>> that's the house tonight passing h.r. 2560, better known as cut, cap and balance. now it's a republican and tea party sponsored measure calling for massive spending cuts, a spending cap, and congress passing a balanced budget amendment. only then would the debt limit be allowed to go up, ending the current crisis. the measure was passed with just five democratic votes. senate democrats say they'll defeat it. if somehow they fail, president obama says he'll veto it. in other words, it's doa which is why a lot of democrats are calling it a stunt and a waste of time. earlier today a bipartisan group of senators called the gang of six came out with a proposal of their own that is being taken seriously, including at the white house. >> and so for us today, democratic fors acknowledge that we've got to deal with our long-term debt problems that arise out of our various entitlement programs. and for republican senators to acknowledge that, revenues will have to be part of a balanced package that makes sure that nobody is disproportionately hurt from us making progress on the debt and deficits, i think is a very significant step. >> the plan in brief cuts the national debt by about $3.7 trillion over the next 10 years. it does it with a mix of spending cuts and tax changes. now, there are several catches, though. uncertainty whether house tea party republicans will get behind it, and doubts from senate leaders that they can get it all done within the next two weeks. whatever the outcome, though, new polling tonight suggests that americans are losing confidence in washington. in the latest abc news "washington post" survey, 8 in 10 americans are either dissatisfied or angry about the way the federal government is working. that's the highest percentage since the 1990s. additionally, 63% say they were inclined to look around next year for new representation in washington. joining us now, democratic strategist james carville and ari fleischer, former george w. bush press secretary. thanks both of you for joining us. ari, that poll today is pretty striking. eight in ten americans upset with washington right now, six in ten inclined to look elsewhere when it comes to election time. we're one day closer to a possible problem with the debt ceiling here. was this really the moment to spend an entire day on what everyone thinks is a symbolic gesture? >> i don't think it was symbolic at all, sanjay. the only institution of the washington the house the senate and white house that has actually done its job and done anything meaningful on spending or debt is the house of representatives. they passed a budget. the senate has not. they passed cuts today. the senate has not. and president obama in his budget never propose today do anything about the debt except to let it grow. so only one institution is doing it. the president isn't for it, so therefore he wants to belittle it and act as if what the house did isn't meaningful but it is. the other reason it's meaningful beyond legislatively is now because almost every republican in the house has now voted to increase the debt limit. that crosses an important threshold for house republicans. it's almost as if that old game of warm warm hot hot? you've got to go through a few of these intermediate steps before you get to the final last-minute step of getting the agreement done. i'm still hopeful an agreement will be done. but you do have to go through this dance before you get there. and this is a part of it. but make no mistake, that was a real bullet what they passed today. it's the only real cuts in town. >> and james, i'm going to have you weigh in on this in a second. but ari, my point is that it's not going to get passed, h.r. 2560. the american people watch this and say that's great but it's not going to probably get through the senate and certainly the president will veto it so it does nothing for me. according to these polls it doesn't seem like it provides political cover for the representatives because the people seem frustrated with what's happening in washington right now. >> what they did in the house is actually the closest representation to the election of 2010 where people were sent to washington to make a difference and change. so in that case it's consistent with the public. i think the frustration is that the public's divided as well just as the politicses are. the public wants to get things done, they want people to work together but they also want washington to change the way it's been spending money. and so until the end of the day, and this is the way washington has always worked, they get the work done at the last second. until that last second agreement is reached, you're going to have this national churning in the public. everybody's fed up with it. it's totally understandable. it's a messy, messy, bad-looking process but it's the way our system works. >> james, you know how the system works as well. do you think this vote was an important gesture to conservatives in does it provide some cover in terms of -- >> i think it provided conservatives -- i think it provided cover to the conservatives. actually when you look at the polls they're not balanced at all who people are mad at. they are overwhelmingly mad at the congressional republicans. 71% to 73% disapprove of them. something like the numbers were like 20 to 73. president was 43-48. that's not parity. the public has decided that they don't like their approach. now, they may be wanting to double down with their base, may be wanting to do this where they have this vote so they can do something else. that i don't know. but i suspect that this thing now that one side has a clear political advantage, that's generally the way these things wash out. and pretty soon we're going to get off of this and they'll go to some version of an extension or something that will give them some kind of political -- they're going to try to get political cover with their base to move forward. it's still got a little ways to go here. >> looking forward, james, there seems to be a lot of optimism. i think you'll agree in the senate about this gang of six proposal. the president came out praising it as you heard. called it a good development. between democratic leaders in the senate saying they don't think now there's enough time to pass this bill. is it possible that we've just gotten too late for this grand bargain? >> well, they can do anything they want. they can extend it 30 -- can extend the debt ceiling for 30 days pending the outcome. they're congress. there's 11 options -- 1,0001 options they have before you get to default. a lot of republicans