Everyday Americans Weigh in on Health Care
PHILLIPS: Well, living in a tent, it sounds like an awful and sad fate, but a California mayor says it might be a viable, short-term option. As a matter of fact, Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson spent part of the night at a tent city just like this one on the outskirts of his town. Long-term, he wants permanent housing for homeless people, and in a couple months his city will get millions of dollars in stimulus money. But for now? Well, let's go right to the source. Mayor Kevin Johnson of Sacramento joining me live. Now, tell me Mayor, can you really call a tent city a viable, short-term option for people?</s>MAYOR KEVIN JOHNSON, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA: Well, I think our ultimate goal in Sacramento is permanent housing. We want to be a model city when it comes to dealing with our homeless population. However, there's always going to be a small group of people who do not want to go into shelters or permanent housing, and we as a city have an obligation to make sure that no one lives in third-world conditions. There's a group of people right now that are living illegally along the river. And a viable option, perhaps, can be -- is something we call safe ground, where it's temporary housing that people who stay there will be there for a period of time. And then secondly, it's about empowering them. Us understanding what their issues are and getting them into permanent housing, which is the ultimate solution.</s>PHILLIPS: And tell me what you learned. Did anything surprise you as you mingled with folks there? And also, you know, a lot of people stereotype homeless people: "Oh, they're Vietnam Vets or they're people with drug issues, alcohol issues. And I understand there was quite a diversity of people in this tent city.</s>JOHNSON: Kyra, you're exactly right. There's a new face of homelessness. But, there's people that have families and have lost their job and now lost their home and are just down on their luck. So, it's a new face of homelessness number one. What I learned though, is that these people living along the river illegally, they have more of a sense of community than most American families. They make sure that they look after each other. They want to make sure that their grounds are governed properly, they're cleaned, they're sanitized to the best that they can do. And what touched me more than anything is, that they took their food stamps, went to the grocery store and bought groceries where they were able to cook a hamburger, buns, ketchup, Arizona Iced Tea, to feed me when I was out there that particular night and that was really heartwarming.</s>PHILLIPS: OK. That just totally made my heart sink. My producer actually told me that right before I came up here and I wanted to ask you if, indeed, that really did happen. You know, they're looking to you for help. I mean, you just realized that these are good people who obviously want to do something within this bad economy. So can they count on you? I mean, there you were with them. I mean, you've talked about using stimulus money to modernize shelters. Do you think that's truly a good investment, because a lot of people would say, no, take that stimulus money and put it into infrastructure that's going to create jobs immediately.</s>JOHNSON: Well, I think when we think about the stimulus and the Obama administration has shifted a focus from spending dollars on just shelters, going toward permanent housing. So our ultimate goal is permanent housing. But I want the people that live along the river in Sacramento, to know that the mayor of the City of Sacramento is going to be a huge advocate for their needs. My campaign slogan was a "City That Works for Everyone." And that was really what the homeless population in mind. And certainly this has been a dirty little secret that our city has not wanted to talk about. We've kind of swept under the rug. It's existed for at least 10 years or longer. And I think we have an excellent opportunity to win this war on homelessness. The people out there, they want dignity, they want respect. They want nothing more than the rest of America want. And I think they're certainly entitled to that.</s>PHILLIPS: Well, they're sure counting on you. And I'm glad you actually got some time to go out there and really get to know these people face to face, people like the young woman sitting next to you. I know that she wasn't living in this tent city, but she's been staying at the St. John's Shelter there in your area, Stacey Rooker. And, Stacey, I guess, first of all, you know, what do you think about the mayor's effort? I mean, you are dealing with this right now. You've got five kids. You're homeless. Do you think this will make a difference?</s>STACEY ROOKER, HOMELESS JOB SEEKER: I think that a difference can be made, yes. I don't think that everybody knows about these programs out there. And just getting the word out would help quite a bit of people around the homeless people --</s>PHILLIPS: Sure. That -- and I mean you can see that that's happening. I mean, what he did is obviously received a lot of press. It caught our attention. Now, for you personally, what happened? Tell me how you and the kids ended up being in this situation.