either chamber of congress. what is striking about that fact, about 41% of republican voters say they support the bill. a bill republican leaders say they'll not vote for in part because they feel left out of the process. >> it didn't have to be this way. we could have had a bill that was, you know, a fraction of the cost of this one that could have gotten bipartisan approval and support, but the speaker decided to go in another direction. >> now, there certainly can be legitimate reasons not to like this current relief bill like there were legitimate reasons republicans and democrats didn't like the last one. feeling left out of the process was listed as a reason then, too. few leaders making decisions without significant input from members and feeling rushed but it passed by wide margins it passed because the whole out weighed the individual parts people didn't like. 359 votes in the democratic controlled house and 92 in the republican senate. it was largely bipartisan, same with the same package that passed a year ago that cost $2 trillion. 96 1rthen votes in the republic control senate and no republican votes likely in either house so what changed in a year? in addition to the hundreds of thousands of lost lives and millions of lost jobs, you can probably figure it out. chief white house correspondent kaitlan collins joins us with breaking details how administration is looking to roll out the relief package. so kaitlan, how is the president preparing to sell this package to the american people in the coming days and how much has that complicated by the complete lack of republican support? >> reporter: in addition to wanting to take a victory lap to tote his first major legislative achievement, a lot of the driving force behind this and what you see by him getting on air force one and going around the country to pitch this plan is the fact no republicans in washington voted for it because this is something the white house has been banking on saying it may not be bipartisan here in the nation's capitol but it is throughout the nation soaying there are republican voters, trump voters they believe wanted to see this bill get passed and wanted to get stimulus checks and have other aspects go into effect. that's what president biden is going to be saying by taking that message on the road and really trying to ensure that this remains a popular plan because you are right, we do not expect a single republican to vote in favor of this bill even through the iterations that we've seen through it and the white house is counting on saying maybe these republicans didn't vote for it but many constituents wanted them to. >> you mentioned the president's national address on thursday. do we know more what he's expected to say? >> we're told it's going to be forward looking because the white house seems to register that there is a sense of weariness among the restrictions you're seeing and this comes of course after the cdc announces guidelines for what they believe fully vaccinated people should be able to do. there has been some push back on administration and the cdc i should say i guess over the fact that it didn't change the travel guidance. they did not say whether or not fully vaccinated people can travel. so when president biden does speak to the nation on thursday night, that's going to be something top of mind for voters and the white house really wants to talk about how getting this plan passed will be able to be directly tied to his plan for getting life back to normal really. >> on the stimulus checks, any sense when americans can expect to get them? >> reporter: this is a big question. in the last round they went out from the irs pretty quickly, within days of the president actually signing that bill, and so right now the white house is not offering that specific of a timeline. they're just saying they should start going out this month. we're only at the beginning of ma march. we pressed them on a more specific timeline today and didn't get one. we should note one other thing, president biden may be signing this bill in the coming days but his signature won't be on the stimulus checks. the press secretary told me it's not a priority for him, he wants them out quicker and that stands in stark contrast to former president trump who demanded and insisted his name be on the checks that were going out even though we should note a lot was direct deposit to people but he wanted to make sure he got credit and doesn't seem to be the case with biden because he's not making her his name is on them. >> just a few minutes ago we spoke to a top democrat that will help guide the bill to president biden's desk, chuck schumer. leader schumer, what's your message to millions of americans tonight out of work struggling to make ends meet because of the pandemic? the expectations for the relief bill are extraordinary high. >> help is on the way for so many americans, the vast overwhelming majority of americans who need help. there will be money in people's pockets, checks of $1400 will go to middle class and working families. the vast majority of americans will receive those. there will be vaccines in people's arms far more quickly than people anticipated. the pace will be picking up. there will be money to keep schools open and safely open so all the discome boblation in terms of kids learning and parents having to deal with kids who are at home will be gone and there will be the kind of help to feed people who have lost their jobs and need food to keep people in their homes, to pay the rent. this is the broadest, most comprehensive bill to help middle class and working people, poor people that's come along in decades. it is broad. it is comprehensive, and it will be very effective. >> i spoke to senator bernie sanders last night. he said even though the bill doesn't include a federal minimum wage hike it is the most significant legislation for working people that's been passed in decades. it sounds like you agree with that. >> totally agree. we worked closely on this bill and bernie was very, very helpful in getting this bill passed and done. >> senate republican leader mitch mcconnell attacked the relief bill on the chamber floor today and called it very liberal and purely partisan and accused you of putting lock step party unity substance ahead of bipartisan compromise. >> the biggest bill mcconnell put on the floor was a bill of about the same size 1.7 trillion. it benefitted the top 1%. it was tax cuts for the very wealthy and big corporations. our bill helps people in the middle class and who are poor. people who -- it will end -- cut in