Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Pennsylvania I.D. Law Relaxed; The Role of Debates; Early Voting in Ohio; What the Fiscal Cliff Means for You; TV Show Crashes 727; Obama, Romney Faceoff in Denver Tomorrow; Todd Akin Against Equal Pay; Auto Sales Data Mostly Upbeat
Aired October 02, 2012 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, ANCHOR, "CNN NEWSROOM": Hi, everybody, I'm Ashleigh Banfield. Nice to have you with us. It's 11:00 on the East Coast, 8:00 on the West Coast and we begin with this.
Big news out of Pennsylvania, it looks like voters there are going to find it a whole lot easier to cast their ballots in the presidential election and that's because the judge in the case has made a decision to actually reverse a decision that he'd made before on that state's voter I.D. law.
It was one of the strictest laws in the country and everyone wanted to know if it was going to go into effect before this election.
You know the debate. The Republican supporters say that this kind of law would stop voter fraud. Democrats said, not really, that it would really just keep a lot of voters from being able to vote, real, legitimate citizens who maybe just don't happen to have an I.D., a driver's license, or a passport.
Joining me now is CNN crime and justice correspondent Joe Johns. So, Joe, let's break this down. Since this is breaking news and you know how it can go with legal decisions, they can be looked at a whole lot of different ways.
This particular case, this judge had to look at not the constitutionality of voter I.D.s, he had to look at specifically whether the people of Pennsylvania all had equal access to get I.D.s and get to the polls in time and he's reversed himself from his earlier decision. Where does this leave us?
JOE JOHNS, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, big picture, OK, Ashleigh? It's a victory for opponents of the voter I.D. law in Pennsylvania but only for this election.
What the judge in Pennsylvania said is that for this election only he is blocking this controversial voter I.D. law in Pennsylvania. Remember, there are a lot of other states that have voter I.D. laws and the reason this judge in Pennsylvania is doing this in that state is there's not enough time, he says, between now and November to get protections in place to assure that people who want to vote don't lose their ability to vote.
So, the state right now is cut off from implementing or enforcing the controversial part of the voter I.D. law through the November 6th general election.
This is not necessarily the final word, though, because an appeal of this decision has already been predicted. The judge issued this injunction, pretty much after being told by the state supreme court this was his only choice because the state views voting as a fundamental right.
The other thing, Ashleigh, I think, that has to be said at this stage is it's a little complicated. The judge appears to have left open the door a little bit for the state to still ask for voter I.D.s on election day, but the judge says he's blocking the conditions under which a provisional ballot is accepted.
So, the upshot is that voters will not be turned away from the polls, apparently, if they don't have identification.
Opponents of the law are saying that last piece I just described to you, which was probably confusing, is likely to cause confusion at the polls.
I think the other important thing to say is the law will go into effect under this ruling, just not before the election. Got it?
BANFIELD: You are so absolutely right at how confusing it is. And look, even lawyers among us can all disagree, me not being one of them.
Let me jump in with a law professor, though, as well, Joe Johns. if you can standby for a moment, Joey Jackson now joining me live from Atlanta, as well, for more on this decision.
Listen, Mr. Legal Briefs, this has come at us all in a bunch of different ways. Some people say it's struck down, some saying it's just kicked the can.
But in the end, what is it going to take for the governor of the great state of Pennsylvania if he wants his way to have voter I.D.? How is he going to get it?
JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Ashleigh, you come to me to create confusion? To avoid confusion?
Look, no, here's the point. The point is that what will happen is that, ultimately, it'll be appealed.
For this particular moment, it's too close to the presidential election. We have an election in weeks and, as a result of that, for the judge to have taken this law and said, you know what? You have to get I.D.s. It would have caused all kinds of problems.
He talked about clerks and long lines and people who are confused and, as a result of that, felt that it was not appropriate at this time. However, as it relates to future elections, I do think that Pennsylvania will, indeed, have a law that it wants relating to voter I.D. Why? Because you have a governor who has implemented the law and you have a Republican legislator who has passed the law.
So, as a result of the political wishes of that particular state, I do believe that the law at some point will take effect, Ashleigh, just not now.
BANFIELD: So, no matter how you feel about the constitutionality or the fairness or anything else when it comes to voter I.D. and let's just talk about Pennsylvania because that's where this breaking news is coming from right now, Professor Jackson.
I want to read something that the judge wrote in an earlier opinion on this very case because it speaks very much to just the "what-the-what- the" factor.