being told it doesn't matter, it would actually be good for the country. kind of flummoxes me but that's what a lot of them think. we're going to need a lot of democratic votes to pass this in the house. whether they can get them i don't know. it's still not a done deal. but right now it's pretty easy to declare there's a political winner in this. it's the president. that's pretty clear at this point. maybe they'll be able to change it and turn it around but it's going to be pretty tough. >> here's why the president is not the political winner in. this if he was the political winner why is the generic republican candidate beating him by eight points in the recent gallup poll. why is his job approval dropping including gallup to the low mid 40s range? the president's number have been coming down this whole process as well. so has congress's. this is the ultimate pox on both houses. there is no winner in this whole mess. and as far as the whoelt notion of is default good or bad for the country, you have a very small number of republicans who think that we won't default and if we did it's not a big problem. they're wrong. you also have a big number of democrats and much larger number who say it doesn't matter if we spend the nation into bankruptcy. we won't go bankrupt. they're wrong. and that's even worse because there are more of them who believe that than the small number of republicans who are willing to countenance the fall. >> let me ask you something. >> let me be clear. these polls, can i just be clear about something? this is washington equivalent. polls are not equivalent. the public blames the congressional republicans much more than the president, all right? that's a fact that cannot be disputed. we should not get off with the facts are. it's not a pox on both the house. it's overwhelmingly the public blames the congressional republicans. >> james, as somebody who's made his living with polls you know as well as i do that there's not only one poll in town. there's a bunch of them. >> three of them. you can look at all three. [ overlapping speakers ] >> his numbers have been dropping. the president is not -- nobody's faring well in this, james. >> james let me ask you something very specific. there's a question about the president releasing more details about what specifically he'd cut. that seems to be a point of contention. do you think the president should do that? people accuse him of being vague. should he be more specific on this? >> well, what i think -- he's embraced the quote gang of six i guess now they're saying it's the gang of seven. and a lot of these cuts are going to have to go. i was listening to senator conrad today, was reading something. this would have to go obviously to some of the revenue things have to go to finance committee and have to go to different places. but they're pretty specific in, this the amount that they're trying to do. one agreement they said they had half a billion dollars or a trillion dollars in cuts and it turned out to be 30 billion or something like that. who knows? nobody has an agreement to do anything yet. i suspect that they're going to get one. it may be -- they may have to get a 30-day extension do something like that. by the way, senator demint says it's not just minor republicans. one of the most powerful republican senators said that. senator too maniy an up and coming star of the republican party says default would be fine, better for the country. all over talk radio you're hearing default would be good. "wall street journal" editorial pages is printing op ed pieces saying default would be good for the party. pretty substantial feeling among the republican party this would be a good thing. >> what do you think happens between now and august 2nd? >> never forget, the administration, the department of treasury, does have the ability to juggle some more trust funds and push back the august 2nd date. i think that's ultimately going to happen if we're anywhere close to august 2nd. i think you'll get some type of intermediate agreement made modest level of spending cuts only going to get us through the fall, maybe the winter, and then they're going to have to come back with this with different politics as the year goes along to figure out what to do down the road. i think it's too late for any kind of grand bargain. don't overinterpret what the gang of six did. it actually is not the language of a grand bargain. it's kicking the can down the road so a grand bargain gets negotiated again later. it's not to do all its work before august 2nd. short term then they're going to come back and we're going to be here again i hate to tell you in another six months or so. >> big day, though, on this particular topic. all right, other lee fleischer, james sar ville. thanks coach. you can follow me on twiting @ sanjay goop tachlt up next rupert murdoch in the hot seat. his phone hacking scandal is only part of the story. a three-ring sir cuss attackeded it as well as piers morgan and his stinging counter punch. later japan's nuclear disaster, another credibility gap getting even wider. just a week ago the government said beef from nearby areas was safe in small portions. now it's saying don't even take a bite. we'll have details shortly. first up check in with isha sesay. >> a stunning revelation in the casey anthony story. the 84 internet searches for chloroform she allegedly made? turns out the real number might be just one. says who? and what about the prosecution's duty to tell the defense? answers coming up when 360 continues. of at&t and t-mobile would deliver our next generation mobile broadband experience to 55 million more americans, many in small towns and rural communities, giving them a new choice. we'll deliver better service, with thousands of new cell sites... for greater access to all the things you want, whenever you want them. it's the at&t network... and what's possible in here is almost impossible to say. ok. [ cellphone rings ] hey. you haven't left yet. no. i'm boarding now... what's up? um...would you mind doing it again? last time. [ engine turns over ] oooohhhh...sweet. [ male announcer ] the chevy cruze with the my chevrolet app. the remote control car is finally here. well, now she's just playing with us. oh. [ horn honks ] energy is being produced to power our lives. while energy developement comes with some risk, north america's natural gas producers are committed to safely and responsibly providing decades of cleaner burning energy for our country, drilling thousands of feet below fresh water sources within self contained well systems and using state of the art