then, you know, you can get them. as long as they are nowhere near the sneaker department, okay? you folks at home can tell i run things at home with an iron figs. that's the way i am. you should see what i do at the conventions next week. oh. h ♪ oo >> i'm sandra smith in for wha melissa francis. here's money tonight.rom dire forecast taking a plunge over the cliff could bring a recession ruering back and cost millions of jobs. what are the chances the outlook comes true? we have former advisers here,ga and a big break for coal. shooting down the epa over new pollution regulations. the industry may be clear from government's crack downs for now, but in even bigger threat is already turning the lights out on the industry out on the industry.

. ils. even when they say it's not. >> even when they say it's not, it always is about money. ♪ following the fed's relief, and fed policymakers showing us growing willingness for a growing round of stimulus to aid the economy.e the dow paired the in majority of the losses closing down 30 30 points. hewlett-packard shares rise after the fiscal

third quarter earnings. the company beat profit estimates but coming in light on the revenue side. slowdown in pc sales was smaller than expected hp's cfo says the company cut 4,000 jobs over the quarter. signs of life for battered shares of zynga. the social gaming company scoring an outperform from jnp securities sending its stock soaring nearly 10%. shares of zynga however, still down 65% since its ipo last december. as i mentioned the minutes from the federal reserve's latest meeting are now in and they seem to indicate that fed officials are seriously considering taking further action to stimulate the economy. let me bring in glenn hubbard, economic advisor to presumptive gop presidential nominee mitt romney, and dean of the columbia school of business. professor hubbard, thank you for joining me. >> my pleasure. sandra: the big question tonight, is it another round of stimulus really what our country needs right now? will this solve our problems? >> i don't think it would be particularly helpful.

what the quantitative easing might do is lower modestly yields on 10-year treasury instruments that is not really holding back the economy. it is really the government that needs to act. sandra: another round of qe is not the way to go? >> i don't think so, no. sandra: and do you believe at this point the fed will enact another round of stimulus? >> that is up to the fed but i think in order to really help the economy we need to reduce policy, uncertainty and avoid going off the fiscal cliff. sandra: professor i think there is still obviously a lot of concern today about the future of the fed and what is going to happen there. do you believe that the fed actually has the tools that it is going to take to get us out of this, you know, what has been a very dismal economic recovery? >> well the fed certainly has abundant tools but a part of our problems are structural problems and that is not really an area for monetary policy. it is really an area for the government. fiscal policy, regulatory reform and other issues. sandra: now, the fed did indicate today they are going to do something to act.

and the market interpreted that as that. the market came well off the lows of the day, however the fed officials did say in those minutes that they agreed that data is pointing to recent deceleration of economic activity, and considerable slower spending. overall how do you interpret what the fed is seeing right now? it appears that they're saying things are actually not just stagnating but slowing. >> well i think the fed is worried and i think legitimately so. the economy is in a stagnating period. we are not seeing very rapid growth. job creation is simply not there. so the fed's right to worry. the question though is whether that worry should translate into qe3. i just don't think that would be particularly helpful. sandra: again the fed indicated that they will act. the market is interpreting that they act. i'm curious, how would you expect romney to react if we do see the federal reserve enact another round of stimulus? >> well, i think what governor romney said, he

focused on the right kind of fiscal and budget policy and policy certainty that would help the economy for the long term. that is really what the government can do most of all. sandra: obviously we've seen from many republicans on the hill, they have criticized the work of the fed since the end of the recession. there is on ousley -- obviously a lot of conflicting viewpoints of what we can and can't do. obviously we're facing this fiscal cliff. what does the end the year look like to you right now? >> it is a lot of uncertainty because frankly we don't know whether the dividend tax is going to be 15% or 43.4%. what is the capital gains rate? what is the ordinary income rates? that kind of uncertainty chills a lot of spending decisions. the spending cuts also chill a lot of decisions. our leaders really need to come up with a credible fiscal plan. mitt romney certainly proposed one. sandra: you bring up a really great point. that is what the markets are

