tv Varney Company FOX Business January 18, 2017 9:00am-12:01pm EST
maria: dagen. >> i'm hoping that trump live tweets his own inauguration and tells the chief justice, hold on a second and shares with the american people directly. maria: i'm sure he will be tweeting. >> undoubtedly. maria: always a pleasure, thank you so much. that will do it for us. so you tomorrow, same time, same place. "varney & company," stuart, over to you. stuart: the boycott list keeps growing and donald trump is responding, he's not happy. good morning, everyone, 60 house democrats now say they will not attend and that number doubled in 24 hours. the inauguration has turned into a partisan fight. it started when congressman john lewis said trump would thnot be a legitimate president. the first inauguration he would miss. not true. mr. trump called him on it. he tells fox, lewis, that he got caught and pretty d and making him look bad.
and most of the black and hispanic house membe wilnot be there. here is an ugly development. broadway star jennifer holiday withdrew from the inaugural celebration, she says she received debt threats. the names of some celebrities who will perform are being withheld because of a likely backlash. that's ugly. three highly contentious hearings, democrats will attack tom price. he wants to repeal and replace obamacare as health secretary. scott pruett will be pillaried because he wants to replace, and wilbur ross on trade. these three would roll back obama's legacy and the left will defend it vigorously. >> how about this, another win for mr. trump, the ceo of novartis, a swiss drug giant says he may invest more in america because of trump's corporate tax cuts. "varney & company" is about to begin.
♪ oh, we begin with this. president george h.w. bush, 41 taken to the hospital. ashley: he was taken in on saturday suffering from shortness of breath, but we're told from doctors, a spokesman that he's doing well and responding well to medication. because he's 92 years old. the oldest living expresident. his public appearances are very rare these days. he's had a number of hospital stays, 2015 and a couple in 2014, the good news is, doctors say he's responding well to treatment. stuart: okay, that's good news. muted open for the stock market, this is of course, two days before the inauguration, you've got to say it, the trump rally has stalled just shy of 20,000, but will open up just a little bit today. weak holiday sales at target.
now, there's a headline for you, and it cut its forecast. what's going on with target? >> they were disappointed. clearly, you listen to what the executives are saying with their on-line performance. they didn't like it. they had weak sales and you know we're seeing, too, talking about the bottom of the hour, we will more retail companies pulling, not doing ipo's like nieman marcus and the popular teen store called claire's. stuart: by the way, target will open 3% down. liz: it started to trade under pressure yesterday, as well. stuart: the swiss global drug maker, called novartis, says if mr. trump lowers corporate taxes they may be more inclined to invest in america. ashley: veyes, this is despite
trump's harsh words for drug makers. but when we build a new manufacturing site we think about the tax rate, the economy of the country, we think about jobs. so a booming u.s. economy would make the u.s. more attractive for investments. stuart: they're responding to the carrot, the carrot of the improving american economy and not the stick. >> putting pressure on drug prices, this is a very interesting example, a company responding to that. stuart: another win for trump, that's my opinion. >> no question about it. stuart: okay. this is a troubling story. in america, we accept the results of the election, don't we? and we peacefully and amicably trance iffer power, doesn't we? the list of democrats boycotting the inauguration now upwards of 60 house democrats who will not attend. it will not be a bipartisan celebration. the previously mentioned-- the aforementioned liz peek,
fiscal times is with us. i think this damages our constitutional republic, but i think it damages the democrats politically in the long run. >> i agree. polling shows most of the country wants to move on and the last eight years incredibly divisive and looking to donald trump, interestingly enough, bringing the country together. so this is not a very good start. look, it started with lewis, john lewis, a respected civil rights leader saying he would not go to the inauguration, but the difference here is, he took an oath of office to support the constitution. by calling donald trump not a legitimate president, i think he abrogates that pledge and it's an unpatriotic thing to do, but you know what? rather than single out lewis, i think we should talk about all of these democrats as basically being, you know, kind of sore losers and not doing what is in the country's best interest right now, which is showing some allegiance to the bringing together of the country.