He said this. "The parties are not aware of any incidents of in- person voter fraud in Pennsylvania and do not have direct personal knowledge of in-person voter fraud elsewhere, no evidence or argument that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absence of the photo I.D. law."
JACKSON: So, why the law?
BANFIELD: Thank you. It just -- you know, for a lot of people, it defies logic.
JACKSON: This turns it into a political discussion because, as you know, supporters of the law believe that you need it because you want to prevent fraud. You don't want people voting who should not be voting. You don't want people voting from the grave.
And, of course, the opponents of the law suggest that it disenfranchises voters. It makes it a problem to vote. In this society, anyone who wants to participate should, indeed, be enabled to participate and not excluded from the process.
So, ultimately, Ashleigh, what you have are converging political views. On the merits, however, as you suggest, laws generally are passed because they're meaningful, because they're purposeful, because we need them.
And, so, the real issue is the wisdom of the law designed to prevent fraud or is it designed to make sure that people who want to vote cannot and those people, as you know, Ashleigh, generally are people who are disenfranchised communities, people of color, people who are poor, people who are not educated and, so, that debate will indeed continue.
BANFIELD: OK. I want to go to Joe -- stay with me, if you will, because I know I have a whole lot more questions for you because, with each answer, it tends to make more questions, Professor Jackson.
Joe Johns, Joey Jackson just alluded to the politics of all of this and, with that in mind, I want to play a short sound bite that's been actually out there for quite a while of the Pennsylvania speaker of the House.
His name is Mike Turzai. He's a Republican. He was speaking to fellow Republicans about sort of electoral tactics and, really, strategies and he was almost ticking off on the list what voter I.D. would do for this race in the state of Pennsylvania. And here are his words exactly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE TURZAI (R), PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: Voter I.D., which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BANFIELD: Wait a second. Not done as it turns out.
But, Joe Jackson, I want you to comment on the politics of it when you hear a sound bite like that. Or Joe Johns. I'm sorry, Joe Johns.
Yeah, comment on the politics of it because that's pretty strident stuff.
JOHNS: No, I think you're absolutely right and the question, of course, as the professor has stated is, are they actually solving a problem in the law that exists?
And, as to the issue of in-person voting fraud, you know, we're working on a documentary on this. We haven't been able to find much evidence at all of voter fraud.
Now, that said, Ashleigh, there are a lot of people in this country who say, if you look at this in a nonpartisan way, there are things about American elections that can be done better and, you know, antiquated procedures.
How do you get electronic voting in there so you can count the votes a little bit better? How do you include more Americans inside the process? All of those are issues that a lot of people say could be addressed in a nonpartisan way.
But this issue of nonvoting -- non-in-person voting and the question of fraud, a lot of people say is a nonissue and they say it just turns this whole thing into a political question that, you know, Democrats and Republicans around the country in a bunch of different states with photo I.D. are now fighting, Ashleigh.
BANFIELD: Last issue, very quickly. I want to put up a map that we've compiled of all the different states that currently have the voter identification requirements.
It's a little tricky to look at it, but basically the strict photo is the light green and the photo I.D.s are the yellow. No photo in all those blue states. So, you can identify where you live and no voter I.D. law, either, in the gray states.
A wee bit confusing, but safe to say the ones that are light green and yellow are somewhat problematic for some people.
Joe Johns, the big question is, a lot of Americans support having an identification in order to vote. What's the downside? Why is it a problem?
JOHNS: It's a very common sense idea when you think about it. You have to show some type of identification to get on a plane, for a variety of things in this country, so why not show I.D. when you go to vote? Simple idea, right? And that's the reason the polls say what they say.
On the other side of it, there is a segment of the American public. There are students. There are poor people who don't drive. There are elderly people. There are senior citizens who can't drive because, for example, they can't see very well.
They don't have any reason to get these I.D.s. and Democrats have made the case that many of the people in those demographics are people who vote for Democrats.
And, so, they're concerned that, by putting in this voter I.D. law, you're cutting off a segment of the population more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans.
And by the way, that map you showed, a lot of those states with photo I.D. laws for voting actually happened to be states that are controlled by Republicans, so that's where you get the sort of explosive political question.
BANFIELD: I cannot -- I can't wait for your documentary. So many questions.
Joe Johns, Joey Jackson, thank you very much for being on this right as this decision came out to lay some groundwork and some framework for people so they can understand it. Thanks to you both. Two Joes in one day.
All right, so, on to the presidential debate, OK? Can Mitt Romney turn this race upside down against the polls, as the polls now say?
