
argument. i don't think he probably welcomes it because he'd rather be talking about other things. but i think, as jessica said, he's quite clearly ready to defend it. >> and he is defending it. >> john, can i just -- >> hang on just one second for me, jessica. i know as people watch this conversation, they just heard the president essentially say, awe, shucks, trust me the government is doing this in a responsible way. millions of phone calls being tracked, metadata the president says people tracking who's calling whom, only with probable cause they can go back to court. let's listen again to the key part from the president of the united states, not so much the conversation in washington but the conversation you might be having around your dinner table or office today about whether the government is listening to you. >> when it comes to telephone calls, nobody is listening to your telephone calls. that's not what this program's about. as was indicate d what the intelligence community is doing
is looking at phone numbers and durations of calls. they are not looking at people's names. and they're not looking at content. >> jessica yellin, the president tried to assure people we're doing something careful, cautious, regulated and supervised. we're not listening to you when you call your grandmother, when you call your spouse, when you call a friend. we're only doing this if we absolutely have to. but some members of his own party in congress are the ones complaining saying mr. president as you've expanded these programs, we think you have gone a bit too far. >> this, john, goes back to the fundamental disconnect between people who voted for the obama they wanted and then got a different president. he was never a bleeding heart liberal. he was never a libertarian. he voted in favor of the fiza reauthorization in 2008 for the law that allowed bush to
continue part of his program. so people who supported thought they were getting a liberal obama who would fight these measures didn't -- saw what they wanted to see. the president talks about transparency and talks about protecting privacy, but you have to watch what he does and hoe e how he votes and the measures he supports. and, you know, he's changed many of bush's policies. he ended the war in iraq. he does not send detainees still to gitmo. but he finds himself today saying exactly what president bush said many years ago when bush was defending the nsa wiretapping program, which is we're not listening to your phone calls. i mean, i bet we could put video side by side they said the same thing. and sometimes president obama engages in transparency only when his hand is forced. >> a bit of an i told you so moment, candy, for george w. bush and dick cheney who predicted this administration would get into office, read the daily intelligence programs and
keep many of the programs. let me ask this, candy, the president says essentially we're doing this in a safe responsible way and then condemns the leaks. at a time people are seeing this administration subpoenaing, tracking news reporters records to try to track down the leaks, does that add their apples and oranges to a degree, but does the aggressive government role, does it add to the suspicions people will have about are they really not listening to my phone call, are they really not going into my e-mails in a way that oversteps hunting for terrorists? >> i do think it still goes to the trust issue. and it's very hard to govern whether you're a congresswoman or senator or president if people don't trust your judgment. essentially you heard what the president said. you elected us, you need to trust us, we're doing this within the confines of the law, i'm very protective of both civil rights as well as civil liberties, et cetera, et cetera. but i do think that it's a
complicated subject and it's a nuance subject. that doesn't always play well on talk radio. it doesn't always play well with those who are worried about this what they think is overreach. i don't think it's the depth. certainly our conversation and the conversation i've seen most people reporting this it's not about they're listening to your phone calls. it's been very clear they simply have numbers. nobody said they're listening -- at least as far as i'm heard i'm sure somebody got it wrong, but the fact is this is a huge cash of information. and it's not even just do you trust the president, it's do you trust the next president, do you trust the next head of the fbi? so i think people are asking those questions and balancing what's worth it and what isn't. >> whether the president truly welcomes it or not it is a debate worth having. candy crowley, jessica yellin, thanks for your help here. this will continue between the president and his chinese counterpart. "around the world" with suzanne malveaux and michael holmes after the break.
welcome back to "around the world." tropical storm andrea creating dangerous conditions along the east coast. right now it is moving over the carolinas bringing heavy rain and strong winds to the central and eastern parts of the states. >> in florida, andrea took a violent turn though. tornadoes damaged homes, injured at least one person. chad myers tracking the storm from the cnn weather center. chad, where's it headed now? >> well, headed through the
carolinas with rain all the way to d.c., new york city, philadelphia, even boston at this hour. so there you see the heavy rain. now, this isn't going to be a major rainmaker. we did have four to six inches across the deep south. but now the storm has really picked up speed. now it's moving northeast at 28. that's such a difference compared to where we were yesterday, which was northeast at 15. so you get half as much rain if the storm's moving twice as fast because it gets out of there quicker. still flood watches from providence, boston, all the way down to new york city. two to four inches of rainfall expected. turn around, don't drown. get out of there. go a different way. find a different road. simple as that. it's not going to be a great flood threat like sandy or irene, but this is going to move to sea and be gone by tomorrow afternoon. and maybe the belmont will dry out by about 10:00 or 12:00 for the horses that are going to try to run around that maybe possibly muddy track. we'll see. you know where my mind's at. >> i know what you're thinking about. exactly. i'm with you. folks in central europe are
bracing for more rain, this is after days of deadly floods in in parts of germany, czech republic. 15 people have died. there's hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. matthew chance captured exclusive pictures of the damage. this is in dresden, germany. >> as bad as it looks, flood defenses around the swollen river actually saved that city. the danube river also surging threatening now to reach its highest level ever in hungary. that crest sort of moving down the river towards the coast. and turkey's prime minister standing by his riot police and his government's handling of a weeklong protest that swept through his country. he spoke to a european conference today in istanbul. he said he's not against democracy, he's against terror and vandalism. said his security forces handled the protests better than other european countries would have.