looking for is leadership in all of this. the next big thing that we can look forward to is the jackson hole meeting. markets are really pinning a lot of hopes on that meeting. do you think that that, do you think that could be a dud or do you think that will, some things are going to come out of that? >> i think it will be a very interesting meeting. it is always a wonderful place to go. i would be very surprised if chairman bernanke has the kind of major announcement for the markets at that meeting. >> you know, i wanted to point out one other thing that the fed actually did say. unless there is incoming information pointing to a substantial and sustainable strengthening in the pace of the recovery they may not act. if they don't act, with stimulus, what happens to our economy then? >> i think given there is not much the fed could do with qe3, it is more of the same really until the government acts. the fed of course would keep the monetary accommodation it presently has in place. the real need is for leadership from our government. we presently don't have it

but we could. sandra: professor, that being said, do you think that we've got the right guy at the helm? who do you think is the right man for the job to be the chairman of the fed federal reserve? >> that is really a question for president obama or for a president romney. i think what we need at the federal reserve is a team that is committed to low inflation, to financial market stability, and to the fed's independence. sandra: by the way, you have a little bit of a history with ben bernanke. you guys have known each other since you were kids i read? >> since we were much younger, yes. >> obviously you have somewhat of a favorable impression of him? >> i do, yes. sandra: okay. well thank you, so much, glenn hubbard. thank you for joining us today. >> my pleasure. sandra: well the congressional budget office warning today that a recession is likely in 2013 if congress doesn't take action over the fiscal cliff. take a listen to the dire projections from cbo director doug elmendorf. >> i think what we see coming for next year under current law, is a very large

amount of fiscal tightening, larger reduction in the deficit relative to gdp than we've seen any year since 1969, and that is sufficiently large shock, negative shock to the, demand for goods and services next year, to push the economy into a significant recession. sandra: so how realistic is the cbo's outlook? with me here to break down the cbo report, dr. art laffer, former economic advisor to president reagan. thank you for joining us. >> thank you, sandra. a pleasure to be with you. sandra: do you agree with this? this was a pretty dire forecast from the cbo, this fresh fiscal cliff warning. do you agree? >> yikes! i think he is right. i don't think it is a fiscal cliff. i think it is really a tax cliff. you have a huge tax increases coming on january 1st, 2013 as glenn hubbard just said. i never heard, sandra, never

heard of an economy tax understood prosperity. if you tax people who work and give that money to people who don't work you will get a lot of people not working and that date of january 13th, january 1st, 2013 is dead on. i don't know how they can stop people from trying to adjust their income into and out of 2013, to really make a big difference in the forecast. sandra: so what does the future look like then if these tax hikes do go into effect and spending cuts? do we enter a recession? >> well i think the spending cuts are good. i don't think the spending cuts will hurt the economy frankly. i think it will help it. i think the tax increases are the real killers. i think if they go through we will be in a recession. if we don't act fairly soon, sandra, we'll also be in one. if you know they're going to raise tax rates on january 1st, 201, what do you do today? i mean you accelerate all the income you can possibly do into 2012 to avoid these tax increases. people are already doing that. so even if you wait until,

let's say december 22nd, and then extend the tax cuts, a lot of people will already have done their planning. so you will still see a big drop-off in 2013 because of the shift effect. it is really serious. it is much bigger than most people think. it's 50% bigger than reagan's tax cuts were in 1981. it is much bigger than the 2010 last minute agreement to cut taxes. you have got a real big fiscal cliff or tax cliff here in 2013. i am quite concerned. sandra: dr. laffer, this could be theorecast that we get from the cbo. you know, what does this mean for each of the presidential candidates right now? >> well which hope you mean the last forecast this year. i'm just teasing you. sandra: right, exactly. >> yes. what it means is, there is a really bad outlook there. the outlook for the cbo, and they're a pretty good group of people and they're pretty solid. this is a terrible piece of news for obama. if you would have imagined