Chris Christie said he can do it and guess what? Mitt Romney has done it before. Going to show you what happened back in 2002 in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BANFIELD: He's behind in the polls, his image and his message have been taking some serious hits and voters just seem to like his opponent better, if you believe those polls on those questions.
There's no question that Mitt Romney is heading into the first of three presidential face-offs with a steep hill to climb, but guess what? He has been down this road before and he won an election coming out of it.
I want to take you back a decade for a moment. Indulge me. Mitt Romney, a Republican candidate for governor in bluer-than-blue Massachusetts, in mere weeks, he went from an "also-ran" to a contender, to a five-point winner on election night.
And you know something? The debates had a whole lot to do with that.
Matt Viser is a political reporter with "The Boston Globe" who has just written a great piece on the '02 race and Mitt Romney's political resourcefulness, joins me now, live.
Matt, great story and I think, you know, either I'm just too young to have really remembered it, which I think is not true, but I think a lot of people don't know that Mitt had this remarkable turnaround. How did he do it?
MATT VISER, POLITICAL REPORTER, "THE BOSTON GLOBE": Yeah, I mean, it was -- in 2002, really the only political race that he's actually won, he was behind.
I mean, he was leading in the polls early on. He faltered. He was behind by six points with six weeks to go. He was down. There was an 18-point gender gap. I mean, people favored his opponent, Shannon O'Brien.
And he sort of had a meeting with his advisers and they decided to shift gears. They got -- they went after her a lot more. They dropped some of the family-friendly ads that they'd been running about Mitt and Ann that people are familiar with in the national race and they went right after her.
And the debates certainly played a big factor. There were three one- on-one debates between Romney and O'Brien and Romney was considered to win at least two of those debates.
BANFIELD: Well, let me ask you about the performance in the debates because, as I recall and also from reading through your article, his challenger at the time did something foolish in a debate, attempted humor without knowing the outcome.
That's something none of us should ever do and she really fell flat and, at the time, that was something that a lot of people said was a super moment for Mitt Romney.
And now we're hearing that he's practicing zingers. Wouldn't you think he would've learned from the failures of his challenger?
VISER: Yeah. I mean, I think he can benefit in two different ways. One is by coming across as a good alternative, as somebody who people want to go to.
The other way is for his opponent to have some faltering moment in a high-profile debate.
The one that Shannon O'Brien made was days before the election. Tim Russert was moderating. The whole state was tuning in. It was a big deal and, you know, her joke that she made about having a tattoo with Tim Russert, you know, kind of just fell flat among voters.
But Romney also had some moments in those debates that didn't come across well. He called Shannon O'Brien unbecoming and that sort of felt odd to people, too.
So, I mean, if Obama can get under Romney's skin, then Romney kind of can falter himself.
BANFIELD: Well, at least he didn't say she wasn't lady like because that's getting some heat, too, in the press these days.
Let me ask you one other thing about something that was in the strategy of Governor Romney before he was Governor Romney and that was something they called "workdays" where Mitt Romney decided to spend some time working as a blue-collar worker like the rest of us.
He was selling sausages at Fenway Park. Love that. He worked as a garbage man on Beacon Hill, where they have very nice garbage, I'm told. And he was fixing cars, too.
But we haven't really seen that this time around and, yet, that was a successful strategy back then.
VISER: Yeah. I mean, they sort of recognized that his wealth was sort of an issue and a barrier with voters. One of the questions in that poll was asked which candidate cares for people like you and only 18 percent said Mitt Romney, six weeks before the election.
So, it's a similar thing that he's failed at on a national level. People don't feel like he cares about people like them.
They haven't done quite as much to mitigate that as they did in 2002. I mean, the caveat, though, is it was a state race. It was more controlled. On a national scale, there's a lot more variables and it's harder to sort of make big swings in the polls.
But, you know, the strategy was clearly different when he was running for governor.
BANFIELD: Are you expecting anything major in Denver?
VISER: I think it'll be really interesting. Yeah. I think, you know, you have the whole country sort of tuning in. I mean, I think it'll be a big moment, I think Romney has to have a big moment. I think it's crucial for him to change the dynamic in this race, you know, with just a short period to go.
BANFIELD: Matt Viser, awesome to talk to you. Great piece. Thanks for doing your homework and looking back to 2002. It's very insightful and it is fascinating and you know what? It just goes to show you -- don't count anybody out. Thanks.
VISER: All right. Thanks, Ashleigh.
BANFIELD: We're ...
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BANFIELD: With the presidential debate as a backdrop, Ohio voters start going to the polls today. Ohio is one of 32 different states that allow early voting and it joins 10 states where the early voting has already begun. So exciting.