>> the violent street fighting of course grew out of a protest over plans to tear up a park, one of the last green spaces in istanbul and build a new development including a shopping mall. two people died. a policeman also died. 4,000 were hurt over several days and nights of demonstrations. >> and britain's prince philip, the queen's husband, will spend his 92nd birthday in the hospital. the duke is expected to have exploratory surgery on his abdomen today we're told. might stay in the hospital for two weeks. >> this is an operation that bucking ham palace says was pre-arranged, not an e emergency. his birthday, his 92nd on monday in the hospital. >> all right. and you just heard president obama wrapping up his health care speech a short time ago in california, but also talking about all of the reports regarding the phone calls and the internet, whether or not the united states government is
spying on its citizens. the president is going to go onto focus on china, that is later today. >> he is. the knew chinese president's going to be his first face-to-face meeting with xi jinping going to happen this afternoon at an estate near palm springs. a weekend summit designed to be pretty informal, designed to get to know you. >> a lot of speculation about why the first lady's decided to skip that trip. erin mcpike, she's got that. >> it's being billed as a sign of progress for american and chinese diplomacy. these two major world leaders rolling up their sleeves and building a personal relationship. the chinese president will be bringing along his wife. like michelle obama, pang is considered a rock star in china. except pang actually is a rock star. but she won't be serenading
michelle obama. president obama is going it alone, meaning there will be no facetime for the first ladies. it's a curious turn. first ladies entertaining other first ladies is customary for many major state visits. there are mixed reactions on chinese social media about mrs. obama's decision to stay home. one said because our first lady is so pretty that she was scared to show up? another, why disappointed? it is for sure understandable that she put family and her kids in the first place. also, she's a mom in the first place, then the first lady. still, critics say that's a mistake for the white house as it tries to thaw tensions with the chinese. >> whether this kind of a political gesture from the u.s. or part of a disrespect and people in china will think, you know, this may not be just a family matter. >> cheng lee studies
u.s.-chinese relations for the brookings institute. >> it's unfortunate that the first lady will not be there otherwise would be a perfect story, a double date. >> the white house says the first lady is staying home to tend to her job as mom and chief. sasha obama's 12th birthday is monday. >> all right. erin mcpike joins us from washington. so, are they accepting that explanation? i mean, sasha's birthday. come on. >> well, suzanne, the white house said to me yesterday that when the meetings were set up with the chinese, the chinese counterparts were perfectly aware michelle obama would not be able to make it. and they say they've gotten no complaints, although obviously the chinese are disappointed that michelle obama won't be able to attend. they're satisfied that these meetings are happening anyway. and, suzanne, let me also point out, you know full well from covering the white house that president obama has gotten some praise over time for how he's managed the chinese relationship. so generally they're excited about these meetings this weekend. >> all right. erin, thank you.
the first lady, she gets a lot of attention. people love her when she goes overseas. >> the distraction. >> they are going to miss out. >> exactly. now, he's a 60-something newly single russian male, he does a little judo, he likes to ride motorcycles, shoot bears and go hang gliding, lots of shirt off stuff. >> all right. ladies, vladimir putin on the market. that story up ahead. i don't make any decisions about who to hire without going to angie's list first. you'll find reviews on home repair to healthcare written by people just like you. with angie's list, i know who to call, and i know the results will be fantastic. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. grrrrreat outdoors, and a great deal. ahhh let's leave the deals to hotels.com. perfect! yep, and no angry bears. up to 30% off. only at hotels.com.
foour neighbors.... and our communities... america's beverage companies have created... a wide range of new choices. developing smaller portion sizes and more.. low and no-calorie beverages... adding clear calorie labels so you know... exactly what you're choosing... and in schools, replacing full-calorie soft drinks... with lower-calorie options. with more choices and fewer calories... america's beverage companies are delivering.
welcome back to "around the world." the united nations today launched its biggest-ever humanitarian appeal in its history. now, this is for the people of syria whose lives of course have been wrecked by their country's civil war. the u.n. estimates half of syria's population -- you're talking 10.5 million people, will be in need of some sort of aid by the end of this year. >> so far the u.n.'s refugee agency says it has received $1 billion to help them. needs $4 billion more. officials say 1.6 million syrian refugees are being hosted across five countries.