anything like this three years ago, i don't even think he would have sought re-election. this is a terrible set of circumstances and, you know, unfortunately i think it works to romney's advantage but, it is terrible the economy has to go through this type of travails, just to be able to change presidents. but, i guess that's what's necessary. sandra: let's talk numbers here. in the cbo forecast today they said that the economy would contract by half a percent by the end of 201. >> for the year. for the whole year. sandra: for the year, that's right. so what my question is, what kind of damage are we actually looking at for the united states economy if that occurs? >> well, you can sit there and talk about gdp being in the range of $15 trillion. you're talking half a percent on that, which is what, 750 billion. no, 75 billion i guess. it's a huge number. and if you look at the first half of the year, sandra, where they talk about the decline being almost 3%, i mean that's a huge sharp

downturn for the first half year. and a little bit small up ticks. you will get huge increases in the unemployment rate. more participation rate declines. it will be bad for the poor, minorities, disenfranchised. it is bad for everyone. there is just no need for this to happen. sandra: obviously unemployment is key here because it seems it is a double-edged sword. if the tax increases and spending cuts are averted unemployment would go up to 9.1% they say. if they're avoided all together, unemployment will fall to 8% which historically is very high. it seems to be a losing battle for the unemployment number. >> yeah. it is very simple to fix it, sandra. i mean if you look at it, all you need to do is have low rate, flat tax, spending restraint, sound money, free trade and minimal regulation. pretty much all of the things that romney and ryan have proposed is exactly what we need to get a good, quick, jump in this economy, just like we had under reagan. when those tax cuts took effect on january 1st, 1983,

we had growth rates in the 7 1/2, 8 1/2% ranges on quarterly basis. they're nothing in there. they don't even have enough employment growth to offset population growth. it's really very frightening, that the united states should be under these types of circumstances. sandra: we have to leave it there, dr. laffer. we have a few seconds. any good news, any thing positive you can leave us with? >> i think romney will inwith the election. all the forecast we're talking about will be different. i think he and ryan will put in a great set of policies led by glenn hubbard the previous guest. you will get a lot of prosperity like we've never seen before. i'm very optimistic about the u.s. over the next four years. how is that? sandra: that is spectacular. i wanted to leave off with a smile not a frown. >> thank you, sandra. sandra: the coal industry score as major victory as a federal judge stops the epa in its trackses. but a new threat is already emerging. the details next. >> from enemies to french

miss. president obama giving private equity a warm embrace to keep gas prices from spiking. ♪

♪ . sandra: the epa get as slap down. a federal appeals court ruled against its cross state air pollution rule. that sets limits on pollution from burning coal so it wouldn't blow downwind into neighboring states. court says it is up to states to make these decisions. what does this mean for the coal industry? we'll ask tom borelli, senior fellow at freedomworks. thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me. sandra: what does all this mean to the coal industry as a whole? >> first of all it shows that obama administration is another regulatory overreach with the epa and the court said, forget about it. slapped that rule away. but the problem for the coal industry there are other rules. the utility mac rule. there is greenhouse gas proposed rule. president obama has a war on fossil fuels. it is devastating the coal

industry. 175 coal-fired power plants are closing. it will be bad in the midwest states like ohio. sandra: i want to bring up the map that we have that shows, that, shows the coal-fired plants that are going to be closing. 175 of them within the next year. 11 of which come from the state of ohio alone. you can see where the concentration of red dots are. eight -- 80% of the electricity in ohio comes from coal-fired plant. >> 90% missouri. president obama declared war on those states. energy prices are going to necessarily skyrocket. that is what he promised when he was running for president. sandra: so you don't believe it is natural market function that is closing these coal plants down? >> i think primarily epa. obviously natural gas is at historic lows but that place into it but it is not a level competitive playing field when you have the boot of government crushing the coal industry. look at the coal industry

