right here in the united states. and a war of words between two florida lawmakers. democratic party chairwoman debbie wasserman-shultz joins me to respond to a congressman's rant calling her vile, unprofessional and despicable. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." right now, six u.s. senators are giving new momentum to talks aiming at avoiding a national catastrophe in the united states. their bipartisan compromise to slash the deficit. only 12 dpas left, president obama is due to meet this hour with house speaker john boehner and majority leader eric cantor. this just a short while after he met with top congressional democrats over at the white house. ours who correspondent dan lothian is standing by. kate baldwin has the latest. kate? >> polling show that americans are looking for compromise to get through this debt crisis. senators in the gang of six say that's exactly what they're offering here with their plan, but there are real questions if they can get enough support in time. now after months of negotiations. the so-called gang of six met once again behind closed doors this time to try to build momentum around their $3.7 trillion debt reduction plan. >> this is the only bipartisan plan that meets the debt reduction targets. >> the proposal would have budget sate h savings of $500 million. -- $500 billion. also it calls for big changes to medicare and social security. >> i think at the end of the day, what the overwhelming majority of americans are saying, fix this. and if it takes a little compromise from both. >> but the is plan faces a harsh reality. tough procedural obstacles means the proposal won't be ready ahead of the august 2 debt ceiling deadline. and a key block of conservatives is already saying no way. >> we know it's going to hurt job creation. we know it's bad for small businesses. we're not going to go for this type of plan. >> with time running out, harry reid, who is still work on a fall back plan with mitch mcconnell says he's now waiting for a signal from house gop leaders. >> we have a plan to go forward over here, but until we hear from the house of representatives, we really are -- all of our work here would be for not. >> now there is also talk of folding elements of the gang of six plan into this so-called fallback plan being worked out between senators reid and senator mitch mcconnell. but it's not even clear at this point, wolf, if there's enough votes for even that last-ditch plan to pass the house. at this point. >> yeah, there's a lot of uncertainty. kate baldwin, thanks very much. let's go to the white house. dan lothian is standing by. what is the president's latest stance right now. we've seen a little shifting on delaying -- having a stop gap measure to at least give this more time after the august 2 deadline. >> well, they still think this gang of six proposal is overall an approach that they can accept, and while some republicans see the enthusiastic embrace by this white house as a strategy to overshadow cut, cap and balance, one senior administration official tells me that's simply not the case. the only strategy here is about finding a solution that's good for the economy. >> it wasn't an outright endorsement, but president obama could hardly contain his enthusiasm tuesday for deficit reduction proposal from the bipartisan gang of six opini opinion -- six. >> the frame work is broadly consistent with what we've been working on at the white house. >> a delater with more details in hand, jay carney continueded to praise the proposal even if the white house, he said, might not agree with everything in it. >> that is a significant deal and it's worth being enthusiastic about. >> but when some republicans heard that strong endorsement, it fuelled more skepticism. conservatives on twitter -- >> they came up with the debt compromise plan they all figured they would come up with. let's take it seriously. then the president came out and said let's take it seriously. the president endorsed it and then they think it's an awful plan. >> some republican aides on the hill say the president's strong endorsement did more harm than good because he also called the proposal consistent with his own approach and touted the revenue or tax increases. but some democrats aren't happy either, pushing back, unwilling to accept cuts to entitlement programs like social security and medicare. >> we are trying to suppress the growth. we don't think it's healthy for washington. the afl/cio said there's no shared sacrifice here. the only sacred cows being gored are working people, the middle class, senior and the poor. no uh some democrats were very careful about weighing in, saying that they still need to see some of the details before they'll decide whether or not it's something they can embrace. as for white house enthusiastic reaction, jessica yellin asked today, if in hindsight they had any second thoughts about how they reacted, and he said, quote, absolutely not. >> thanks very much. much more on this story coming up. jeff cafferty has the cafferty file. jack? >> in an economy with 9.2% unemployment, job security is a little tough to come by. that is unless you work for the federal government. an analysis done by "usa today" found that job security for government employees at many federal agencies last year was more than 99%. and these workers are more likely to die than they are to lose their jobs due to a layoff or a firing. the federal government only fired about 1/2 of 1% of its work force last year. the private sector by contrast fires about 3% of its workers every year for performance issues. here are a few examples. at the small business administration, they employ 4,000 people. six were fired last year. there were no layoffs. 