</s>ROOKER: I was a loan officer for a mortgage company. A week after I gave birth, I was laid off. I went to go to apply for unemployment and where I worked, they told unemployment that I had quit and so I wasn't eligible for unemployment. I lost my apartment. I stayed two nights in my car, and I called St. John's, got on their waitlist. They told me it would be two to three weeks. They called me two days later and I got into St. John's June 3rd. And I've been working the program. And it's looking really good for permanent housing. We applied at quite a few places for me. And I'm hoping to get into the save work apartments.</s>PHILLIPS: Well, that, I mean, it's great to just hear that you've had the -- well, you've received help. You're focused. And we were telling you about this segment that we have here on CNN called 30 Second Pitch. And basically as we meet people like you and find out their stories, we want to give them a chance just to at least give a resume on the air and see if there's any types of hits that could help you. Now, I know you used to have an e-mail, but you don't anymore. But we did create one for you and I know we've talked with you about how to access that through the public library system. So, are you ready to give your 30 second pitch?</s>ROOKER: I sure am.</s>PHILLIPS: OK. I love it. All right. Stacey Rooker. The e-mail is staceyrooker@yahoo.com. We're going to put that up right now. Go ahead and start Stacey.</s>ROOKER: Hi. I'm Stacey Rooker and I have experience with being a loan officer. Also six years management experience with restaurants. I did do child care for about five years. I'm looking for more of an office position, maybe administration. I'm available 40-plus hours a week. My pay is negotiable.</s>PHILLIPS: There you go, full-time availability. And you know what, you've got six more seconds. Anything you want to add besides the fact that you have shown a lot of courage coming on and doing this, Stacey? Any other thoughts?</s>ROOKER: I'm reliable.</s>PHILLIPS: Yes, you are from what I hear. The mayor, too. Staceyrooker@yahoo.com. Let us know what happens, Stacey. We want to follow up with you. And Mayor, interesting efforts that you have made. We haven't seen this type of move by a politician in quite some time. Keep us updated on your efforts, please, because we'd really like to see what happens, not only with Stacey but with those within the tent city, too, that really touched your heart.</s>JOHNSON: Yes. Thank you for the exposure and thank you for giving a voice to those who are homeless.</s>PHILLIPS: Well, I appreciate you both very much. Thank you. We're going to take you live to the White House now, listen in to Robert Gibbs, apparently talking about a number of issues, taking questions now from reporters, trying to hear more about health care at this point.</s>ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: -- if you asked just straight up, here's health care reform -- here's what you get, here's what it costs what the number was 58/38, something like that.</s>QUESTION: Right. Theoretically, they're with -- what you think you're pushing, what you say you're pushing. But they're not with the president.</s>GIBBS: I don't think it was theoretical, but go ahead.</s>QUESTION: The polls aren't where you wanted them to be. Would you quibble with that?</s>GIBBS: On some of those questions, I would not quibble with. We're just stuck on word polling.</s>QUESTION: Why not? Why aren't they working?</s>GIBBS: Why do I not agree?</s>QUESTION: No. If the president is pushing for something that the American people when you poll independently support --</s>GIBBS: Right.</s>QUESTION: -- why are they not with the president?</s>GIBBS: Well, I think part of it is some of these misconceptions. I don't doubt that. I do the think people have questions. I think that's why -- I mean, the president isn't out doing town hall meetings just for his health. I mean, he wants to -- I think he understands the need to address concerns or misconceptions out there. I think, again, I think the president, whether it's the NBC poll, certainly other polling will demonstrate that people want to see health care reform this year. They want to see legislation that cuts costs. They want to see legislation that provides accessibility of coverage, that has insurance reforms. And that's what the president will continue to talk about.</s>QUESTION: Due to the fact that the American people are not with the president right now, does that indicate that this pushback, whether it's the viral e-mail you guys sent out today, or, the reality check web site you set up, or whatever, does it indicate that your pushback is late?</s>GIBBS: I don't think so. Again, I -- largely because your question was based on polling. Polling is a snapshot in time. It's -- the debate continues and we'll see whether numbers move or change as a result of the continuing debate.</s>QUESTION: But doesn't the fact that you've started pushing back indicate that you realize that the initiative is in trouble?