stocks. patriot coal went bankrupt. thousands of coal miners being unemployed. sandra: talk about that for a second. when we talk about the price of natural gas it is at historic lows. actually today it was at 2.77 a btu. >> pretty cheap. sandra: that is nearly a decade low for natural gas. >> right. sandra: is it viable for the coal industry to continue with those low prices for natural gas? >> we do know there is always volatility in any market. we know the natural gas market has been very volatile over the years. if we but the all the eggs in the natural gas basket, what happens if natural gas goes up? sandra: which it has. >> which it has. we're the saudi arabia of coal. why would you want to shut down one of your natural resources that provides, reliable, cheap source of electricity and jobs. sandra: so what do you think does happen here? obviously we've been looking at a lot of coal stocks and the stock market they have been getting hit on all the news and oh regulation from the current administration. >> right. sandra: what is the future then? >> the future depends on politics. if president obama gets

reelected the coal industry will go bankrupt and we'll lose thousands of jobs and electricity prices will go up. if romney and republicans take the senate, the senate tried to stop some the epa rules. rand paul tried but senate democrats trying to stop it. sherrod brown of ohio should be worried about his constituents. democrat from ohio up for re-election. shouldn't be worried about president obama. should be worried about his constituents and electricity prices. sandra: do you see this becoming a big election issue than it is today? >> i think this is obama's achilles' heel. war on fossil fuels. keystone pipeline. gas to fill up my suv was $4.50. coal mining unions knot endorsing president obama and all bad news for him and good news for america. sandra: tom borelli on the passing of this new ruling from the epa. thank you so much. >> thanks. sandra: on the epa i should say. unless you've been living on mars you've heard the white house criticizing mitt romney for his career

in private equity at bain capital. we all have. get this. the "wall street journal" reporting that the white house cozied up to the private equity firm carlisle group. in fact the obama administration helped kick off talks between carlisle and sunoco over plans to save the oil company's philadelphia refinery. talk about strange bedfellows. what is really going on here? for a lively debate, i'm joined by jack bergman, republican strategist and chris hahn, fox news contributor. democratic strategist. so get us started here. didn't we constantly hear the criticizing, don't we still, of, i'll start with you, chris, over obama, sorry, romney and his involvement with bain capital? why is it okay for the obama administration? >> well, we're not necessarily opposed to private equity as democrats. we're opposed to the way that mitt romney used private equity. mitt romney was only interested in his own bottom line. he didn't care how many workers he put out on the street. he didn't care how many

towns he destroyed. what the president is trying to do is work with good private equity firms to bring money into a plant that we need to keep our gas prices low here in the united states. so there is absolutely nothing wrong and he is not inconsistent. sandra: chris i would beg to differ. i urge you to look at carlisle groups's background. i'm sure they have had involvement in similar matters. jack, go to you on this one. obama's white house played a key role in rescue agoil refinery we're talking about here. this is more government involvement in private business. do you see it that way? >> that is a joke. i love chris's spin. the funniest part, sandra, when they swept aside all the environmental regulations. obama fights on environmental regulations for the pipeline. fought over them 100 times. with the stroke of a pen this is the first time he swept them all away. why? because he need admit call fix to try to drive gas prices down before the election. i call this is a kind of crony session alism.

-- soigsism. one thing if your left-wingwer and believes in it and another thing because they do this because after political fix. i'll tell you something else, sandra, watch for the fund-raisers. you will see the carlisle and others --. sandra: hold on, chris. hold on. >> will do a fund-raiser as a kind of kick back to the president. sandra: chris, let's let chris get in here. chomping at the bit. chris, respond. >> if funny thing if the president let the refinery go belly-up you would be blaming him for letting the refinery going belly-up. >> not so. >> he is finding a solution that will stablize gas prices in the united states, will keep people employed and move things along. yet there has to be something, that we've got to look at here that has got to be something wrong and crony capitalist here. if the carlisle group wants to come in and help the refinery. that is good thing. we don't judge them on everything. carlyle group --. sandra: hold on. >> this president is not personally profited by

anything in this deal. >> when a refinery or any other kind of business goes out of business there are reasons for that. it is called bad management. it is called bad management of risk. like general motors. when one refinery goes out of business, if you want to help the country, three or four others that are better, more nimble managers of risk and better business people spring up. when you step in as a government manager and you block that process, what you're doing just as we did with gm, you force resources and capital to serve as the old antiquated dying thing. like keeping a dying old person alive. sandra: chris, let me get in here a second. gene spurling, director of obama's economic counsel. he kick-started this conversation. not like the refinery went straight to carlyle group, help us. it was actually the white house that kick-started this. >> you know if you liked it you call it a public/private partnership. i don't see anything wrong with the government seeing a problem and trying to solve it, even if it is outside of the government actually