17 employees died. not a single federal attorney was laid off last year. we have about 35,000 of those. just 27 were fired, 33 died. both the federal trade commission and federal communications commission, not a single employee was fired or laid off last year. the "usa today" analysis also found that nearly 3 out of 5 firings among federal workers occurred within the first two years on the job. most commonly to those who are paid the lowest. meanwhile, the nearly 500,000 federal employees who earn more than $100,000 a year, they had job security of more than -- write this one down -- job security of more than 99.8%. nice work if you can get it. here's the question -- what does it mean that federal workers are more likely to die than lose their jobs? go to cnn.com/caffertyfile and post a comment on my blog. wolf? >> jack cafferty, thank you. disturbing new evidence that u.s. taxpayer money may be winding up in the hands of extremists and terrorists who are killing u.s. troops in afghanistan. this is the story that's just coming in. and how much are house democrats willing to give to raise the debt limit? i'll ask the democratic party chairwoman about possible cut. she's walk into "the situation room" right now. congresswoman, stand by. the clock is ticking towards a possible default of the nation's debt. the democratic party chair in the congress certainly has a lot op her plate right now with the debt crisis. everything else, as well as a very, very strong verbal showdown with a republican colleague of hers from florida. she's here in the situation room. congressman, thanks very much for coming in. let's talk about substance first and then you can talk about this riff you have with this congressman. the gang of six is out with a plan. the president warmly embracing it, even though there are cuts in medicare for the elderly included. is this something you can live with? >> well, i think the really good and big news out of that gang of six is prose sal is that there are finally republicans, particularly in the senate that recognize that default would be cataclysmic and we need to avoid that at any cost and we need to make sure that we have a deal that can be embraced as prodly by as many members of both houses as we can. >> if there are cuts in medicare, social security, could you embrace it? >> i haven't seen the details of the plan or know how it impacts medicare, but i do think it's important to note that the democrats have put all of our sacred cows on the table, that we're willing to consider items that will preserve the long-term medicare or social security without impacting or harming seniors. >> one of the pro-proposals is what the president has called means testing for medicare recipients. yor in other words, richer elderly people would have to pay more than middle class or poor recipients. is that something you can live with? >> well, i think we need -- i'm not prepared to commit to any specific proposal, but we are willing to put all of our sacred cows on the table to make sure that we can get a big solution to a big problem. and there are a lot of things that we' placed on the table as an option. it would be wonderful if we had the republicans go on the table and put their sacred cows on the table. >> some of the republicans have done it. some of your liberal democrats in the house can't accept this gang of six proposals precisely because it deals with entitlements, social security, medicare, medicare. and they will never vote for it. and so you rear the chair. you have a tough position. you've got to get the conservative democrats, the liberal democrats. you're also a member of congress. what will you do if it comes down to a deal that the president wants, supporting the gang of six legislation and you have a lott of seniors in your district in south florida. >> making sure we protect seniors from being gravely harmed by changes to medicare is a goal of all democrats including the president. and i know that long-term making sure that we can get a big solution to a big problem is going to be important. and like i said, that's why we've put everything on the table and we need the republicans in the house to join froem and congressional democrats so we can work out what everyone can agree on. >> i'm wondering if you're open to adjusting the cost of living increase for social security, medicare, so that the seniors who are getting a regular cost of living increase, it will be lower in the years to come. >> when it comes to including entitlements in any deal, there feeds to be some balance. there needs to be shared sacrifice. the president and congressional democrats are looking for that balance. and we could look at those sacred cows if the republicans are putting theirs on the table, but so far, at least on the house side, there hasn't been any inclination to do that. >> but if the republicans were willing that, at least the republicans in the gang of six, like tom coburn and others, if they were willing to increase taxes, you would be willing to deal with entitlement cuts. >> accomplishing a big deal with everything on the table would be possible with that shared sacrifice. i don't see how it's possible without it. >> you were on the house floor and you said this, and i'll play the clip of what you said. >> incredulously, the gentleman from florida who represents thousands of medicare beneficiaries, as do i supports this plan, unbelievable to a member from south florida. >> he sent a letter to you and copied the republican leadership. he said look, debbie, i understand after i departed the house floor, you directed your floor speech comments directly towards me. let me make myself perfectly clear, you want a personal fight. i'm happy to oblige. you are the most vile, unprofessional and despicable member of the united states house of representatives. if you have something to say to me, stop being a coward and say it to myself. otherwise shut the heck up, focus on your own congressional district. that's not all he says. he goes on. i am bringing your actions today to our majority leader and majority whip and from this time forward, understand that i shall defend myself forthright against your heinous characterless behavior which dates back to the disgusting protest you ordered at my campaign headquarters october 2010 in deerfield beach. you have proven repeatedly you are not a lady and therefore shall not be afforded due respect from me. wow. have you ever been attacked publicly like that? >> no. and i was surprised that he sent that to my personal e-mail, an e-mail that he didn't previously have. but it's -- you know, it doesn't faze me. it isn't surprising he would react to the probably untold pressure he's getting from his constituents. i mean, he and i boat represent, as i pointed out in debate on the house floor, represent thousands of senior citizens who under this cut, cap and balance really, duck dodge and dismaptle plan the republicans have proposed would face huge increases in their medicare costs. it would end medicare as we know it. it's the ryan plan on steroids. and he clearly is feeling the pressure. if he can't handle that pressure, can't handle being called out in debate on the house floor, then he probably should change his position. you know, he also suggested that i focus on my own congressional distri district. i'll point out that i was, he's a constituent of mine. and so i was dutifully doing my job and representing my constituents and taking to task someone who i think is