</s>GIBBS: Well, one of the reasons we've pushed back is because of those misconceptions. Have some of those misconceptions contributed to the poll numbers? I don't doubt that. But at the same time, I mean, there's a little cause and effect here. But we're not going to stop pushing back on the misconceptions, whether or not the polling shows one thing or another. The president, again, strongly believes that -- and has for years -- that it's -- it's better to address what people's concerns are and take them on head-on.</s>QUESTION: I just have a quick one more question, I'm sorry. The PhRMA deal. There's been some confusion, I think, about what exactly the White House has agreed to with Big PhRMA, what they have not agreed to. Could you clarify what it is exactly that the White House signed off on, whether or not you feel that the Senate Finance Committee and Senator Baucus were up front with you guys about what he agreed to? And also do you think this was done, whatever deal this was, was this done that was done in keeping with the transparency that then candidate Obama promised?</s>GIBBS: Yes. Well, we had a little -- let me take the last part of that. I think the question a few days ago, something similar to this which is, we discussed bringing people to the table. We discussed making sure that stakeholders that are involved in health care are part of an agreement. Look, you can't -- you're not going to get health care legislation without involving the hospitals, without involving those that provide medications, without talking to groups that represent doctors or patients or seniors, nurses, what have you. And we've talked a little bit about the PhRMA deal. You know, the Finance Committee and PhRMA agreed to $80 billion in cost savings, part of which goes to fill the doughnut hole for seniors as part of Medicare Part D, which I think we all know is at a certain point coverage for the purchase of those drugs stops until you basically reach a catastrophic level, and the coverage kicks back in. Then some of the -- some of that additional savings would be used for health care.</s>QUESTION: But the question is what the White House agreed to, bypassing most members of Congress. Did you agree to impose importation of drugs? Did you agree to oppose rebates in Medicare Part D? Did you oppose a repeal of noninterference and oppose the opening of Medicare Part B? That is what some lobbyists are saying the White House has agreed to.</s>GIBBS: Yes. And I think the same article that denotes that has denials from both PhRMA and us on that.</s>QUESTION: But PhRMA said that the deal was $8 billion, that's it. No more. They can't give any more. Yet, in Portsmouth, the president said that maybe you could get more.</s>GIBBS: Well, maybe you could get more savings as a result of health care reform. I do not believe that the president meant we could take an $80 billion agreement and make it $95 billion. I've been fairly clear on that. From here I think as a result of the change in health care, you can see health care costs and drug costs driven down. That's not to say we were reopening this.</s>QUESTION: So, just to be clear -- you're denying that --</s>GIBBS: I'm denying the --</s>QUESTION: -- the administration agreed to any of those things that I just listed.</s>GIBBS: I'm denying that the -- I'm reissuing the denial that I think is in the story that you're referring to our behalf and on PhRMA's behalf. Yes, sir?</s>QUESTION: Robert, what is the president hearing from lawmakers out in the field from these town halls? Is there a sense of frustration? Do they feel like they're getting through to the public in these town halls?</s>GIBBS: Well, I don't know that the president -- I don't -- I don't have a list of -- I haven't seen a list of calls that he's made recently. I know staff have talked to a number of offices. I hate to break it to you, I don't think all the town halls are as you're seeing them on</s>TV. QUESTION: So, tell us what the town halls are like, then. What kind of feedback are they getting that the journalists --</s>GIBBS: I think people are getting the feedback that they're having very good conversations about what's in the legislation, what people would like to see, what options they want to have, why they think it's important. I said this yesterday. I'll say this again. I -- while I appreciate that you all have decided that every town hall meeting ends in pushing, shoving and yelling, I don't think many of -- well, I don't know how many town halls you all have been to. They're not completely indicative of what's going on in America.</s>QUESTION: Do you have a list, Robert, of maybe some lawmakers who -- I mean, obviously --</s>GIBBS: I don't have it with me, but I certainly can.</s>QUESTION: Do you have a broader span of knowledge of lawmakers --</s>GIBBS: I don't have as many reporters as the "New York Times."</s>QUESTION: But you're obviously collecting information. You say that we don't have a representative sample.</s>GIBBS: I can maybe direct you to attend a couple, since we sort of had this conversation yesterday. I don't know what your plans are next week.</s>QUESTION: My plans are to travel with the president this weekend.