Let's bring in CNN political editor Paul Steinhauser who I rarely get a chance to actually see in the flesh.
STEINHAUSER: In person.
BANFIELD: It's great. We've worked together for a year and we've never met.
PAUL STEINHAUSER, CNN POLITICAL EDITOR: I love it.
BANFIELD: Crazy. Let's talk numbers because you've got -- sometimes I can't even keep track of how quickly these polls come out.
Not only do we have them, other news organizations, but then we also do the poll of polls, but what's your freshest? What do you have?
STEINHAUSER: OK, we have a brand new, CNN/ORC poll. This is a national survey. It came out late yesterday.
Take a look at this, among likely voters, 50 percent for the president, 47 percent for Mitt Romney. That three points, that's within the sampling error, so, yeah, there's a slight edge for the president, but you can consider it basically all tied up.
That's one of five polls, Ashleigh, five national polls that's coming out -- come out in the last 24 hours. You average them all together. We call it our CNN Poll of Polls. You take all five of those polls, you average them together, 49 percent for the president, 46 percent for Mitt Romney.
BANFIELD: So, this is where it stands today. We've got all these early voters going to the polls. So, as these guys are preparing for the debate tomorrow and then the subsequent next two, they're not worried about people voting today, are they?
STEINHAUSER: Well, here's the thing about early voters. Most people of these people have already made up their minds. That's why they're voting early.
They're usually partisans. They know they're either going to vote for the president or Mitt Romney, so they've pretty much made up their mind.
The only thing that factors in here is what happens if something happens in the debates that really changes their mind? Too late. Sorry. You've already voted.
BANFIELD: Like what? Looking at your watch? There've been some wonderful moments in debate history that actually have had a huge effect on people, Nixon sweating, all sorts of things.
STEINHAUSER: Yeah, you look back at previous cycles. Sometimes the debates have made a difference and you've seen that reflected in polls. Sometimes they really haven't.
BANFIELD: OK, so, let's talk about where everybody stands because, look, the debates are about the issues. It's the first chance we get to see these guys face-to-face, albeit -- it's a bit confined. It's not a perfect conversation, but it's the best we can get so far.
How do people across America feel about the issues and where each candidate stands? When you poll them, how do they feel about these guys?
STEINHAUSER: Well, this debate is going to be about domestic issues, so, on the economy, we're pretty much all tied up there between the president and Mitt Romney.
Specifically on taxes, look at this, the president with an eight-point advantage, 52 percent to 44 percent. Interesting, Republicans usually have the upper hand on taxes.
BANFIELD: Wow. Your sampling error is only 3.5 there, so that's a win so far.
STEINHAUSER: Let's move on to jobs. You know, it's all about the economy and jobs, jobs, jobs. Well, on jobs, Mitt Romney with a six- point advantage there, Ashleigh, and two of those probably are going to be coming up on Wednesday night. What do you think?
BANFIELD: It's really incredible that the jobs and economy are so segregated in people's minds anyway. Wow, fascinating.
What about just overall, I like the guy, I don't like the guy?
STEINHAUSER: It is an important factor. You know what? The president used to have a big advantage over Mitt Romney when it comes to likability, when it comes to favorable ratings.
Take a look at our most recent numbers just from yesterday. Fifty-two percent of people, 52 percent have a favorable rating of the president, Mitt Romney's not that far off at 49 percent.
What about the wing man, the running mates? Joe Biden, the vice president, at 47 percent, Paul Ryan at 46 percent, all kind of in the same range.
BANFIELD: How often do we actually poll about the wing man? I rarely see the actual numbers separated for the vice presidential candidate.
STEINHAUSER: You're going to see more of that because, remember, they face off next week. We'll get some more numbers on them.
BANFIELD: OK, and, just lastly, while we look at these polls and we hear a lot of people arguing about polls and that they're skewed and that they follow a narrative and the questions follow a narrative and that may or may not be true.
Historically, how accurate have polls been as we head towards an election?
STEINHAUSER: I like to brag about our own CNN poll four years ago. We were pretty much spot-on on the public vote -- on the popular vote between the president and Mitt Romney. I'm sorry, John McCain.
But, listen, polls are a reflection of how people feel right now, a snapshot of how people feel right now. We still have five weeks till the election. That's why polls change. Because people change their minds.
BANFIELD: Yeah, do they ever.
It's nice to see you in person.
STEINHAUSER: Great to be here.
BANFIELD: Let's do this more often.
STEINHAUSER: I'll come up.