doing the work here. this is obviously a private companies coming together and the government is facilitating that happening. i don't see anything wrong wig that. as for the thought about the market taking-here, i agree in most cases that should be the case. here with the refining industry, very difficult to get new refinery built in america. sandra: chris, hold on. i want to give jack last word on this i will throw one other fact to you about this. that is that we do know that the administration is going to loosen certain environmental restrictions on the refinery that it is helping. jack. >> i think, i started out by saying i think it is a joke. they fight on anything but for their own politics they sweep it aside. you a moment ago hit it right on the ahead. this is kind of a corrupt deal. remind me what the government did with buffett, oh, put 5 billion here in goldman sachs and whispered to him, you will double your money in 60 days, wink, wink, nod nod. same thing with the carlyle group. all of this is so corrupt. i'll tell you something, sandra, watch, to continue

this story watch over the next 60 days i absolutely guaranty you will see a series of fund raisers done, quid pro quo. >> stop. buffett doesn't need anybody's advice. sandra: leave it there. gave last word on jack. thanks so much for joining us tonight. we have breaking news about the mississippi river at this hour. let's go to adam shapiro now with the details. >> a little less controversial than what you went through there but the mississippi refer is -- river is open according to jeff flock. the coast guard are opening channels to two northbound vessels in the area where he is right now. they will overnight allow southbound vessels to transit throughout the evening to try to reduce the numbers of vessels which are heading south. the river is once again open. sandra: very importa. thank you very much for bringing that to us, adam shapiro. climb in existing homes sales gives fresh hope a housing recovery is at the door but a top real estate expert says it is too early to roll out the welcome mat. he is here to explain. that's next.

only in california can a two-word mistake cost half a billion dollars. how a simple error may hang $548 in new silicon taxes out to dry. do you ever have too much money? ♪ .

♪ . sandra: existing home sales out today and the numbers are up slightly from a month earlier. plus they are up more than 10% from a year ago? that is today's headline but housing data in general have been pointing in all different kinds of directions. are today's numbers a true sign of extremity for a potential recovery? with me is real estate attorney, steven meister. thanks very much for joining

us. i will ask the dreaded question, have we hit bottom yet? >> i don't think we're quite ready to say that. i think we're limping along at a bottom but the numbers are not nearly as strong as you think. the nearly 10% increase in the median price you were referring to i think that's --. sandra: it looks good. >> i think that is more an adjustment to the mix of distressed and nondistressed sales. sandra: you will have to make that simple for me. >> when you have distressed sales from banks. sandra: foreclosures. >> foreclosures and short sales. those are low-priced. people aren't in distress and not in foreclosure sell they get a higher price. the mix of those go changes over time. i think you're getting less distressed sales. so the price appears to be going up but it is not really going up. sandra: that is a little bit scary. do you think we're actually still getting worse? >> well it is hard to say. it is not a commodity like, an ounce of gold. so it is hard to say.

i will say that the foreclosures, this report is out that foreclosure activity is down but as we were discussing before, that foreclosure activity measurement doesn't include short sales where the banks are letting someone who is in the foreclosure process but hasn't lost their home yet sell for less than the mortgage, the bank takes less. they are not counting that as foreclosure sales. foreclosure starts where the process begins are actually up for three months in a row after 27 months of decline. sandra: so we have new home sales numbers out tomorrow which equally have started to improve. actually in june we saw a pretty big drop. but the overall trend has been up. is there some sort of magic metric i can be watching for? everybody at home says, is now the time to buy? they are trying to pick the bottom of the market. is it unemployment? is it the election? what is it? >> it is a complex tap best tri. i don't have a magic metric for you unfortunately. i think you're going to see