</s>GIBBS: Excellent. We'll save you a seat.</s>QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) -- this is something that he wants to tackle in 2010. But until then, what is taking place in of for really jumping into this next year?</s>GIBBS: Well, look, I think the president discussed in Mexico, a more formal legislatively timetable, understanding, though, that that does not mean that work doesn't continue. I think you've seen Secretary Napolitano work on aspects of comprehensive immigration reform. She will continue to do that and meet with stakeholders and discuss along different border communities the challenges and the opportunities and what has to be done in order to make comprehensive immigration reform possible.</s>QUESTION: And are there any groups that are being brought in to sort of help shape whatever it is that will eventually --</s>GIBBS: I think there will be some meetings soon on all of that, yes. Yes, sir?</s>QUESTION: Step back a minute on the PhRMA deal. Are we to believe that PhRMA didn't get anything for their agreement on the $80 billion? That they did not get anything in return from the White House, any pledges, promises, winks, nods, whatever? Are we to believe that nothing was promised?</s>GIBBS: Well, again, I'm simply was responding to what the question was about a memo that I think both sides --</s>QUESTION: Forget the memo a minute. Can you answer that question? Can you answer that question? Would they -- can you say for sure they were promised nothing in return?</s>GIBBS: I can assure you that we've come to an agreement to seek some savings from -- from the pharmaceutical industry as part of comprehensive health care.</s>QUESTION: And at what point are you going to release, then, the facts of the deal with them and with the hospitals and with the couple of these stakeholders that have come here? Maybe pledges and you guys have --</s>GIBBS: I think some of this will be written into legislation that we'll hopefully see going through Congress relatively soon.</s>QUESTION: Should we -- you know, why not release it now? Why not say what it is?</s>GIBBS: Again, as I said yesterday, some of that agreement -- some of those agreements are up on the Finance Committee web site.</s>QUESTION: Speaking of the Finance Committee, Chuck Grassley was at a town hall yesterday and brought up the issue of living wills. Has the White House reached out to him and --</s>GIBBS: Not that</s>I -- QUESTION: -- asked him why he chose to do this? Is this -- does his comments at all jeopardize -- in your mind jeopardize the bipartisanship that you're trying to put together?</s>GIBBS: No. Again, I -- well, not --</s>QUESTION: Did you see his comments?</s>GIBBS: I watched your newscast.</s>QUESTION: What is your reaction to his comments?</s>GIBBS: I would have him talk to Senator Murkowski, who said just in case -- you didn't -- I didn't see it. It wasn't on your newscast. "But it does us no good to incite fear in people by saying that there's these end-of-life provisions, these death panels. Quite honestly, I'm so offended at that terminology because it absolutely isn't in the bill. There's no reason to gin up fear in the American public by saying things that are not included in the bill." That, I think, would be my -- I'd paraphrase that response.</s>QUESTION: What would you want to say to Senator Grassley?</s>GIBBS: Yes. I think, again, that's what Senator Murkowski said. Does it in your mind this doesn't jeopardize the bipartisanship now?</s>GIBBS: No. I think we're continuing to -- obviously the president is continuing to talk to lawmakers and hope that the Finance Committee can come to some agreement.</s>QUESTION: Besides the town hall tomorrow, what else is he doing in Montana? Anything recreationally that you been --</s>GIBBS: I hope he'll be enjoying big sky country. But I don't have any announcements.</s>QUESTION: Hiking, fishing?</s>GIBBS: I don't have any announcements on that today.</s>QUESTION: Any coverage?</s>GIBBS: Probably not.</s>QUESTION: That you are sure about.</s>GIBBS: At least I can lean on that side of it, yes.</s>QUESTION: Whatever it is, we won't see it, is that what you're saying?</s>QUESTION: Robert, I want to follow-up on what Chuck was asking about Senator Grassley. Because -- so, he's the top senator on the Senate Finance Committee. The press has talked to him, the president wants a bipartisan bill. And yet Senator Grassley came out and said no public plan option, no way, no how. He won't vote for a bill on it. And yesterday he had a chance to clarify those death penalty thing and instead he jumped on it and said --</s>GIBBS: The death panel.</s>QUESTION: -- death panel, sorry. That people have a right to be afraid of it. So, I mean, do you really, can you still count seriously Chuck Grassley as an ally in getting your health care bill passed?</s>GIBBS: I still think there is the possibility of getting bipartisan agreement through the Finance Committee in order to make progress on a piece of legislation that can pass the Senate, yes.