monitoring technologies, rigorous practices help ensure our operations are safe and clean for our communities and the environment we are america's natural gas. take one media mogul, one pie in the face, a right hook and a stiff upper lip. you've pretty much summed up the day in britain's parliament and rupert murdoch's phone hacking scandal. he and his son james and former news corp. executive rebekah brooks were grilled today. the elder murdoch apologizing but refusing to take the rap. >> do you feel that ultimately you are responsible for this whole fiasco? >> nope. >> you're not responsible? who is responsible? >> the people that i trusted to run it. and then maybe the people they trusted. >> no apology and no stepping down. >> have you considered resigning? >> >> no. >> why not? >> because i feel that people i trusted, not saying who, i don't know what level. have let me down. and i think they have behaved disgracefully and betrayed the company and me. and it's for them to pay. i think that frankly i'm the best person to clean this up. >> and speaking of cleaning up, the proceedings were interrupted briefly when a protestor deliver a shaving cream pie. take a look at this. keep your eye on the lower left-hand corner of your screen. it happens pretty quickly. >> oh! >> here it is quickly again in slow motion. here comes the pie. and that pink blur that you see over there is rupert murdoch's wife wendy who leaps across the table, taking a poke at the pieman. then a body arrives and takes the man away. his name reportedly is jonathan may bowles. in his twitter handle, johnny marbles. just before the attack he tweeted "i'm actually in this committee and can confirm, murdoch is mr. burns". mr. burns being c. montgomery burns from fox's "the simpsons". springfield's richest man. unlike mr. burns, though, there's nothing funny about the allegations against mr. murdoch's british newspaper empire. you heard him deny any responsibility for the phone hacking. he's spent a fair bit of time painting himself as simply out of tuchlt listen. >> i can't answer. i don't know. >> i don't know. i was not aware at the time, but i don't have any memory. i don't know anything about that. i'm not sure what i said. i cannot swear to the accuracy of it. i just don't remember. >> joining me now, cnn's internationals richard quest, senior legal analyst jeffrey toobin and "vanity fair" contributing editor vickie ward. welcome to all of you. you all had very busy days, i know. richard, let me start with you. how do you think the murdochs did today? and i'll preface by saying if the stock price is any indication, the reaction seemed to be favorable. should we be reading into that? >> the murdochs did what they had to do in the sense of appeasing investors but not a great deal more than that. they still have not answered to the fundamental question, why was the culture allowed to take place at that newspaper that aloud these events to happen, and why did they not know more about it? did the chain of command clearly fall -- i want to show you the morning newspapers. it's a quarter past 3:00 in the u.k. bear with me. this is how the daily telegraph is reporting it this morning. murdoch eats humble pie. the rival news of the world has foam whacked. but interestingly, sanjay, if i show you both of the murdoch newspapers, they go for the most humble day of my life and murdoch's defense. and they're that highly-highly embarrassing moment is not on the front page, although obviously both newspapers do feature it inside. the newspapers are clearly all over this with every pun you can possibly imagine about foam, custard pies, humble pies. >> richard, i mean, i watched that and everyone just saw it again. you can't help feel a little bit sorry for the giecht he's 80 years old and getting essentially whacked with this foam pie or whatever it was. does it make a big difference? was there a little bit of sympathy, you think, that people felt as a result? >> whatever sympathy there was, listen to those answers again that you played, sanjay. and you'll see that yes, that might have been his general demeanor. very long pauses before answers. but when those answers came, they were clear, they were definitive. no, i don't take ultimate responsibility. i didn't do this. i was misled and betrayed. and the feeling generally from what i've read in the comment and the analysis is that whatever he may have on the surface looked like, here was rupert murdoch doing what he had to do, doing it honestly and sincerely about the million dollar hacking of the dead girl's phone. but obviously with a wider agenda. >> so jeff, i mean, so he apologized. he said he was humbled. but he did not take responsibility. what do you make of that, jeff toobin? >> i think his problem is not really legal at this point. it's a business problem. he has to figure out a way to keep control for his family of the news corp. i mean, i don't think there is any direct criminal responsibility, either -- certainly not in the united states, and probably not in great britain, either. but he has to persuade the so-called independent directors of news corp. who are not very independent who are very much in normal circumstances dependent on him, he has to persuade them that he and his son are still fit to run the company, that they are not liabilities. and i think they barely did that. james murdoch did his sort of tony robbins, a lot of business cliche's about how he was being proactive and there was a code of conduct. but -- and rupert was grudgingly accepting of responsibility, although he apparently had no idea how his newspapers work. but i think he probably did enough to hold on. >> vickie, you used to work for rupert murdoch. >> yeah. both side of the atlantic. >> right. right. and as jeff said, he seems to have held his ground today in some ways scoring points as we saw with investors. but there are other investigations still going on. i think four or five of them. where do you see the scandal going from here? >> well, i think this is a watershed moment for the british press, and hopefully for the press around the world. i mean, it's very important that press play the part that actually rupert talked about at the end of the hearing today. what he initially intended to do when his father gave him the legacy that he gave him and he came to britain was create a culture of transparentsy, to make the democracy really free. and make the establishment answerably to the press that was honest and clean, not sleazy and criminal. as the allegations -- what clearly happened with the cases "the news of the world" have been involve