stuart: and they're isolated now. >> without a doubt. stuart: just for a second, i want to follow up on mr. trump because as you know, he did indeed call out john lewis and he did this again in an interview with fox news ainsley earhart. watch this. >> he conveniently doesn't remember. how do you forget if you go to an inauguration. i can tell you when i was at the inaugurations and you don't forget something like that. so, he got caught and it's pretty bad. and it's making him look bad, frankly. it's a very important time. this is a transition and a very important transition and especially because things will be done beautifully, but they'll be done differently than they have been the past eight years. stuart: the world wants to give john lewis a pass because of his civil rights history and mr. trump is not going to do it. >> also lewis said, he'd been to every other inauguration, that's turned out to be false because he didn't go to george w. bush's inauguration.
so, again, lewis is held in great esteem, but i think he has kind of blown it here in trying to undermine a legitimate, dually elected president. basically obama is, of course, is going to the inauguration and hillary clinton is going to the inauguration. this is about our democracy and peaceful transfer of power. stuart: you've got something to add what mr. lewis said on the subject of racist. liz: he's a civil rights hero, but omparejohn mccain to george wallace and that mitt romney would bring back jim crowe style when he ran. and bernie sanders, john lewis said bernie sanders i didn't see him at a civil rights activism and bernie sanders was arrested in 1963 at a protest. stuart: racial divide, here it is right here and now. liz, stay there, please. more in a second. with just days, two days left in office, president obama has commuted the sense for chelsea manning. she will be released in may.
manning leaked classified army documents to wikileaks, originally sentenced to 35 years, but she is out in may. fox news contributor pete is with us. did people die because of the information that manning released? >> yes, private bradley manning released 700,000 documents back in 2010. we know usama bin laden sought them ought and used them to peace together what our strategy was in afghanistan and iraq. stuart: we know that? >> we know that. he sought out wikileaks, a dossier, and it's devastating when the enemy knows where you're going to find what you're going to do and reveal sources afghan interpreters and others working with us, and you put them out and get them killed. he's a traitor and give up 700,000 documents in a time of war you deserve more than 35 years what he was sentenced to
and political correctness because he's now chelsea manning. stuart: do you think it's to the transgender community. >> he claims he was suffering from gender disphobia and why he did it and now he's tried to commit suicide twice in prison and feels so sad in prison, and barack obama says i'm going to let him out. we're giving away state secrets and no one is held to account to it. stuart: the presidential pardons tend to go away. does this go away? >> no, unfortunately chelsea manning doesn't go away and she's going to be a cause celeb. and the consequences of wikileaks does not go away. whether or not our allies will be trusted.
if you're thinking it will be given away. stuart: she gave the information to wikileaks and published. >> he did and then he became she. stuart: i've got that. is there some suggestion that the guy to runs wikileaks will receive a pardon or will turn himself in because he might get clemency? >> he suggested he would come back because of extradition if chelsea manning was pardoned or commuted. stuart: he has? >> he said that on twitter, we'll see. stuart: you can't be pleased. >> no, find me a military guy that's pleased today. stuart: they're mad at hell? >> absolutely. stuart: pete, thank you for being with us. yes, sir. check this out, wild video from the dash cam, camera, that is on a police car, it caught right there. a huge natural gas pipeline explosion, just happened to be on, bang, you got it! no injuries, very dramatic. those cameras are everywhere and they catch everything. more original content coming to
netflix. jerry seinfeld signing a deal to let netflix stream his show called comedians in cars getting coffee. it's a premier later this year and by the way, the stock hit a record high tuesday. today we're all going to hear from dr. tom price, the man who will lead the charge to replace obamacare. there will be fireworks at his confirmation hearing for health sect. coming up next, senator rand paul, my question to him, will anyone, even for one day, lose their health insurance when obamacare is repealed. scott pruett, trump's pick for the epa wants to roll back obama's climate rules. that's blasphemy. >> the epa is killing you and killing your companies and you're losing your jobs. let me tell you, that's going to be turned around on day one. the bottom line is, for your goals, this is a strategy i'd remmend. this actually makes sense. now on the next page you'll see a breakdown of costs.