BANFIELD: Paul Steinhauser, political editor, thanks so much. Appreciate it.
And a quick reminder for you, as well. It's coming, folks. It's a really exciting night. I like to call it date night, but it's debate night in America and it's live, starting at 7:00 Easter, right here on CNN.
We've got extraordinarily special coverage. Come on, Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper together? It does not get better than that. 7:00 p.m. Eastern and, if you can't get to a TV, you got your iPad or your laptop. We stream this live on CNN.com. Do not miss it. Be a great voter.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BANFIELD: You like taxes? I've got taxes for you.
Christine Romans is here to talk about the very serious issue of the fiscal cliff and what it means for your bottom line. Literally "Your Bottom Line." Plug for your show and plug for (INAUDIBLE).
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Your bottom line is -- the bottom line is you're going to pay more in taxes next year, either because you're going to go off the fiscal cliff or because the payroll tax is going to expire, so taxes are likely rising next year.
BANFIELD: Real numbers for people who make certain amounts of money, show me.
ROMANS: This is the fiscal cliff only. Take a look.
If you make $20,000 to $40,000 a year, your taxes are going to go up -- you can see right here -- $1,231. These are numbers from the Tax Policy Center.
Move out with me. $40,000 to $64,000 a year, you're talking about a $2,000 tax bill right there, $2,000.
$64,000 to $108,000, $3,500 more in taxes, you're going to pay.
Take a look at $108,000 and up, another $14,000 in taxes.
So, you can see the more money you take, the more you're going to pay in taxes if the U.S. goes over the fiscal cliff.
What's a fiscal cliff? It's those huge tax increases, huge tax increases and huge spending cuts that hit at beginning of January.
The Bush tax cuts would go away, the AMT patch would go away, a whole bunch of things would go away, Ashleigh, and that's basically what these numbers are going to look like for your tax bill next year if we go over the fiscal cliff.
BANFIELD: OK, what's the reality? What is the actual chance this is going to hit us all right smack in the wallet?
ROMANS: Well, we hope, we hope that Senators are working on this, right? And that they know they've got to get this fixed. It would be disastrous. It would cause a recession.
BANFIELD: "New York Times" say, "Eh, they're talking."
ROMANS: They're starting to talk about what a post-election session, what kind of framework to coalesce around, et cetera, et cetera. But this is what it looks like. You've got economists surveyed by "CNN Money" who say basically none of them think we'll go over the fiscal cliff. Why? Because it's so dangerous. 14 of 17 economists surveyed say, "Falling off a fiscal cliff will mean a recession." 12 said, "The fiscal cliff is the biggest risk to the American economy." Bigger than Europe. Bigger than China. bigger than all of these other things.
BANFIELD: Bigger than jobs and the housing crisis? All of that?
ROMANS: The fiscal cliff is incredibly important to that overall. So they don't think we'll go over the fiscal cliff.
How they fix it is critical. Already, you have so many business leaders and big CEOs who have been saying it's OK that you all think we're not going to go over the fiscal cliff, but we're holding off on hiring new people, building new plants, spending more money on R&D until we can see how Congress --
(CROSSTALK)
BANFIELD: That's damage. That's damage.
ROMANS: Every day that it's a big discussion it's damage. And what Senators and Congress members need to be very careful of is punting this into next year because all that uncertainty is something that will cast a pall over business growth over America.
BANFIELD: I'm going to be a Pollyanna here and I'll suggest they all have a session and actually come to some kind of measure where they can avoid this catastrophe right here that you showed me. But we're still going to pay more taxes, aren't we? Payroll?
ROMANS: Well, the Kumbaya moment should have been last year for the debt ceiling negotiations, and instead it was all-out war from Republicans and Democrats.
In terms of the payroll tax, you're right, even if they fix the fiscal cliff, very few expect the payroll tax holiday, which was meant to be temporary, the extra few bucks every week, that's going to come to an end.
BANFIELD: You're no Pollyanna.
(LAUGHTER)
Christine Romans.
ROMANS: Just the facts, ma'am.
(LAUGHTER)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BANFIELD: Some great video to show you right now. Incredible pictures of a Boeing 727. You got it crashing in the desert. And this is on purpose. Luckily, it's only a test, right? Obviously. But look at what happens inside the aircraft as it crashes. Just imagine yourself in one of those seats. Hmm. May not look survivable, but it does, prove, actually this crash test that there are some ways you can survive a plane crash. There are some places that you can survive a plane crash.
Cindy Bir is a biomedical engineering professor at Wayne State University. She's here to explain all of this.
