nearly all mainstream medical and psychological associations say there's no evidence that works. and there's plenty of evidence that it can be hurtful and harmful. this might not even be a story except mr. bachmann has denied the clinic he and his wife own practice reparative therapy. now congresswoman bachmann is refusing to answer questions about it. neither one is talking about it now. what's surprising is for years congresswoman bachmann and her husband have spoken extensively publicly about their views on sexual orientation which they clearly believe is not something that people are born with and which they believe can be treated. here's some of michele bachmann's comments in the past. >> this is an earthquake issue. this will change our state forever. because the immediate consequence if gay marriage goes through is that k-12 little children will be forced to learn that homosexuality is normal and natural and that perhaps they should try it. >> if you're involved in the gay and rez lesbian lifestyle it's bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement. this is not funny. it's a very sad life. it's part of satan, i think, to say that this is gay. it's anything but gay. it's profoundly sad to recognize that almost all -- >> some of the audio recordings over the years. you can agree or disagree with bachmann's views on homosexual tichlt that's not the issue tonight. what's not the issue is when mr. bachmann denied using reparative therapy at his clinic as you'll hear him do shortly, it seems he wasn't telling the truth, jim acosta tonight keeping them honest. >> hi, everybody. >> reporter: in her campaign for president, michele bachmann touts her background as a small business owner. >> as a mom of five, a foster parent, and a former tax lawyer and now a small business job creator -- >> reporter: that business is bachmann and associates, a christian counselling service outside minneapolis run by her husband marcus. in recent years the clinic has faced accusations it encourages gay and liz lesbian patients to change their sexual orientation, a practice that is frowned upon by mental health experts. back in 2004, andrew ramirez at the urging of his mother turned to bachmann and associates to talk about his own homosexuality. the then 17-year-old says he was immediately skeptical of what one of the clinic's counselors told him. >> it was therapy that would help me change from being homosexual to straight. >> that's how he described it? >> yes. >> he basically said if you do this, what? you wouldn't be gay anymore? >> if i did this and worked his therapy program, god could perform a miracle and i could no longer be gay. >> reporter: ramirez says he was assigned a therapy program consisting of prayer and reading bible passages. he also says he was told he would be mentored by an ex-lesbian minister. if none of that worked, ramirez says, the counselor had another idea. >> he suggested to you what? >> not acting out on my same-sex attractions and living a life of celibacy. >> that was an alternative to being gay? >> right. >> reporter: after the second session, ramirez told his mother he wanted to stop. >> and i could just hear his voice quivering. i just said, you know, andy, if you're good with being gay then i am, too. >> reporter: the american psychological association is sharply critical of what's known in the mental health community as reparative therapy, saying in a recent report "there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation". but in a talk radio interview last year, marcus bachmann compared gay teenagers to barbarians who must be disciplined. >> what do you say when your teenager says she's gay? what do you say to christian parents who come up with this? well, i think you clearly say what is the understanding of god's word on homosexuality. and i think that this is no mystery that a child or pre-adolescent particularly adolescent will question and wonder -- certainly there's that curiosity. but again, we like -- it is as if we have to understand barbarians need to be educated. they need to be disciplined, and just because someone feels it or thinks it doesn't mean that we're supposed to go down that road. >> reporter: back in 2006, bachmann denied his practice engaged in reparative therapy, telling a minneapolis newspaper "that's a false statement" and went on to say "if someone is interested in talking to us about their homo sexuality we are open to talking about that. but if someone comes in a homosexual and they want to stay homosexual, i don't have a problem with that". >> what would you suggest to me like a treatment plan type of thing? >> definitely pray. >> reporter: this week a gay rights group truth wins out released a hidden camera video recorded by one of its activists who posed as a patient at bachmann and association. >> you can actually leave homosexuality completely and become heterosexual? >> oh, yeah, yeah, definitely. oh, i believe all about that. and it's happened before. it really has. >> reporter: in the full five sessions of footage, while the counselor at times suggests homosexuality can be treated at the clinic, he also concedes he's not an expert on the subject. michele bachmann has a long history of controversial views on homosexuality. she recently signed a pledge to defend marriage that compared same sex couples to polygamists. that's a comparison bachmann made as a state lawmaker in 2004 when she called for an amendment to block gay marriages in other states from being recognized in minnesota. >> if we allow this to happen, group marriage, polygamy and things much worse may not be far behind. >> reporter: both balk mens declined our request for interviews. her campaign released a statement to cnn that says "the bachmanns are in no position ethically, legally or morally to discuss specific courses of treatment concerning the clinic's patients". a local tv station in iowa tried to ask bachmann whether her family clinic engages in reparative therapy, she dodged the question. >> is it something that is conducted at that center? >> well, i'm running for the presidency of the united states. and i'm here today to talk about job creation and also the fact that we do have a business that deals with job creation. we're very proud of the business that we've created. >> so jim, how might these revelations and her refusal to answer them affect her campaign in places like iowa? it's very possible they'd have no effect especially among her conservative base. >> reporter: that's right, anderson. the polls show she has a serious shot of winning the iowa caucuses because social