half child poverty. poor kids who don't have much of a chance and then grow up not having to have good full happy productive lives are going to get a much better break here. mitch mcconnell is somebody instead of just opposing everything and trying to thwart biden and be political, he caught to join us to help the american people. half of all republican voters like this bill. this is not a partisan bill. mcconnell is being highly partisan and hurting america. >> some senate republicans did meet with president biden early on. susan collins, lisa murkowski and mitt romney. could more have been done to get some of them on board? >> no, you know, we made a big mistake in 2009 and '10. susan collins was part of that mistake. we cut back on the stimulus dramatically and we stayed in recession for five years. what was offered by the republicans was so far away from what is needed. so far away from what biden proposed that he thought that they were not being serious and wanting to really negotiate. >> you got the bill across the finish line in the senate. it really came down to an 11th hour agreement with senator joe mansion. given the now majority, does mansion have de facto veto power over future legislation? >> look, originally joe mansion wanted to do an amendment with portman. i said that's going to kill the bill, joe. that is going to kill the bill. he thought about it for several hours and realized that and then said okay, let's come to a compromise and we did. we didn't change things very much. we changed it a little in his direction. i would prefer not to do it. this bill with that change is so overwhelmingly strong in helping poor and working people in america that i think it's getting huge applause from the american people. when people start getting their checks, when they start getting the vaccines, when school starts opening, when kids can get out of poverty, that's huge. that's huge, anderson. >> if it is that popular, given that or assuming that, despite that, there is still this un unified republican opposition to it. are you hopeful republicans will join democrats on anything or democrats will join republicans on anything in the near future? >> i want to say we want to work with republicans where we can but we have to get big bold change done and that's our number one priority. i, you know, have hope. i'm always an of tiptimist, nowt republicans see we can do it without them, they will try to work with us but we won't make the mistake of 2008 and 9 and do a small proposal it won't get us out of the mess we're in now, the mess health wise and economically and getting the economy going to the way it was 20, 30 years ago when people's wages went up regularly, when unemployment went down regularly. we've had a rather placid economy, i wouldn't say placid. we've had a weak, limp economy over the last ten years. we got to do a lot better than that to help the american people, give them hope. the american optimism that's so important is leaving people and they turn to a demagogue, a b bib biggot like donald trump. we have to show positive change that helps people so there is a positive path and they don't turn to demagogues. >> appreciate your time, thank you. thanks, anderson. >> still to come, more on the flight over covid-19 and the cristicism over the cdc guidelines and the lack of guidance on travel. cnbc saying it may give more information there. medical experts will discuss that and whether we should feel safe with case numbers declining and the response with the interview of prince harry and his wife meghan markle. that allowed me to pay off aggressively and save without breaking my back or breaking the bank. start your day with crest 3d white and from mochaccinos to merlot, that allowed me to pay off aggressively and save your smile will always be brilliant. crest 3d white brilliance. 100% stain removal, 24 hour stain resistance to lock in your whitest smile. crest. the #1 toothpaste brand in america. (customer) movie night. (burke) should have been watching the stove instead. (customer) tell me something i don't know. (burke) with your farmers policy perk, guaranteed replacement cost, your home can be rebuilt, regardless of your limits. (customer) that's really something. (burke) get a whole lot of something with farmers policy perks. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ there is more breaking news, the cdc says it may update travel guidance for those who are fully vaccinated but must first wait for more vaccinations and data after cristicism they didn't update travel requirements for those who had the final or only shot. writing "the washington post" cnn's medical analyst dr. lynn that nguyen said she found the guidelines too timid and limited. flying on an airport the risk of infection is low when all passengers are masked, surely it's lower for vaccinated people. why can't the cdc say people who have vaccinated travel without quarantining or getting tested. someone who continues to express grave concerns about covid variants. sanjay, the cdc director warned every time there is a travel surge, there is a covid surge. that was before 10% of the population was fully vaccinated. do you agree with dr. nguyen? are the cdc guidelines too cautious? >> well, you know, i do agree with dr. nguyen. they are cautious but one thing to keep in mind, we needd disentangle flying with vaccinations. the cdc says it still not a good time to recommend non-essential travel because of the way the cases are whether you're vaccinated or not. i don't think they think that really makes a difference. it is probably true what dr. nguyen has said if you're vaccinated, you're not likely to obviously, get sick. could you possibly still pass on the virus to somebody else? perhaps. it's a risk. albeit a small one. i think the larger message and i talked to andy about this a bit, we're still in the middle of this and they don't think people should be doinging non-essentia travel at this point. that's the main message they're trying to get across. >> professor osterholm, can you explain your thoughts and whether you believe the new guidelines are cautious enough? >> well, the variant that we're talking about is b117, the variant that originated in the u.k. and this is one that is actually much more infectious, 40 to 60% more infectious and one that is able to cause more severe illness. what we've seen in the united states over the course of the last five weeks is an increasing proportion of the viruses that we see in patients actually are coming from the b117 source, and what we're concerned about is if this follows as it would in