really taking the wrong position when it comes to the people we represent in south florida who badly need that safety net. we fe that we won't dramatically raise their costs. . >> relives he lives in your disf not his own? >> yes, he lives in my dris dis trikt. >> there's reports that he called you and apologized. is that true? >> that is not true. i haven't received an e-mail or a voice mail. >> he's quoted in this roll call as having told a reporter, i just apologized. >> that's simply not true. >> adds of this moment, he's not called you or communicated -- he has not apologized? >> no, he has not. >> if he does call you and say i'm sorry, what will you say? >> well, i would appreciate his apology. and i would hope that he would reconsider his ill advised position on increasing benefit -- increasing costs for medicare beneficiaries, but i think he really needs to understand when we're debating on the house floor, that's what we do. we engage in the back and forth. if he can't handle that, particularly on an issue as important to our constituents as medicare, then he probably needs to reconsider his really ill advised position on medicare. >> obviously a lot of hard feelings there with the congressman. by the way, we invited him to come into "the situation room" today like you and his office told us he couldn't do it. he didn't want to do it today. but he has an open invitation to come in if he wants to come in. >> the hard feelings are one way. i simply debated a policy issue on the house floor. he had spoken directly before me and i got a tirade in response out of the clear blue sky. it was really unfortunate. >> mitt romney is speaking out in california right now. let's go there and listen briefly and get your reaction. >> he would be able to keep unemployment below 8%. it has not been below 8% since. and for caliifornians, it's above 10%. it's two full percentage points higher than when he was elected president. now some years ago, just weeks after he became inauguratinged. he went on "the today show" and he said look, if i can't turn this economy around in three years, i'm looking at a one-term proposition. and i'm here to collect. we have to make sure we focus our attention on getting americans back to work. >> he's arguably the front-runner right now for the republican nomination. you're the democratic party chair. is he the republican you fear the most? >> well, it's interesting that mitt romney is talking about job creation and unemployment when he was 47th of job creation in the country in massachusetts. wasn't even able to recover the jobs lost in 2001 recession in his state. coming from someone with an abysmal track record, he really shouldn't be questioning the president's record. each month, each quarter has created fifth sector jobs, millions at this point, when we were bleeding jobs before the president was inauguratinged in 2009. >> romney-obama run for the white house? >> i think it's really unclear. they have a collection of interesting candidates on the other side. they're going to duke it out for the next few months and we'll see who emerges as their nominee. >> debbie wasserman-shultz, the chairman for the democratic national committee. the doctor for michele bachmann is weighing in on the migraine headaches that we now know she suffers from. could they put herred by for b white house at risk? and what happened after this leopard went on an attack. stay with us. [ male announcer ] 95% of all americans aren't getting enough whole grain. but actually, it's never been easier to get the whole grain you want from your favorite big g cereals. from cheerios to lucky charms, there's whole grain in every box. make sure to look for the white check. there's whole grain in every box. another good thing about geico so like say you need to report a people wclaim, alright./7. a real person will be there to help you. then you can use geico.com to view photos of the damage, track your claim, print an estimate. you want an english muffin? they literally hand you a toasted muffin with butter and jam. (sigh) whaa. tasty. that's, that's a complete dramatization of course, but you get my point. vo: geico 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance. i'm wolf blitzer. more stories we're working on for our next hour. ahead, a closer look at the young life literally leaping to her husband's defense amidst a worsening tabloid scandal. as the clock ticks towards a deadline of a debt deal, some americans are flocking to capitol hill with an urgent message for congress. and exhausted and starving, the worst drought to hit somalia in half a century. you're in "the situation room." >> first, a report of million billions and billions of taxpayer dollars missing in afghanistan. we have the details. at a time of economic difficulty, they're looking to save money. all of a sudden millions are missing in afghanistan? what's going on? >> basically this shows that about ten years in, the u.s. still only has limited visibility of what happens to billions of dollars once we send it to afghanistan. that makes it not only vulnerable to fraud, but in some cases even being diverted to insurgents who are fighting american troops. the u.s. spent about $70 billion, sending it to reconstruction and security projects in afghanistan. when afghan government officials leave the country, no one is checking how much money they have with them. and the audit shows that afghan government officials are refusing to put their money through these electronic currency counters. could the u.s. check it? hard to do when u.s. officials are denied access to that part of the airport where the vip's are getting screened. and president hamid karzai has banned u.s. treasury officials from working with the afghan central bank. the obama administration has requested another $17 billion for afghanistan reconstruction next year. but even some democrats are running if we're throwing good money after bad. >> i was hopeful after doing a lot of oversights in iraq that he had learned a lot of lessons. this report said lessons had not been learned. the lack of cooperation in the afghanistan banking system is not helping us with our oversight responsibility. if they're not willing to allow us to look over their shoulder as this money flows into the afghan economy, then we ought to say to them, maybe it's time we don't let that money flow. >> of one of the problems is they use what's called sort of informal financial institutions that operate sort of outside the law. they're not like official banks. one of the -- and you look at the audit, they found one case in which a u.s. contrac