ar ago. the stock is flat today, but it's up 17% just since the election. there's a rally. how about this? goldman sachs, it benefitted from a surge in trading after trump's surprise win. that stock is also flat today, but it's up 30% since the election. that's a rally and a half. president-elect trump says, yeah, he'll be repealing obamacare and replacing it with, quote, insurance for everybody. senator rand paul, republican, kentucky is with us now. senator, i've got to start with this. will any one person lose health care coverage for even one day when obamacare is repealed? >> well, i think we start with the facts as they are. millions of people do not have insurance under obamacare, so, you have to start with the facts as they are. millions of people under obamacare don't have insurance. our goal, what president trump says and my goal is the same. insurance the most at the least
amount of cost, i want to expand than nos insured under obamacare, the way you do it, lower the costs of insurance. obamacare did the opposite. and said all insurance had to include ten different items. we elevated the insurance and made it too expensive for all to afford. we can lower through health savings accounts, we can help people to save for it and finally i'd like every individual in america to join into a group to get group costs.nce and lower thr stuart: what our audience wants is confirmation, reassurance, that nobody who has health insurance now will lose it on the day obamacare is repealed. i mean, will you make that guarantee for our audience? >> well, i think if you want to have a more realistic discussion about this, you would say, we want more people to be insured than are currently insured. i think it's not a very
realistic scenario or hypothetical setup one person, not one person will have less or there's going to be one more. right now the current facts are millions of people do not have insurance under obamacare. our goal is to have more people insured at a lower cost and this is where obamacare broke down, where obamacare failed. obamacare elevated the cost of insurance by putting mandates on insurance. the number one thing you have to do to lower the cost of insurance do not dictate to insurance companies what kind of insurance they have to sell. stuart: real fast. we've got three major confirmation hearings today. tom price for health and human services, wilbur ross or health secretary and contentious of all, scott pruitt, for epa. would you say any of these three look shaky or unlikely to be confirmed? >> no, i think they'll all be confirmed and so far i haven't seen a trump nominee that's not going to be confirmed. i think there is still a lot of
sour grapes over the election though and last night in the secretary of education, betsy devos' hearing, whine, whine, whine, the other side. spent most the time. they complained about wanting more time to speak and whined instead of asking questions. they need to get over the election and decide to move forward. i'm looking forward to working with democrats, but they've got to get over the election. stuart: yes, pathetic, i think that word will live on for a long time to come. senator paul, thank you for joining us. >> thank you. stuart: all right. news from j.p. morgan. a discrimination lawsuit. ashley: yeah, the u.s. government filing suit accusing j.p. morgan essentially of discriminating against black and hispanic mortgage borrowers from 2006 to 2009 essentially charging higher interest rates, and higher fees during that period compared to, as they say similar situated white
borrowers, they're wanting compensation-- they want fines and they also want compensation for those affected. j.p. morgan denies all of it. stuart: got , j.p. morgan. got it. a fiery confirmation hearing for president-elect trump's pick for education secretary, betsy devos. senator elizabeth warren says she's not experienced. and jennifer holiday scrapped plans to sing at the inauguration because of death threats. how ugly can it get? we're on it in a moment. why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away
i've spent my life planting a size-six, non-slip shoe into that door. on this side, i want my customers to relax and enjoy themselves. but these days it's phones before forks. they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business. strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business. anything with a screen is a tv. stream 130 live channels, plus 40,000 on demand tv shows and movies, all on the go. you can even download from your x1 dvr and watch it offline.