conservatives will be a decisive factor in that contest. and it's quite possible that the conservative base there will view this clinic not as a liability but as an asset. the marriage pledge that she signed from one conservative group out there basically believes what she believes and what this clinic believes. >> yeah. jim, appreciate the reporting. you saw a moment ago where the american psychological association this of this reparative therapy. we wanted to learn more about it so earlier i spoke with dr. drew pinsky host of hln "dr. drew". >> what does reparative therapy mean? what does it consist of? >> many times they're using models for other kinds of behaviors that people have difficulty controlling like addictions. so they're using things like 12-step models and those sorts of interventions. there's a lot of trauma therapist involved. some of these treatments are quite legitimate. what's problematic is this idea that being homosexual is somehow pathological and needs to be fix zbld you said these treatments were legitimate but there's not really any evidence that this kind of therapy works, right? >> that's right. the treatments are legitimate. i mean, for instance, when i've talked to the guys that have either been through these treatments or use them, they're talking about trauma treatments. they're talking about trauma therapies. i understand that. that's a legitimate thing to do if somebody's had trauma. but with the goal of changing somebody's sexual orientation now you've gone completely off the rail. the medical establishment is going to great lengths to sort of atone for having pathologized this for many years. it was not correct. is it is not a pathology. and there's no one in established medicine that believes that it is. >> so the american psychiatric association, the ama, none of them back this idea of reparative therapy, that you can pray enough and suddenly not be gay or go through other forms of reparative therapy and no longer be gay? >> that's absolutely true. and not only that, though, even again, the people that i've talked to that went through, this we dedicated an entire program to this one evening. and even the guys that have been through it are clear it's not like their sexual orientation has changed. they just can contain their behaviors a little differently. >> it was interesting one of the counselors, and i don't know if the person is an actual therapist or what their qualification is but i'll just say a counselor in that video was telling this person with the hidden camera, it's definitely worked. you can definitely change it. but in truth, as you said, you've interviewed a lot of people who have gone through this kind of treatment. i've interviewed people over the years who have gone through this treatment. and even the ones who claim that they are no longer gay, when you really push them they will admit that every day they still have the fantasies, they still have the thoughts, they just are forcing themselves not to act on what appears to be their natural inclination. >> that is precisely what i found. that is exactly what i found with those people. now, they will also then say that, well, okay, but are you saying that people shouldn't have a choice to do something if they want to change? that's sort of what they'll hide behind then. and the fact is, again, it's exactly what you're describing. it's living a life that is not consistent with their biology and who they are. and it's pathologizing something that's not a pathology. and i'm not saying that there shouldn't be choices for people. i'm saying that having those choices might have a very significantly negative impact on people and we need to take a look at that. >> because repressing yourself in that way, because living that kind of -- repressing your inner most thoughts, you're saying, is not healthy long term. >> i'm saying of course that would be a very difficult way to live. but i'm actually more concerned about the ambient culture coming down on people who otherwise would be able to live healthy, happy lives. those are the people that really get hurt in the fallout from something like this. it's somebody who is coming to terms with this who may be ambivalent who begins thinking because they seal billboards on the roadside that there's something wrong with them, aren't you adding to discrimination and misery for people -- >> to say that this is somehow a choice which there's no evidence of. >> well, you know, you're absolutely correct. the idea of a choice, it's a bizarre notion. i mean, think about it. for anybody who has feelings about this out there. it's like a choice to like chocolate ice cream or a choice to like certain kinds of -- be attracted in a certain way to certain kinds of people. that's something in us. it's a very deep biological piece of who we are as human beings. >> dr. drew pinsky, thanks. >> anderson, thank you. quick 360 keeping them honest followup. last night we told you about a marriage pledge signed by michele bachmann and rick santorum, republican presidential candidates that had some historically inaccurate and false statements about slavery. the fall slavery section was taken out. tonight we've learned that mitt romney has said he will not sign the pledge. he said "mitt romney strongly supports traditional marriage but he felt this contained references and divisions that were undignified and inappropriate for a presidential campaign". let us know what you think we're on facebook, follow me on twitter @ anderson cooper president obama's dire warnings about the social security checks that millions of people rely on. if government defaults don't count on the checks he's saying. is he just trying to scare seniors and others? details on that ahead. later syria where tension is rising after mobs attack the u.s. embassies, very latest what washington is doing about it. also hear from one of the casey anthony jurors about the reaction she's getting for voting not guilty. >> you come home and everyone's mad at you. and the media's outside hounding you and making it clear they're not leaving. and it's just very stressful. and you get anonymous letters from people that are hateful and nasty. w, go to priceline for a sneak peek at recent winning hotel bids to find where you can save up to 60% on hotels. * we'll even email you other people's winning bids, so you'll know what price to name. *รก with new hotel bid alerts, from priceline. woman: saving for our child's college fund was getting man: yes it was. so to save some money, we taught our 5 year old how to dunk. woman: scholarship! woman: honey go get him. anncr: there's an easier way to save. get online. go to geico.com. get a quote. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. raw politics now, late developments in the trillion dollar battle over the budget and one major bombshell today, president obama saying he cannot guarantee americans will get their social security checks on august 3rd unless an agreement is reached by august 2nd on cutting the deficit and raising the debt ceiling. in political terms with his showdown with house and senate republicans that's called bringing an h bomb to a gun fight or little league came and could be called scare mongering. we'll talk about it shortly and the budget negotiations. first the president's stunning answer. >> can you tell the folks at home that no matter what happens the social security checks are going to go out on august 3rd? there are about $20 billion worth of social security checks that to go out the day after. >> these are not just social security checks. these are veterans checks and folks on disability, their checks. there are about 70 million checks that go out each month. >> can you guarantee as president those checks will go out on august 3rd? >> i cannot guarantee those checks go out on august 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue. because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it. >> now, in fact, there are different estimates of when precise lit treasury would run out of cash and authority to sell more bonds to finance the government. but whichever day it is according to bipartisan policy center, the government will instantly be unable to finance the difference between the $200 billion in revenue for august and $360 billion in spending, sending out those social security plus medicare, defense contractors, interest on the debt accounts for 172 billion of the $200 billion. after paying all of that, the bipartisan center estimates the treasury would not be able to pay the troops, finance the v.a., send out college loans, fund highway construction or pay tax refunds. and the choices make it tougher as time goes on. president obama says he will not accept a short-term deal. senate minority leader mitch mcconnel today offered a complicated series of short-term deals. democratic snot dick durbin said he'd consider mcconnel's offer but republicans slammed mcconnel and for making it. house speaker boehner laid the problem squarely at president obama's doorstep. >> this debt limit increase is his problem and he needs to put his plan on the table, something that congress can pass. >> speaker boehner says he cannot sell a plan with tax increases to his members. president obama today said he thinks he can sell democrats on entitlement cuts but liberal democrats are putting up sharp resistance and conservatives are accusing them and others of scaring seniors on social security. joining us gloria borger and david gergen both weighing in on cnn cnn.com. what do you make of the president's statements today? was that scare mongering or does he have a valid snoint. >> it's both. of course he's trying to scare people. but it's also true that you could put social security first and pay it. but clearly, anderson, when a government as we are is borrowing 40 cents on the dollar, you're only got 60 cents left out of each dollar to figure out what you're going to pay for. that other 40 cents is not going to get paid. so theoretically, yes, social security may not -- checks may not go out. would the government actually do that? i think the social security would go out first then along with veterans checks. >> gloria, you're referring to this as a defining moment or definitional moment for the republican party. how so? >> well, i think at a certain point the parties have to decide how they're going to govern and what they're about. and i think it's always in my memory been that republican party is the party of smaller government and fiscal responsibility. but now we see a new strain in the republican party in which the sort of obsession, no taxes, no new taxes, seems to trump everything else. you had a deal, a potential deal between the president of the united states and the house speaker in which the president was offering $3 of spending cuts for every dollar of tax increases. i believe even ronald reagan probably would have taken that deal. but there are all these republicans, 230 of them in the house, who have taken a no tax pledge. and couldn't even sign onto that. i think they've made a choice. the choice is, taxes are more important than deficit reduction. >> it's interesting, david, democrats are drawing the line, some democrats are drawing the line on some entitlement programs like social security, medicare. isn't that as much of a hurdle for the president as the republican hard line on taxes? >> i don't think it is. the president has -- believes very strongly, and i have this on excellent authority today -- he believes very strongly he can bring along harry reid and nancy pelosi kicking and screaming to be sure to sign onto some entitlement reforms. and while he's having a recal sit rant republican party. i happen to favor the simpson bowles plan which was $2 of spending cuts for $1 of tax increases. i think that's the right way to go. but i think it's unfair to republicans to say that they're simply -- they're so ideological. they feel that in the last few years, government has become bloated. it's grown from about 19% of the gdp to almost 25% of gdp. and they feel that the democrats have the ideological commitment to big government. what they would like to see is the government sweated down. that's the point they've been trying to make. and there are honest differences and people have a very different view of what kind of society we ought to live in. >> but at a certain point, david, when there was a big deal on the table, and if as you say the president could have brought nancy pelosi along, and i agree with you i think he could have, the republicans would have gotten a great deficit reduction deal if they hadn't committed to the no tax pledge, right? >> but gloria, asking any party to commit to a $1 trillion of tax increases is an awful big lift for a party that is all along stood for lower taxes. and when they also feel a lot of these cuts are going to turn out to be illusory. their experience in the past they sign onto the bargains and they feel the democrats eventually wind up getting what they wanted and what they were promised never materializes. >> but there's a big difference between that and nothing. you know? a big difference. [ overlapping speakers ] >> where do you see the middle gr