Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

WHO Reports Hantavirus Cases From Cruise Ship Rise to 11; Inflation Outpaces Americans' Paychecks for First Time in 3 Years; Future of OpenAI on the Line as CEO Sam Altman Testifies. Aired 3:30- 4p ET

Aired May 12, 2026 - 15:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[15:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: There's some new cases to report from the first known Hantavirus outbreak on a cruise ship. The World Health Organization says the total number of infections has climbed to 11, and that includes the three people who died after being on the cruise.

This just in, Kansas has now joined a string of states that are monitoring dozens of people for potential exposure. Most of them being monitored are passengers. A few cases, though, involve people who were not on the cruise but exposed to a confirmed case. In the last hour, a federal health official said a symptomatic person under watch in Georgia has tested negative.

Let's get some perspective now from infectious disease physician Dr. Fiona Havers. She's a former CDC official who resigned over concerns about Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Doctor, thank you so much for being with us. So we've heard Secretary Kennedy say that HHS has this outbreak under control. Do you agree with the Secretary?

DR. FIONA HAVERS, INFECTIOUS DISEASE PHYSICIAN AND FORMER CDC OFFICIAL: I mean, I think that CDC and other federal agencies are doing what needs to be done in this setting. Hantavirus, the anti- strain of the hantavirus that can spread between people is a dangerous virus, but it is not as transmissible as many other viruses. And I think what they're doing is, you know, the Americans that were brought back on an airplane yesterday, many of them are being quarantined.

They're being monitored closely. And I think public health officials are doing a good job so far.

SANCHEZ: The White House is pushing for a quick confirmation of President Trump's CDC nominee, Dr. Erica Schwartz. Is it a problem that there isn't a confirmed head of CDC during this outbreak?

HAVERS: Yes, I mean, I think it is generally been a problem that CDC has not had a director, basically, with the exception of a couple of weeks last summer for this entire administration. I think overall, while I said that this administration or like the current actions of the CDC officials and other officials seem appropriate in this setting, that does not mean that CDC and other public health agencies haven't been greatly weakened by the actions of this administration, including firing a lot of the senior leadership and experienced staff at CDC, you know, funding cuts, attacks on science-based policy processes, and other actions that this administration has taken.

[15:35:00]

SANCHEZ: So after several days of observation, officials are going to decide whether each of the 15 passengers should complete their 42-day monitoring period either at home or in medical facilities. How do they go about determining that?

HAVERS: Well, I think they were -- I think the general plan would be to interview the passengers, find out what kind of actual exposures they had to the other ill passengers that were on the cruise ship. That would kind of give people an assessment of whether or not they had a high, medium, or low-risk exposure. The other factors that might come into this would be, is if they go home, will they be able to be followed up fairly easily?

If they become sick, do they have access to medical facilities that can take care of them safely and quickly? Because with Hantavirus, you can be, you know, there's a long incubation period, so they might be completely fine for a while, then develop symptoms for a couple of days that are relatively mild, but then get suddenly very, very quickly very ill. And so they need, you know -- so I think there's a lot of factors that would affect that, sort of how likely is it that they actually got infected on the ship based on their exposures to the ill people that were other passengers?

And then also what kind of follow-up and monitoring and access to care would they have if they were to leave the current facilities?

SANCHEZ: Sure. So yesterday, Brianna interviewed Dr. Matt Slade, who's been working for years on an mRNA vaccine for Hantavirus, though to be clear, not the Andes strain. Last year, HHS announced that it would wind down investments in mRNA vaccine development.

Do we know what kind of impact that's had on the country's ability to combat not only Hantavirus, but other pathogens?

HAVERS: Yes, I mean, I think it was a huge mistake to do that. And I think that is one of the more damaging actions that this administration has taken. I think mRNA vaccines we saw, you know, were developed after years of investment in basic science, NIH research, and they allowed us to, during the COVID pandemic, to get vaccines to a brand new pathogen that we had not seen before out to the general public within a year, and they saved millions of lives.