</s>QUESTION: Does Senator Grassley's support (</s>GIBBS: Well, Senator Grassley, Senator Enzi, Senator Snowe, are obviously three Republican senators that are involved in this. We, again, will hope to quell the misconceptions that are apparently held even by some in the Senate about what the bill is and what the bill isn't. But we'll continue to hope that they can make progress. Now, whether or not it happens, I don't know.</s>QUESTION: It seems to be playing a rope a dope with the White House. Leading you along and then slamming you down.</s>GIBBS: Well, we'll -- I guess we'll see about that.</s>QUESTION: Robert, Senator Grassley did yesterday specifically ask the White House would the president say he's willing to sign a bill that doesn't have a public option. Is that something the president is willing to say?</s>GIBBS: The president is willing -- the president is willing and wants to sign a bill that has adequate choice and competition for those that enter the private insurance market. Understand, again, the concept of this option was to provide exactly that: an option in an otherwise closed private insurance market that in some areas, in different parts of the country, that are dominated by -- might be dominated by only a couple or in some instances only one insurance company that's offering the ability for coverage on a private insurance market. The option of an additional plan is to simply provide some choice and competition to a group of people that can only get insurance that way because their employer doesn't provide it, they don't work, or what have you.</s>QUESTION: So you saying there needs to be a public option?</s>GIBBS: I'm saying there needs to be a mechanism that appropriately institutes choice and competition in a private insurance market that is normally, or can be at times, very narrow and closed, in order for those concepts to impact people's ability to buy quality health insurance.</s>QUESTION: One other question: Do you know if the president has ever consulted on health care with Rahm's brother, Ezekiel Emanuel?</s>GIBBS: Has he ever...</s>QUESTION: Consulted on health care matters.</s>GIBBS: I think Zeke has talked to, certainly to staff and to others about health care. I -- I have not been in every health care meeting the president's been. Yes?</s>QUESTION: Robert, you mentioned that some of -- back to PhRMA -- you mentioned that some of it would be written into the Senate Finance legislation.</s>GIBBS: Well, let's -- I -- I...</s>QUESTION: Did I understand that correctly?</s>GIBBS: Well, again, the -- the -- that's the panel, if you're talking about getting -- getting different cost savings into the bill on the Senate side, that's the committee of jurisdiction.</s>QUESTION: (</s>GIBBS: Is it not binding on...</s>QUESTION: Congress.</s>GIBBS: All of Congress?</s>QUESTION: All of Congress.</s>GIBBS: Well, I -- I guess that depends, to some degree, on what ultimately comes out of the Senate and what's agreed to in a conference committee. But I think that's getting -- that's projecting a tad ahead of ourselves.</s>QUESTION: Well, is it binding on the Senate Finance Committee?</s>GIBBS: This is the agreement that they entered into.</s>QUESTION: Well, Robert, a couple things on public option. It wasn't listed in the e-mail that David Axelrod sent out today defining principal goals for health care reform. By my reading of it, I didn't see any mention of a public option as a mechanism of achieving what you just outlined. Was that an oversight or is this...</s>GIBBS: I'd have to go back and reread...</s>QUESTION: Are there other priorities that take a higher precedent for the president than a public option?</s>GIBBS: Let me be clear -- I thought I was a minute ago, but I'll take another whack at it -- the -- this is an option that provides choice and competition in an otherwise narrow or closed insurance market. That's -- that's the president's goal is to ensure that if you didn't get your health insurance through your employer, you didn't have those type of options, that you would have something that might compete with the only game in town. That's -- I think that's in David's e-mail -- choice and competition.</s>QUESTION: Speaking of the e-mail, how was the list for who would receive it determined?</s>GIBBS: I believe it's for people that have signed up to receive e-mail updates from the White House.</s>QUESTION: The reason I asked is I have received e-mails from people who did not, in any way, shape or form, seek any communication from the White House, who had never registered on OFA, who have never registered on a campaign Web site...</s>GIBBS: Well, hold on, let's...</s>QUESTION: Let me finish my question.</s>GIBBS: No, no, no, no. Let's be clear...</s>GIBBS: No, no, no, no. Let's be clear, before -- I'm going to give you a chance to finish your question. You've done this a couple times, and I just want to be very clear, OK. OFA -- no, no, no, don't look funny -- OFA, whether Obama for America or Organizing for America, has nothing to do with, never has had anything to do with what -- if you sign up for through -- whitehouse.gov to receive e-mails. So let's just -- the reason I interrupted you, because I want you to rephrase your question that doesn't continue to assume that somebody is violating the law...