europe where once it got to be 50% or more of the viruses were b117 there was major surge in cases. we have an outbreak in minnesota that's been developing over the last three weeks of b117 and it is spreading rapidly and very effectively in schools and now on to families and now multiple counties right here. this just literally happened overnight. so i think that this is what we're going to see more of in the course of the next six to 12 weeks and vaccine is a great answer to it but we don't have nearly enough, fast enough to dramatically impactosterholm, i understand you're not fully vaccinated. i understand you received your first dose january 23rd and delayed your second dose until later this spring. why do you think this is safe to do when the pfizer and moderna trials were based on two doses within three and four weeks? >> well, first of all, anderson, this has become an unfortunate situation where we're basically doing public policy by sound bytes and media interviews. what we've asked the u.s. government to do is go carefully and examine the data that supports that you can actually delay a second dose weeks and not have any material impact on the protection. at the same time, you can stretch out the number of doses before this b117 surge occurs. i mean, just this past week the canadian government after a careful review and exhaustive review agreed and said that you could actually postpone your doses potentially up to four months, and this flies, i know, in the face of what is a conventional wisdom from our government but there are many, many experts that actually believe that you will have the same level of protection for that period of time of just weeks. we're not talking about deferring it for months and at the same time, we could make a big difference. we put out a report that suggested that you can save upwards of over 40,000 lives if we could get that many more 65-year-olds and older vaccinated before this particular surge really hits us hard. >> so is that the reason you're delaying because you feel just as a statement that the vaccine that would -- the second vaccine that would have gone to you can go to somebody else? >> that's exactly right. i feel confident in the vaccine i have. i look forward to the second dose but right now there may be a grandfather or grandmother because i didn't get my second dose can get their first. we have more than 20 million americans 65 and older that have not had any vaccine at all and that's what we need to really concentrate on. this is the group where they -- 80% of deaths occurred with serious illnesses. we've done a lot to vaccinate long term care facilities. i think that's wonderful we still have a lot of very vulnerable people that i think as this b117 surge occurs, we're going to wish we had many more vaccinated. >> sanjay, what do you think about that? >> well, you know, it's a tough call. i mean, dr. osterholm and i talked about this a fair amount. i mean, you know, the issue i think a little bit is just how -- what's the veracity of the science in this period for michael here in terms of his protection if he were to get sick at this point having received the one vaccine, what would that do to the vaccine hesitancy around the world where people lose their faith on vaccines. we're in the middle of an emergency. this is a theme throughout. the science is important. this is the data that we have as dr. osterholm points out, it not enough for the cdc to recommend that. they did widen their time frame as you know to six weeks. you can wait up to six weeks instead of the three or four weeks but here we are. so how do you balance the emergency versus the prague -- pragmatic? >> i talked about the brazil variant or variant in brazil causing huge issues in the north of brazil. what's this stop that from coming to the united states? i think it was dr. murray saying if that does happen and it gets wide spread then kind of all bets are off. >> well, i think there is two issues here. number one, is in fact, what is the immediate urge and issue right now for us? it is b117. the p 1 variant is already here. we don't have any evidence of id spreading widely. it surely not competing well against the current concern that we have with the u.k. variant and the other variant that we're also looking at of course is the one from south africa, the b 1135 and i think at this point, that combination surely is a critical issue. we have people that are going to die from this other one, the u.k. variant that we really have to address. i, too, am concerned about that but that's not the first and immediate issue. >> yeah. sanjay, michael ol' sterholm, appreciate it. the queen breaking her silence of the stunning interview where meghan and harry accused the palace after racism. for unauthorized purchases on your card. (giggling) that's my turtle. fraud protection. discover. something brighter. it's an important time to save. with priceline, you can get up to 60% off amazing hotels. and when you get a big deal... you feel like a big deal. ♪ priceline. every trip is a big deal. tonight, i'll be eating the al pastor burrito from boca burritos right here in aurora. (doorbell rings) excellent as a local access show, we want everyone to support local restaurants. right cardi b? yeah! eat local! (trill sound) queen elizabeth is finally breaking her silence on prince harry and meghan markle's interview. the duke and duchess of sussex are making headlines with their climb of racism in the palace and the isolation disappear was so deep while pregnant with her first child she contemplated suicide. max foster joins us with royal reaction. what did the palace say? >> well, it's interesting, anderson. we normally get a statement from buckingham palace but a statement issued on behalf of her majesty the queen, the message being this message is from the top. everyone listen. this is important. so she goes on to say the whole family is satined to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for harry and meghan. it is concerning. while some recollections may vary, they are taking very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. harry and meghan and archie will always be much loved members of the family. i think what we can read into that the royal family doesn't recognize some of the things harry and meghan told oprah but keen to rebuild, look at the issue of race and investigate that. there will be a probe into that, but also, emphasizing they're still part of the family and things can get better. >> have meghan markle or prince p harry reacted to the palace statement? >> so i contacted the office