new home sales in the five to 600,000 range annually, that is what i think. i think the interest rates clearly being so low are helping that industry. prices are off. that helps the industry. prices relative to rents help the industry. but still unemployment is high. and that hurts. and, the fiscal cliff hurts. sandra: by the way, the higher end markets seem to be doing already. toll brothers reported that profits were up 46%. they beat on all accounts. beat actually. >> prices on the higher end are up. some people are doing well and finally getting off their laurels and making some purchases but i still think there's a lot of clouds on the horizon. let me put it that way, in housing. and i wouldn't be so certain that we have hit a bottom. yes it appears to be stablizing. i'm going to be selling a home soon i hope that's so, but i don't think we can absolutely call it yet. sandra: all right. well, is this a good time to

buy would you say? if you're selling a home you will have a biased answer. >> well, maybe. i bought a home. i think it's a food good time to buy especially given the mortgage rates. sandra: there you have it, steven meister. thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you. sandra: it is becoming more farce than tragedy in california. a two-word mistake may cost the silicon valley half a billion dollars in new tax revenue. we'll explain why next. plus whipping up new business off "50 shades of grey"? who isn't. the portland, or gone, hotel in the racy best-seller are giving special packages for guests. are rope and handcuffs included? piles of money is coming up. ♪ .

♪ . sandra: two little words can cost a california government agency more than half a billion dollars. the wording on a ballot measure proposed by the santa clara valley water district totaled 77 words. two more than the maximum allowed by law. now the silicon valley taxpayers association is taking the case to court. they want the ballot measure to be thrown out completely, which means no funding for the water district. we have the executive director of the silicon valley taxpayers association. greg, thank you so much for joining me. >> thank you, sandra. sandra: first off this whole thing seems a little bit frivolous to me and probably to a few folks listening at home. why are you and your organization pursuing this so hard? >> well, the silicon valley

taxpayers association sees it as our mission to stick up for the silicon valley taxpayer. if nobody is watching the agencies putting taxes on us, who is? i would like to point out that the two word over the limit problem was not brought up by the taxpayers association. it was actually brought up by the registrar of voters that first noticed the problem and told the direct about it. when we got involved was when the district had a meeting to fix the problem and they violated the open meeting law in doing so. so that is when we found out about it and brought it to everyone's attention. yeah, we would like to see the ballot measure thrown out. they could put this on the ballot in 2014, 2016 and any number of ways they could get around the problem but for now we think they should take it off the ballot. sandra: i'm curious, is this a bigger problem? is this all the ballot measures in california a lot of people are arguing is the problem to begin with? possibly we should have elected officials voting on these rather than every single new citizen? >> well, if it were the case that the california

legislature was a well-oiled machine producing balanced budgets and being very careful with taxpayer dollars you would be right. but if you looked into that lately that is not really the case. so i personally think the initiative process is good because it brought us prop 13 among many other good initiatives and prop 13 is probably know keeps our property tax rates at manageable level rather than just kind of rising out of control. sandra: obviously the bigger theme is just wasteful spending, not just in general but the state of california. i'm seeing here that the water direct met for under three men's to remove the two words. and are eligible themselves to receive their standard payment of 286 per meeting. some of them are saying they won't accept the compensation. but the fact that that is, in their there begin with and they even met over these two words, isn't that a big problem? >> well, a report came out

last week that analyzed 600 agencies in california that charge the state government for their open meeting law compliance and water district was one of the two, two highest charged back agencies in the whole state where santa clara county and santa clara water district. line items are $9,000 for the preparing minutes of a meeting. i've definitely got concerns about what is going on over there. sandra: all right. greg, we've got two seconds. we're going to end up? >> hopefully they will take it off the ballot and we'll save taxpayers $548 million this time around. sandra: there you have it. greg, thanks for joining us. >> my pleasure. sandra: getting in touch with your inner "50 shades of grey"? the portland, or gone, hotel with a prime role in the erotic best-seller. the head of the hotel joins us with details next. at the end of the day it is all about none any. ♪