</s>GIBBS: ... by mixing a political...</s>QUESTION: ... never, ever signed up for anything related to this White House, Senator Obama as a candidate, Senator Obama as anything, and have received e-mails from David Axelrod.</s>QUESTION: How could that be?</s>GIBBS: I'd have to look at who you said got the e-mail.</s>QUESTION: Do you seek other pieces of information identifying who might be curious about health care, outside of people who have asked for e-mails?</s>GIBBS: I'm sorry. Say that...</s>QUESTION: Do you in any way seek databases or information about people who might be interested in health care?</s>GIBBS: I will certainly check. I -- I will certainly check. I'm not under that impression.</s>QUESTION: They'd like to know how they get an e-mail from the White House when they have never asked for one.</s>GIBBS: I -- I'd be interested to see who you got that e-mail from and whether or not they're on the list. I don't...</s>QUESTION: May I follow up politely on one of...</s>GIBBS: Let me -- let me finish needling Major.</s>GIBBS: Again, I just want to be -- but I just want to be very...</s>QUESTION: What you're telling me is I need to give you these people's e-mails so you can check them on a list. I'm just asking.</s>GIBBS: Well, you're asking me if they're on a list and if you can figure out a different way of checking without asking me to double- check the names, I'm happy to...</s>QUESTION: They're telling me they're (</s>GIBBS: Right. But what I'm saying is, I -- I don't -- I don't -- I'd have to look and see...</s>QUESTION: So there's no -- you don't have an explanation for how someone who never signed up and never asked for anything from the White House would get an e-mail from David Axelrod?</s>GIBBS: Well, I hesitate to give you an answer because you might impugn the motives of the answer. I -- I...</s>QUESTION: Why would you say that?</s>GIBBS: Because of the way you phrased your follow-up. I'd have to look at what you got, Major. I don't -- I appreciate the fact that I have omnipotent clarity as to what you've received in your e-mail box today. I have...</s>QUESTION: You don't have to have omnipotent clarity. You don't have to impugn anything. I'm telling you what I got: e-mails from people who said I never asked anything from the White House...</s>GIBBS: And I'm simply saying -- well, we can -- let me go someplace else that might be constructive.</s>QUESTION: Robert, a couple of questions, one on end-of-life care and one on the town halls. Senator Grassley just in a statement a little while ago saying the Finance Committee dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly.</s>QUESTION: And I'm wondering, would the president support a bill that does not have these end-of-life provisions...</s>GIBBS: I would...</s>QUESTION: ... in it?</s>GIBBS: I have not asked him about that. I can't -- I don't know the answer.</s>QUESTION: OK. In other words, is it something he feels strongly about that is necessary?</s>GIBBS: I'd have to talk to him specifically...</s>QUESTION: OK. And then secondly, you talked a little bit yesterday about the town halls and how people sign up for them, and I'm wondering if you could just give us a little bit more information. I'm curious, how many people do try to get in? How far in advance do you put a sign-up list up on the Web site? Or just how does that work, if I were a citizen wanting to come to a town hall?</s>GIBBS: Well, obviously the size is determined by the venue with which and the capacity with which the venue can fill.</s>QUESTION: How far in advance do you...</s>GIBBS: I don't know...</s>QUESTION: ... advertise them?</s>GIBBS: I don't know how far in advance the Portsmouth one was. I know that a lot of this stuff is done through the local -- local media outlets and the local paper that sends you to a Web site to sign up for.</s>QUESTION: And does the White House find that there are many, many more people wanting to go that can...</s>GIBBS: Sure. Always.</s>QUESTION: ... can get in? And it's random you said...</s>GIBBS: Random, yes.</s>QUESTION: ... picked by computer?</s>GIBBS: It was for New Hampshire, yes.</s>QUESTION: Is it that way always?</s>GIBBS: I mean, different sign-up for different populations, but, yes, that's the way it was done at New Hampshire.</s>QUESTION: Is that the way it will be done this weekend?</s>GIBBS: I admit I don't have clarity on how they're -- how it's done this weekend.</s>QUESTION: Robert, may I ask about foreign affairs...</s>QUESTION: Could we get that by the end of today actually? I mean, I think that's something a lot of our...</s>GIBBS: (</s>QUESTION: ... a lot of our editors and producers are going to want an answer for, which is can you get us clarity exactly how the Montana...</s>GIBBS: Yes...</s>QUESTION: ... how the Montana tickets work by the end of...</s>GIBBS: Yes. (</s>QUESTION: And the Grand (ph) Junction as well?</s>GIBBS: Yes.</s>QUESTION: All right, first, one on Israel and one on Afghanistan. Majority of senators and also a large amount of congressmen have written to the president asking him to pressure the Arab countries to make more gestures toward peace.