This is a project by the Discovery Channel that you all engage in for four years to intentionally crash a 727, right?
DR. CYNTHIA BIR, PROFESSOR, BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY: 727, correct.
BANFIELD: The pilots, what happened to them? Where are they?
BIR: Well, the pilots -- the way it was planned, the pilots ejected out of the back of the plane, which is why we used the 727, because it has the rear exit. They pilot it to a certain point and parachuted out of the back of the plane and from that point on, it was all remote control.
BANFIELD: You had a chase plane following the 727 and literally doing like Atari.
BIR: Yes, exactly.
BANFIELD: And some of those --
(LAUGHTER)
BIR: Yes, really --
(CROSSTALK)
BANFIELD: Xbox.
BIR: Yes, exactly.
BANFIELD: And flying the plane --
(CROSSTALK)
BIR: Flying the plane remotely.
BANFIELD: Back into this --
(CROSSTALK)
BIR: Right. In the middle of a lake, that dry lake in the middle of nowhere, so it was safe. We didn't want to have any -- took a long time just to find a safe place to crash this plane. So, yes, it was in the middle of a desert area.
BANFIELD: What was fascinating about this project -- first of all, the kind of science that you do for a living, you basically find out what we as people can handle when it comes to drama and exposure to these kind of horrifying, you know, events. There were crash test dummies in a lot of these seats. They were very expensive, weren't they?
BIR: There are, about $150,000 uninstrumented. By the time you add all the instrumentation, the data acquisition system needed to collect the data, all of that. We had probably at least, probably about 500,000 plus worth of instrumentation on that plane.
BANFIELD: You wanted to know every single ounce of data, every single knee that would get skinned on an airplane.
BIR: Exactly. Because this isn't something we do every day.
(CROSSTALK)
BANFIELD: '84 was the last time you did it.
BIR: So it was something, we wanted to collect as much information as possible. And that was what was great about Discovery. They allowed us to do that. They viewed this as a science experiment.
BANFIELD: Cindy Bir, now everybody wants to know, where should I sit on an airplane? We've all heard the lore you'll die if you're in first class, you're better to be in the middle, no, the tail, and then you see all of these different kinds of crashes.
BIR: There's several things to do to help survive. One, when you sit down, figure out where your exit rows are. And, again, they may be behind you, just like they say during the announcements.
BANFIELD: Quick plug for the Ben Sherwood's "The Survivors Club." He always says you should count the rows by the number of seats you can touch because you won't be able to see --
(CROSSTALK)
BANFIELD: You won't be able to see. That is true. If you look at the footage on Sunday night at 9:00, you'll see the dust comes flying in and you cannot see the seats. So you're right --
(CROSSTALK)
BANFIELD: Smoke --
(CROSSTALK)
BIR: Everything, everything. So know where the exit rows are.
BANFIELD: Know where the exits are. Look behind you because, if everything's on fire in front of you.
BIR: Right.
BANFIELD: And then should I sit in first, in coach, in the tail?
BIR: Well, we're seeing, for our particular crash, in the back had the lowest acceleration, so the lowest amount of force is the most survivable, but it all depends on the crash.
BANFIELD: Because it can be the reverse, can't it?
BIR: It can be the reverse.
BANFIELD: This is so cool. The nerd factor is literally buzzing through the roof right now.
Cindy Bir, thank you. Thank you so much.
And I'll do another plug here. The Discovery series is called "Curiosity." This one is "Plane Crash" and airs Sunday October 7th, 9:00 p.m. eastern on the Discovery Channel.
Thanks.
BIR: Thank you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BANFIELD: A roll of the eyes and a glance of the watch and a one- liner that can make headlines for weeks and months and sometimes decades. That's why presidential debates are absolute must-see TV. You're a voter, so you should be watching this stuff.
It's also why the world is watching the University of Denver because it's the site of tomorrow night's face-off between President Barack Obama and his challenger, Governor Mitt Romney.
CNN's political director, Mark Preston, could not wait. He's already there in Denver.
(LAUGHTER)
You're looking very happy to be there early. And this is debate number one. You've still got a lot to go. Two more for this month.
Talk to me a little bit about the format of how this conversation is going to take place, what the limitations are, and what they can actually get accomplished.
MARK PRESTON, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, Ashleigh, let's talk about the bullet points, what viewers should expect to see tomorrow. Six different segments during this debate, three segments focusing on the economy, which should come as no surprise. Issue number one since 2008. So, one presidential election ago.
Talking about health care, which has become a big issue over the past couple of years, with President Obama passing what is now known as Obama-care, and Mitt Romney saying he will repeal that.