♪ . sandra: unless you're living

under a rock heard of "50 shades of grey" i'm sure. here is good news for all you fans out there. you can now live the fantasy at the same hotel featured in the racy books. the hotel in portland, oregon, is now offering special "50 shades of grey" packages for the fans. they even offer a signature 50 shades of gin cocktail, to tell us how much the erotic best-seller is boosting business for the hotel is the general manager for the hot tell. chris, thank you for joining us. obviously this is a fun story. what is happening? who are these people? tell us about the packages first. >> thanks, sandra. the packages are so much fun. we have two packages. an expensive luxury package. $2750. that on clouds great dinner for two. just like in the book and also a beautiful luxury helicopter ride around the city of portland and around mount hood. it is a fun package. sandra: what kind of people

are showing up from this? are they coming in from all over or more local to the area? >> they're coming from all over the place. east coast, canada. you name it. this book is a tidal wave of marketing. sandra: so, obviously this could be some good people watching. what types of people, not just where they are from, what types of people are coming? are they married? are they single? >> interestingly enough we had a group of 19-year-old young ladies walk through the hotel. all they wanted to do is take photos of the elevator. there is a scene with the elevator in it. i rode rode down a elevator with 75-year-old pleasant guest. she asked me about the book. she covered her face and admitted to me she also read the book as well. this book is covering all of the different demographics. >> chris, let's talk dollars here. what has it done for your business? >> you know, portland and oregon are having a great year and the heathman hotel

is having a great year and in august we're having a record because of this book. our room revenues increased $30,000 a year. we're a small hotel that is significant. restaurant and dining revenues are up $15,000. we doubled the white wine sales. it face many nonal. sandra: apparently you've got a special, specialty drink, the inner goddess bundle. forgive me i haven't read the book or at least not admitting it. what about this drink? this must also boost revenues? >> we do have a 50 shades of gin cocktail that is surprisingly great. we have a inner goddess package with white wine and gray necktie and keepsake glasses. that selling. sandra: you have to look forward. seattle is the setting for the "twilight" series. do you have anything else in the works here? >> i understand there will be a movie coming out this next year. i think everyone is having fun who might be casted in that movie. this continues to roll

along. and i believe the author, el james will be visiting portland too. there is no stopping the momentum. we're having a lot of fun. sandra: congratulations to you. heathman general manager of the hotel in the pock, "50 shades of grey". congratulations. >>. >> the worst drought in a half century is wreaking havoc. pot growers may have their crop going up in smoke. and you can never have too much money. ♪ .

melissa: it's time for a little fun with spare change. they were advocating the green job efforts. more than 100 commercials ran, but here is the real kicker. zero jobs were created.

these dollars, what should they be spent on, david? >> the fact is that this is preaching. rachel midol, the people watching the show, this is a political ad. this wasn't meant to find jobs. is that wall street journal pointed out, a lot of the jobs that they were created not at all. this is pure political ads, paid for by taxpayers. >> i now understand why obama wants to raise taxes. it is very expensive to run network television ads. >> it is indicative of the administration in a way that they had no regard with how they spend our taxpayer money.

sandra: nikes are now causing $350. some are outraged by the product. they want nike to pull the shoes predicament with built electronics. honestly, it factors into the cost. is it inconsiderate nike to be marketing these shoes right now? >> it is free enterprise. there are people out there that are not enough to pay $300 for kids and issues. fine, let the market. there are other products that are available. like when you go to jaycee pennies to buy a sweater versus nordstrom? it's the same product and you get the same results. >> remember the wrapper that went viral a few years ago? we had him a few years ago and i looked at his sneakers. he said they cost me $300. how does identify buys $300 and

issues qualify for food stamps? look at where they are marketing these shoes? >> who runs this? the kids are the parents? >> oh, come on. look at all the marketing for video games and all of these gadgets that kids have. >> you should be able to buy whatever you want to buy, but you should not qualify for food stamps if you want to buy this. sandra: you may not be aware of this. the browning outcrops makes it easier to spot pot plants. 30,000 more fans this year compared to last year. do you think there are any lessons here reign. >> that must be what's going on. the control room will verify this and