They are a very flexible tool and critical for responding to emerging pathogens. And the fact that RFK Jr. cut $500 million of funding into mRNA research definitely leaves us less prepared for emerging threats like Hantavirus or another virus that could be coming along that could be causing the next pandemic.

SANCHEZ: Dr. Fiona Havers, we'll leave the conversation there. Thanks for the time.

HAVERS: Thank you very much for having me on.

SANCHEZ: Up next, inflation jumping to its highest level in three years, just as a new CNN poll shows that Americans are increasingly anxious about the high cost of living.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: The Iran war may be fueling inflation here in the U.S., but the president says Americans' anxiety over rising prices isn't a driver behind his considerations when it comes to making choices about the situation in Iran.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our inflation is just short term. Because if you go from before, just before the war, we were for the last three months 1.7 percent. And now what you have is as soon as this war is over, you're going to see inflation go down to probably one and a half percent. The only thing that matters when I'm talking about Iran, they can't have a nuclear weapon.

I don't think about America's financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: The president's comments come on the same day the Bureau of Labor Statistics says that inflation is rising faster than Americans' paychecks for the first time in three years.

Joining us now, finance expert and host of the Trading Secrets podcast, Jason Tartick. Jason, thanks for being with us.

As we see in this new CNN polling, Americans from all backgrounds name cost of living as their primary financial concern. People are worried about food, gas prices, and only about a third of Americans feel that they can comfortably afford an emergency expense of $1,000. I mean, it seems to be a warning sign for the future.

JASON TARTICK, FINANCE EXPERT AND HOST TRADING SECRETS PODCAST: Yes, I mean, thank you so much for having me. I think it is a warning sign. And I think consumers, you know, we're hearing that they want lower prices.

They want higher wage growth. But more than anything, I think they really want to be heard. They want to be represented.

And they want predictability. And I think that's one of the biggest struggles right now. And we know that markets love it, right?

Like we can move forward with clarity when we have predictability of what's to come. And right now, the reality is, like, we are in a financial conundrum. I think even the biggest economists out there are kind of even thinking, OK, what's going on here? We've got markets at all-time highs, but consumer sentiment is low. You've got corporate earnings outpacing all estimates. But wage growth in the last month is deteriorating and is less than inflation.

You've got youth unemployment dropping. It's higher than it's been. You know, they're looking for their jobs.

But we're seeing overall productivity increase. So it's a big financial conundrum in a lot of places right now. And there's a lot of people hurting. There's a lot of people scratching their head looking for answers.

KEILAR: And what is the Fed going to do, right? Because there's about to be a brand new Fed chair, Kevin Warsh. And as President Trump selected him, it was really clear that what he wants is a new Fed chair who is going to be more friendly to lowering interest rates.

[15:45:00]

And with the new CPI report with inflation at 3.8 percent, what kind of positions the new Fed chair in with that?

TARTICK: I mean, he's in a tough spot right now because he had, you know, inflation's at 3.8 percent, increase from 3.3 percent. And there's a big predicament here, right? Because as inflation goes up, we all know that to combat that inflation, interest rates have to go up.

And then you have the president who's telling us that he wants interest rates lower. So it kind of goes back to this financial conundrum that we're at. And the big question I'm looking at is there are all forms of inflation to look at.

There's all kinds of data to look at. And there's all kinds of angling and context for the conversation of what's going to happen and why it's going to happen. And I'm just curious to see with the new Fed chair in place, what are some of those answers?

What are the analytics that they're looking at? And how are they going to represent the masses, the American people right now that are dealing with the highest household debt that we've seen, over $18 trillion in quarter one 2026, right? How are we going to see change?

It also connects to, you know, student debt right now. 2.6 million student loans right now are 120 days past due. There are so many factors to consider.