only xfinity gives you more to stream to any screen. download the xfinity tv app today. >> i don't believe this is going to have any impact on the stock market, but the price of oil is down to $51 a barrel. down $1.12. singer and broadway star jennifer holiday reportedly in talks to sing at the inauguration and she backed out after receiving an extraordinary backlash. she told the view she's even gotten death threats. >> i have performed for four other presidents, you know, i started with ronald reagan, my voice i felt could be used as an instrument of healing and unity, i didn't realize that people weren't really over the election. i was even receiving death threats at this point. and i had never experienced--
>> which is never okay. >> that's terrible. >> i was receiving death threats from black people, the n-word from black people, aunt jemima from black people saying i should kill myself. >> pete is with us and i want to exchange opinions. i think that undermines the peaceful and amicable transfer of power and it's highly unamerican. >> of course, and the healing and unity that comes with that civic ritual. she wanted her voice to be healing and she caved to snowflake media pressure. i'm sure she got death threats, but it takes courage to stand up and she probably wasn't a trump supporter, who cares, that's not the point. this is about america and had the courage, and death threats to show us how intolerant the left is for this. stuart: i blame the left for this. the left is making these threats and disrupt the inauguration and trying to spoil the inauguration. i don't blame ms. holiday if i
got death threats i had a he think twice. >> you don't think that donald trump gets death threats? he's going to stand on the dias. i'm going to be part of the healing and unity and not cave. people making death threats are the ones to blame, but we've got to have performers willing to stand up. >> mr. donald trump says that threats were received by-- some musicians refused to attend the inauguration, but they weren't invited in the first place and the names of those who will perform will not be released because of this backlash. >> this didn't happen in 2008 and 2012 for barack obama, he said he was going to fundmentally transform america. and i like it on "the view," that's not okay. everything was okay until they got to death threats. you can be called bad language et cetera, et cetera, but death threats. ashley: that's the red line. >> the red line. stuart: politics and economics that's what we do, liz.
>> i think it's clear to say that the trump rally has stalled, it stopped going straight up a month ago. just shy of 20,000. what's going to happen today? we're about 160, 70 points away from 20k. 9:30 here we're off and running and down 9 points. a very modest loss in the very early going. that's pretty much the same story the s&p 500, very modest loss in the early going. same story on the nasdaq, i'm going to repeat myself, a modest loss. [laughter]. we're off .14. nasdaq, i guess technology is doing well. price of oil is down a buck. and ounce, 1214 as we speak.
trump's talk about cutting taxes could have more novartis here. who is going to watch the stoc stocks. elizabeth macdonald, shah gilani, liz peek. i'm reading this as another win for president trump and i think it's a win for his carrot approach. that is, you give tax breaks in america and get more investment here. what do you say, scott shellady? >> you know what i think 's going to continue with that and yes, that obvislworks. you know, when you give these ceo's the opportunities to make the right choice because it's there in black and white, instead of a feel this way or that way, a negative kind of decision. you're right, it's a carrot. when he puts it down in black and white and obviously that staying here or make it go here the right decision, you'll have
a lot of ceo's make the common-sensical decision. stuart: you're right. ashley: i think that liz peek said would he use a baseball bat rather than a stick when he says that the drug makers committing murder. liz: and how do you trade a trump tweet, bullish or bearish. stuart: it's an eternity. liz peek. >> look, i think that analysts are trying to figure out what all of these different trump utterances mean, and stalled trying to sort it out, it's good for america. we're basically talking about a president who is willing to engage in the trenches. talk to corporate ceo's about what they need to make it worthwhile investing in the united states. how can that be anything, but good for this country. stuart: fair point. look at netflix, please. lots of news on that stock. it was near anll-time high,
still is. 134, 135 is the high. it reports profits after the bell today. it's going to double hours of content and it has a deal, new deal with jerry seinfeld. now, i want to ask you, shah gilani, what do we have to see in that profit report later on today, from netflix, that will make netflix stock go up? >> we are going to have to see some profit, first of all. the company has been expanding widely and far and done a lot of great deals, but not really generating any profitability that makes it worthwhile at these levels. investors want to see profitability and consistency in terms of turning a profit and the company would go well. like a long-term amazon story, let it build, let it build, the profits will start flowing. investors are hopeful and proven out by solid earnings and it's going to have to start soon. stuart: the king of streaming better produce money, profit. lowe's improvement people,
they're going to layoff 2400 employees less than 1% of the work force. i want to know why they're doing it. ashley: if you want to talk about ceo ease: ceo says store staffing and customers demand. most of these cuts are at the store level, some at distribution centers and even at corporate head office, but what does it mean. we're not getting as many people into the store and we don't need as many staff. >> everything is squeezed. the problem with that and i think we're going to talk about the high end retailers later. when you start cutting staffing, there aren't as many people around to cut customers and the whole advantage of being in the store begins to go away. this is a death spiral and i think it's really, really troublesome for all of these brick and mortar companies. stuart: going into the stores. puts me off, takes forever to get service. the big board shows now at 19,779. we're down this morning. take a look at bank stocks, please?