they actually expect that number to more than double to 3.4 million. and they say twice that many people will be displaced inside of the country as well. we want to do a quick check on the markets right now. you see the dow up 159. >> a whole percentage point on the day. that's that jobs report. i guess it came out this morning. the may jobs report showed unemployment rate is up, but only just 0.01%. >> 175,000 jobs were added in may. that's actually more than analysts expected. better than we did in april. let's bring in alison kosik from the new york stock exchange. what do we make of these numbers here? >> yeah. big jump. >> it was designed, suzanne and michael, the jobs report is good improved from april. but it's just not exceptional. it's still just kind of average when you look at how job growth has been over the past three years. yes, the unemployment rate ticked up to 7.6%. that's because more people jumped back in to look for a job. that's good, but the problem is
a lot of them they haven't gotten a job yet. now, the market as you can see up in the triple digits here with the dow up 164 points. the market's taking it well. stocks still a bit all over the place this week with investors worried about whether the federal reserve is going to begin to pull back on its economic stimulus. with the jobs number, investors wanted it to be good, maybe not too good. so this may have hit the sweet spot. that's not to say wall street wouldn't have welcomed a bigger improvement for jobs, but it looks like the status quo seems to be sitting pretty well with the market today. suzanne, michael. >> all right. alison, thank you. appreciate it. great news. >> it is, indeed. russian president vladimir putin and his wife calling it quits. a lot of people did expect this really. 30 years of marriage nearly. >> all right. so we got to say this. all the single ladies out there, not going to want to miss this one. we're going to take you live to moscow right after this. [ female announcer ] everything that goes into a lennox system
and humidity or the parts that purify the air. together, these parts can cut your heating and cooling bills in half. which is quite comforting. and here's the best part... call now to get up to sixteen hundred dollars back or 12 months deferred interest on select lennox home comfort systems. offer ends june 14th. plus download our free lennox mobile app with an energy-savings calculator. ♪ if your current system is 10 years or older, start planning now. and take advantage of special financing. so call now to get up to sixteen hundred dollars back. or 12 months deferred interest on select lennox home comfort systems. offer ends june 14th. and download our free lennox mobile app. ♪ lennox. innovation never felt so good.
private life of russian president vladimir putin just went public. here's our phil black in moscow. >> it started as a pretty ordinary russian version of date night, going to the ballet. but there's never been anything ordinary about russia's first couple. during a break they walked into an empty room to stand in front of a camera and review the show. excellent, they said. then the reporter asked a question many russians have been wondering about for a long time. is it true you no longer live together? >> translator: this is true. all my activities and work are related with the publicity, with the total publicity. some like it. some don't. >> not the clearest answer. so lyudmila putin had to spell it out. >> translator: our marriage is over because vladimir is completely engaged in his work,
our children are grown up, they're living their own lives. we're happy we have our own lives. >> this break-up appearance is the first time they've been seen together since putin's inauguration as president over a year ago. over the 13 years he has dominated political life in this country, sightings of his wife had become increasingly rare. in 2008 a moscow newspaper reported he was planning to divorce her and marry the russian olympic gymnast. putinrily denied that and the newspaper shut down a short time later. this time lyudmila explained she doesn't like flying or publicity. that had to be a big problem if you're married to a man famous for traveling across the world's largest country attracting lots of attention with highly publicized tough-go stance. despite the differences the marriage lasted just short of 30 years. they have two adult daughters.
lyudmila putin says her soon-to-be ex-husband is a great father and someone she'll always be great to. >> interesting date night. go to the ballet and announce you split up. that will do it for me. thanks for watching "around the world." >> "cnn newsroom" starts right after this break. some brokerage firms are. but way too many aren't. why? because selling their funds makes them more money. which makes you wonder -- isn't that a conflict? search "proprietary mutual funds." yikes! then go to e-trade. we've got over 8,000 mutual funds, and not one of them has our name on it. we're in the business of finding the right investments for you. e-trade. less for us. more for you. the fund's prospectus contains its investment objectives, risks, charges, expenses, and other important information and should be read and considered carefully before investing. for a current prospectus, visit etrade.com/mutualfunds. if you have high cholesterol, here's some information that may be worth looking into. in a clinical trial versus lipitor, crestor got more high-risk patients' bad cholesterol to a goal of under 100. getting to goal is important,
especially if you have high cholesterol plus any of these risk factors because you could be at increased risk for plaque buildup in your arteries over time. and that's why when diet and exercise alone aren't enough to lower cholesterol i prescribe crestor. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. is your cholesterol at goal? ask your doctor about crestor. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
nobody is listening to your telephone calls. that's not what this program's about. >> president obama speaking out about the massive government surveillance programs and says that your privacy is safe. storm andrea is not over yet. the risk of flash flooding all along the east coast. also, unemployment is up. and the stock market is now reacting. what it means for your wallet. this is "cnn newsroom." i'm suzanne malveaux. the president responding now to the growing