Interest rates, of course, are one of them. But it looks like most people are factoring in at least one cut for 2026. But every bank has different estimates.

But you've got to factor inflation. And to battle inflation, you don't cut interest rates necessarily.

SANCHEZ: Given some of the stats that you just laid out, Jason, the public, it shouldn't surprise us, has held a negative view of the economy for five straight years, according to CNN's polling. It went south after COVID, never hasn't recovered. What kind of major change in the economy do you think would be necessary to reverse that trend?

TARTICK: I mean, listen, you know, people are feeling pain at the grocery stores. They're feeling pain at rent. They're feeling pain with insurance.

We know they're feeling pain at the pumps right now. And at this point, I think you got to control what you got to control. And we know that there are so many un-controllables. And like we started this segment, there's so much unpredictability.

And what I would say, we just saw Golden Temple come from last place to first place in the Kentucky Derby. I think what consumers have to do is stop looking for answers and start really fighting for their wallets.

It's like death by a thousand paper cuts right now, when people are getting their subscription increases just for streaming services. They're going to the pubs. They're going to the grocery stores. They're just feeling it in all different ways.

I think as opposed to looking to see what policy is going to change next, when we know that so much is unpredictable right now, more than ever, I think we have to look within, put our blinders up and focus on where we can reduce our spending, how we can increase our overall cash inflow. As inflation increases, how are we not adjusting our lifestyle with inflation?

And I think the best thing for us to do is look within in our own homes and our own spending and our own wage growth and how we're showing up every single day to our employer to advocate for ourselves and get paid more. And I think that's the best answer right now because the only change we know is constant and the only predictability we know with the markets and what's going to happen next is unpredictable. But what we can predict is our actions and what we do with our personal financial situations.

KEILAR: All right, good advice. Jason Tartick, thanks for being with us.

TARTICK: Thank you guys so much for having me.

KEILAR: Ahead, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman taking the stand in a trial that could reshape the company and potentially the AI industry. We'll discuss with one of OpenAI's earliest investors.

[15:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Happening right now, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is on the stand in a trial that could determine the future of his company and potentially the future of the AI industry. Elon Musk is suing the company and its leaders over allegations that OpenAI, Altman and the company's president, breached their charitable trust when they shifted from its non-profit mission to include a profit-oriented structure. Musk wants the judge to order OpenAI to revert to a non-profit and for Altman and the company's president to lose their board positions.

KEILAR: A ruling in Musk's favor could alter OpenAI's plans for an initial public offering later this year. During today's testimony, Altman denied allegations by Musk that he betrayed OpenAI's founding mission. He even went on to say there was a morale boost when Musk left the company they co-founded more than a decade ago.

In the meantime, OpenAI accuses Musk of wanting a for-profit structure and says he only brought the case after he failed to gain control.

We're joined now by Vinod Khosla. He's an early investor in OpenAI. He's the founder of Khosla Ventures. Sir, thanks so much for being with us. Why do you think that Elon Musk is suing OpenAI?

VINOD KHOSLA, EARLY INVESTOR IN OPENAI: Elon Musk is in the business of harassment. He missed OpenAI in the investment there early. And now he's trying to slow them down any way he can and try and catch up.

SANCHEZ: So if he wins, it could scramble the company's plan for an IPO later this year. What would it mean for OpenAI and the AI industry more broadly?

KHOSLA: Well, what's important to OpenAI and to Sam Altman and frankly to myself is not the timing of the IPO. I think that what's important is the rate of technology progress and how it's adapted worldwide.

KEILAR: And OpenAI --

KHOSLA: So I'm not as focused --

KEILAR: Sorry, go on. You said you're not as focused on what?

KHOSLA: On the IPO or the timing of the IPO. Much more focused on what impact it can have and having the best technology developed at OpenAI.

[15:55:00]

KEILAR: So this allegation of Musk's that the for-profit element of OpenAI sort of violates its initial mission. Can you address that?