all of them took a big hit yesterday. morgan stanley today dead flat. it was down 4% just yesterday. citigroup, better profits, but less money coming in over the tr tr transom to them. gom goldman sachs, how about this, revenue, amount of money coming in from bonds, currencies, commodities, up 78% at goldman sachs. $2 billion came in. all right, i want to get back to retail because that's one of the major themes on this program, the retail ice-age. weak holiday sales at target, it's cut its forecast, how bad was it, nicole. nicole: it was bad enough. the stock is down 5%. they had a miss for the quarter and 1.3% for the same-store sales. target follows what we heard from kohl's, what we heard from j.c. penney, dwindling foot traffic, but here is the thing, they saw the digital sales
surge 30%. now, i won't say watch out, amazon, because i don't really think that target is amazon, however, it just shows you that people are just moving toward that shopping at home. shopping in your bathrobe, shopping in whatever you like to wear when you're shopping on-line at home and continue to do it. stuart: the stock is down. nicole: because overall they missed and they had to cut their guidance, a miss overall. while they had the bright spot of the digital on-line sales and toys, the other only bright spot, the big picture they missed, missing their numbers, not good. stuart: still on retail, i've got two bricks and mortar retailers that are pulling the plug on going public, who are they. liz: claire's, a teen mall store, and nieman marcus. and to go public to help pay down the boat load of debt.
nieman marcus said two years ago it would be ipo. ipo's are not doing well in the retail space and target was trying to basically move into other businesses like walk-in clinics and having drugs and pharmacy, and it's just-- their strategies are not firing on all cylinders right now. stuart: look at retailers, the big guys, all of them way, way down. target is down 2% and going down more as we speak. microsoft, yes, i own a little bit of it. the company's designed a phone that folds out into a tablet. ash. ashley: yeah, this is interesting. now, let's just point out, it is applying for the patent so it's a theory thing, so basically turning these devices into origami, you use the smart phone to text and make calls, but say you want to do more, then, you know, you rely on the tablet for other things, combines it all with a series of essentially hinges that can unfold one thing into a bigger thing. it's basically an all in one device. stuart: okay. just a patent thereof.
>> and comes in various screen sizes, many different configurations apparently. stuart: and doing nothing for the stock, that's down. that's what i wanted to know about. ashley: i know you're excited. stuart: trump is the deal maker in chief. listen to what he's doing, he's pitting boeing against lockheed martin for military contract to get the price down. scott shellady, i'm sure you approve of this. >> oh, yeah, you know, if you run a business, stuart, one of the things you do to get more out of your employees and get better prices across the board, you create a competition. you want somebody fighting against somebody else. that's how you get things donement sometimes it can be wrestling, sports, it can be the business world and that's what he's doing here. he's creating a competition so they'll eat each other up and stanback and wait for the best price a take it. that's a good idea. stua: it's a radically different way of doing business. >> it is, but don't you think that 90% of americans think that we're wasteful in erms it of our spending on military outlay? and the answer is yes. common sense people kind of
look at that and say, why not? it's like the drug thing. i mean, if we're-- if the federal government is spending over half and i can't remember the exact number well over half of the monies spent on medications, why wouldn't they go for better price? i mean, again, i think all of this hysteria about what trump is doing is overblown. stuart: look at this, we're down 75 points that means the dow industrials are negative for this calendar year 2017. it means clearly that the trump rally has stalled well shy of 20,000. scott shellady, first to you. what happens after the inauguration? does the selloff resume or does the rally resume? which is it? >> it's going to be in the numbers, stuart. the electorate is going to say, okay, show me the money. you look at the markets that we trade, the dow 20,000, you've got oil between 50 and 55. you've got that 10-year between 230 and 250. going nowhere until we start to
see the proof in the pudding or show me the money. he does a lot of feel-good things and tapped on the shoulder with negative economic news that we haven't been paying attention to, doing a feel-good story. ultimately the end of the day the economy will come in and fill in behind him to make the 100 days a success. stuart: fair point. shah gilani, do we go up after the inauguration on friday? >> i think we have a very good opportunity to go up. i don't know if we'll go up right away after the inauguration. this almost like a holding period, a quiet period before the ipo. starting monday when the president gets to work and the administration, 100 day push, exciting for the country and the economy. if stocks see that this'll start rallying quickly. i don't know if it's on monday, but shortly thereafter. if we see positive signs and hear positive things, the market is waiting to go forward and i think it's got a strong bid underneath it so it's not going to go down too much. looking for good positive news to come out of the administration as soon as it takes its seat. stuart: i want to thank
everyone for joining us, shah, scott, elizabeth. thank you indeed one and all. that will be liz peek. liz: i like your use of the word elizabeth. you're watching the crown, aren't you? [laughter] >> i'm hooked. check that big board. we're down, what, 50 points now. come back a little bit. 19,775. president obama commutes the rest of chelsea manning's prison sentence. remember, she was convicted of leaking secret military information. judge napolitano on that commutation next. and also, we're expecting some contentious hearings on capitol hill. tom price, hhs. scott pruitt for epa. wilbur ross for commerce. we're covering it all and there will be fireworks. more varney next. ♪ hey gary, what'd you got here?