In addition to that, they're going to spend a segment talking about the role of government, also talking about governing, which is interesting because a lot of this campaign is Mitt Romney and Barack Obama talking about how they would work in Washington. And as we know, the American public are so frustrated right now with how Washington is operating or is not operating at all. So there's a lot on the line for Mitt Romney, Barack Obama tomorrow night.
Tens of millions of people will be watching. Of course, a lot here on CNN. There is over 3,000 journalists who are actually credentialed to come and cover this debate. Ashleigh, 700 of them are from other countries. So the whole world will be watching.
BANFIELD: And Jim Lehrer is the moderator for debate number one. Technically, how long do the candidates get to answer the questions, because some candidates are pretty long-winded?
PRESTON: They are, and that's going to be the struggle and one of the challenges for the moderator tomorrow as well as the other debate moderators, including Candy Crowley, who will be moderating a debate later this month. 30 seconds to about a minute to answer a question. And of course there's a rebuttal. If we do see sharp exchange back and forth, sometimes the train can get off the track and the candidates tend to go after that. That's the kind of must-see TV that people are looking for. We'd rather see the candidates engage one another, challenge one another on the issues. But 90 minutes, that's a lot of time for these candidates to try to explain why they should be the president and why voters should vote for them come November. BANFIELD: So these guys are busy. Anybody who has ever worked on a campaign knows it is one of the most grueling things the human body can go through other than war. And to some, it is like that. Then they have to take a deep breath and do these celebrations amid doing the campaigning and ahead -- go head-to-head.
And there's study, Mark Preston, that's come out about eye blinking. Something called the blink index. It may sound silly, but it's actually been able to predict who the winner of the debate is going to be. What on earth is this?
PRESTON: Well, you know, it was a story in "USA Today," this study that the candidate that blinks the most loses, you know. There's also this long-standing tradition about how the Washington Redskins, whether they win or lose depends upon whether the incumbent president will win or lose in November. It's an interesting concept. I don't think there's much to it.
Though I do have to say this, though, body language is extremely important as you said at the top, George H.W. Bush, back in 1992, was seen looking at his watch when one of the audience members was asking a question. That was terrible for him. It looked like he didn't care about the audience member or the concerns that audience member had. So body language will be extremely important. So when you look at these camera angles being shown tomorrow night, not only listening to the words but see how the candidates react because that will be a very, very important part of how they are determined about who won or lost tomorrow night -- Ashleigh?
BANFIELD: President Obama mentioned that the homework is a drag. And I think we all agree that homework is a drag. When do they find time for the kind of homework they have to do? And is this really the job of the campaign and debate preppers to make sure they have absolutely everything they need? Because they're not really watching a lot of TV right now.
PRESTON: Well, no. But, of course, you know, I think my children and your children would agree, homework is a drag. Who likes doing it? But it's so important they do focus on it. In fact, President Obama had to cancel some of his sessions, at least that's what we're told about his campaign, because he had to focus on some of the issues he had to deal with, including Libya.
But the bottom line is it's very important they focus on it. We've seen the candidates doing it. They're not on the campaign trail, they're leaving that up to the vice presidential candidates to do that for them, Ashleigh.
BANFIELD: The president definitely got the vote of my 6-year-old if he could vote on that comment about the homework.
(LAUGHTER)
I'm going to tell you that right now.
Mark Preston, enjoy your time. It's going to be a busy next couple of days. Thank you, sir.
PRESTON: Thank you, Ashleigh.
BANFIELD: Remember here, you can watch the first debate right here. That's presidential debate on CNN. Begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern with our coverage. And if you don't have a TV nearby, you can watch it streaming live on CNN.com.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BANFIELD: Republicans Senate candidate Todd Akin is back in the news and, yes, it is about women, remarks being said about women. Let me get you back, start from the beginning. Remember this take? Back in August, he caused quite an uproar among his own party members and Democrats when he said women were somehow biologically capable of blocking pregnancies in a rape if the rape is so-called a legitimate rape. Now, that was awful and he had to retract it. And he made a lot of enemies even within his own peers. And then he said, you know, his opponent was being more "lady like" at another time and that didn't go over well.
Then we got this tape from Claire McCaskill's camp, Mr. Akins's explanation as to why he voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act. It was something that helped women to challenge unequal pay. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. TODD AKIN, (R), MISSOURI & SENATE CANDIDATE: I don't think the government should be telling people what you pay and what we don't pay. It's about freedom. If somebody wants to hire somebody and they agree on a salary, that's fine, however it wants to work. So the government is sticking its nose into all kinds of things. It's gotten us into huge trouble.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BANFIELD: So to be clear -- and, defense attorney, Joey Jackson, is back with me from Atlanta.