KHOSLA: Well, many non-profits own for-profit entities. It's a pretty common structure in Europe. Companies like Ikea, Bosch and others have had versions of this in one form or another.

So there's nothing unusual about the structure itself. OpenAI needed private funding and commercial capitalistic funding to achieve its goals and have its non-profit impact. The impact today and the size of the non-profit foundation is much larger than anybody would have imagined five years ago.

So what's there to complain about?

SANCHEZ: So beyond the case, there are broader questions about OpenAI and its effect on not only business and the economy, but also on defense. OpenAI reached a deal with the Pentagon earlier this year for the military to use AI tools in its classified systems. Do you think AI firms, though, need to retain some control over how their technology winds up being used by the military?

KHOSLA: So do you think it should be an AI firm against Putin or President Xi? That's absurd. The Defense Department and the president have to have control over what technologies they deploy and how.

Individual companies can demand that the use be legal under the laws of America or the USA. But beyond that, they shouldn't be exercising any control because President Putin and Xi aren't allowing external companies to have control over what they can and can't do.

KEILAR: No, and I hear you on that. But obviously, the standards of Russia and China are different than the standards of the U.S., right? And this is, though, a Pentagon that has eviscerated its legal firewalls in some cases here.

The JAG system has been very much changed. That's the military legal system. And there are a lot of questions, including from former JAG officers and even people currently inside of the system about the legality of some calls.

With that in mind, how do you think that AI companies should be navigating those concerns about how their technology is used?

KHOSLA: I think it's up to Congress and the Senate to make those rules and clarify those rules. I do agree. I'm not a fan of this administration.

It's interpreted laws differently than other presidents have done. But in the end, a private CEO cannot be in charge of how to deploy technology, which is the most powerful weapon we have. I think it's absurd to think a private citizen should exercise that control.

SANCHEZ: There are questions about the way that --

KHOSLA: I, look --

SANCHEZ: Go ahead.

KHOSLA: My point is these are all consequential technologies. And whenever somebody like a Sam Altman or OpenAI build consequential technology that's of global importance, they always get attacked.

And opportunists like Elon Musk, in this case, take that opportunity to harass people, slow them down any way they can. But the intensity of these attacks is what's really important here. It shows how important the stuff OpenAI is doing is.

In fact, that's the lens through which one should be interpreting these attacks.

SANCHEZ: As you were just talking about Congress, lawmakers having some say over the laws that the Pentagon and the president have to observe, I imagine when it comes to combat, as we were talking about AI's influence on defense, it made me wonder generally what your outlook is on congressional regulation of AI itself, because there are a lot of questions about that. For example, earlier this week, the family of a Florida State University shooting victim sued OpenAI, alleging that ChatGPT inflamed and encouraged the alleged shooter's delusions ahead of the attack. OpenAI essentially said that though the shooting is a tragedy, ChatGPT is not responsible.

[16:00:00]

Would you be open to legislation that would delineate certain aspects of AI to mitigate the risks of someone becoming persuaded by ChatGPT into a negative act?

KHOSLA: Well, we do have mechanisms for this. The FDA is authorized to approve devices and drugs and treatments. It should be regulating medical treatments of mental health.

In fact, it's sad that we haven't done more. In fact, if we set regular standards, then these providers of technology can meet those standards. I think it's entirely up to the FDA to authorize AI as a doctor, AI as a mental health therapist, and make sure it meets safety standards like they do for any drug or device.

That's their job. I do think that's the mechanism through which it should be handled. And if Congress needs to clarify things, that's Congress's role.

KEILAR: Yes, I certainly hear you on that. I will note some dysfunction in Congress lately, and also, we did just learn a short time ago the FDA chief is departing. So there will be a lot of chaos there as well.

Vinod Khosla, great to have you. Thank you so much for being with us.

And "THE ARENA" with Kasie Hunt starts right now.

END