Professor Jackson, to be clear, Representative Akin was suggesting that the government should not be telling people what to do in their businesses. And I think a lot of people really understand and feel that way. But there are some things you can and cannot do according to the law. Would you enlighten me, please as to whether you can choose somebody who is black make less or choose somebody who is female make more or less? What's the story?
JACKSON: Insert foot in mouth. You know there are laws in the country and what do they say? Specifically, the law he was talking about. It was a big political issue. You might remember the campaign. And, in fact, at that time, you know, John McCain was even against it, and the Republican Party was against it.
But the law he's talking about relates to equal pay and there's a gender gap with between what females and males make. In the event that employers are doing this and they're doing it improperly or inappropriately, there's a low that says you can't.
In 1963 was the first Equal Pay Act we had but in 2009 President Obama signed into law legislation that said, listen, we'll make it even more permissive for people to sue, for women to sue in the event they think they re discriminated. How? Prior to the 2009 law, Ashleigh, what happened, the statue of limitation began when you were hired. If there was a pay disparity upon your hire, the six month statue would run then. But guess what? As a result of the legislation now, what happens is the statute keeps re-enacting itself every time you get paid and so, therefore, people who get less paychecks, women, if they are doing so in a discriminatory basis, can bring forth a lawsuit to correct the wrong.
BANFIELD: OK. Let me switch to another topic. I'll do a bit of menu of legal stories with you today.
This next one involves somebody's engagement announcement that they sent out. Very pretty picture they had taken, the happy couple saying we're getting married. Little bit different. More unique kind of wedding. Same-sex wedding. Photo taken. The one on the left is the real photo. The one on the right -- look what's below it. It says, "State Senator Jean White's idea of family values." A nonprofit conservative group based in Virginia called Public Advocate of the United States took the photo on the left that was that couple's engagement announcement and then like cropped it and redid the background and used it for this political ad that this couple knew nothing about.
JACKSON: Ouch.
BANFIELD: Is there anything, any recourse that this couple has or the photographer who took the picture?
JACKSON: Absolutely. Remind me, Ashleigh, never to run for political office. This is horrible stuff.
The bottom line is that you have an interest in your image and likeness. When your image and likeness is exploited and used for commercial benefit, commercial purposes, in this case, politics, it's improper. As a result of that, you certainly have a cause of action against anyone who would do something like that for their own political, personal or commercial gain.
BANFIELD: I love how you say a cause of action. Just sue the guy. That's what you mean. Just sue.
(LAUGHTER)
JACKSON: A lawsuit, Ashleigh. A lawsuit.
BANFIELD: Joey Jackson. Nice to have you. Thank you, sir.
JACKSON: You're welcome.
BANFIELD: If you want to learn more about this, we do have lots of other information we would like to make accessible to you. It's on CNN.com for all the latest political and legal news.
Back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BANFIELD: Auto companies release their September sales data today and numbers from the big three U.S. Automakers are mostly upbeat.
Alison Kosik is here.
ALISON KOSIK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: There's a lot to consider when getting a car. One of the age old questions should you lease or buy. Which is a better option? We spoke with deputy editor with "consumer reports". He says shoppers take the plunge, buying a car will save money long term. Leased cars have mileage restrictions, too many miles means extra charges and if you drive too many miles you have to pay penalties. Reconditioning fees are common as well. If the car isn't as good as new expect to pay up. On top of all that leasing a car doesn't build any equity. Buying a car gives you something to sell when it's time to upgrade.
So here's some tips to help up get the best deal when making your purchase. Do as much research on the vehicle as possible. Try to figure out the MRSP, or the manufacturer's suggested retail price, listed price, and if any rebates are available.
BANFIELD: I always wonder if you should trade in or just go and try and hit Craig's List and sell your car yourself to make the most money.
KOSIK: Try a little of both.
(LAUGHTER)
BANFIELD: Depends on if you get paid hourly, right?
KOSIK: Yes, right.
BANFIELD: And how high that hourly pay is.
Alison Kosik, thank you very much.
Hey, everybody, thanks for being with us. CNN INTERNATIONAL is getting ready to go live right now. Suzanne Malveaux is ready to take the baton. Thanks for being with us today.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to NEWSROOM INTERNATIONAL. I'm Suzanne Malveaux. We're taking you around the world in 60 minutes. Here's what's going on right now.