this bad boy is a mobile trading desk so that i can take my trading platform wherever i go. you know that thinkorswim seamlessly syncs across all your devices, right? oh, so my custom studies will go with me? anywhere you want to go! the market's hot! sync your platform on any device with thinkorswim. only at td ameritrade (bell chimes) ♪ nice work brother dominic. now we just need 5 more... translated into 35 lanages, personalized oh and shared across the 7 continents. (other languages spoken) look abbot, i got it. it's a miracle. ♪
>> all right. we're down at the moment. 39 points. we've come back just a little bit, 42 points down now. look at under amour, that stock is actually down a fraction, but ashley, they've signed a football star. ashley: leonard forenet out of lsu. i think he did three years at lsu and came out to go into the nfl draft. big, big, you know, excitement around this guy. who takes him, but under amour on it already. multi-year deal signed with this guy and under amour has had pretty good luck with the sports stars. stuart: that's what i like, and all right. # contention, that's what we saw last night. democrats singled out betsy devos in the confirmation hearing for education secretary. contention. >> have your children had to
borrow money in order to go to college. they've been fortunate not to. >> should any personal experience with a pell grant. perm experience, but friends and students i've worked with. >> you've had no experience with financial aid and-- >> elizabeth warren on the scourge of moderation. >> and right, elizabeth warren now tweeting out she shouldn't be the secretary of education because she doesn't have experience in running a one trillion dollar school budget. that she's a rich woman and-- >> it's about the teachers' union that opposes the school of choice at any opportunity. >> they oppose any reform of schools. in 2011 obama had to back away from reforms he had put forward because the teachers union said they wouldn't back him in 2012 and he ran for the exit. so, this is a longstanding situation, never has there
been, i would argue, an education secretary whose kids had pell grants. come on. stuart: now, president obama in his last week in office has commuted the prison sentence of chelsea manning, formerly bradley manning, she leaked classified u.s. intelligence. judge napolitano is with us on that this morning. we were told today that people had died because of the information which manning had illegally released and now she's commuted-- he's commuted her sentence. >> i heard the same arguments made that in the documents that manning released, there were vague descriptions of american intelligence assets and these assets who were not americans, but foreign people providing information to our intelligence sources were killed, as were people who looked like the description of the assets because the killers went on a rampage and killed more than
their true target. look, this is a power given to the president under the constitution. stuart: yes, hold on, can i interrupt for a second? you give me the other side of the argument. i say commute the sentence of chelsea manning is a disgrace and something utterly wrong. give me the other side. >> the other side of the argument is mercy is the opposite side of justice. justice is giving someone what they deserve. you leak secrets and people die, you get 35 years in jail. mercy is out of the heart when it's not deserved. i myself commuted sentences of people i had sentenced and judges can do and prosecutors were furious and something motivated me from a sense of mercy. stuart: did chelsea manning get this because of gender surgery and--
she wanted to, and-- >> it's not one surgical procedure. stuart: she says she's having a hard time in a man's military prison, outlined in the new york times today. >> under the law, even though she's in a military prison, they have to accommodate her as unique as she is. i don't know what motivated the president, but the president has this awesome power. it's so awesome, it cannot be reversed by president trump. this is not a pardon. she has the stigma of having been convicted. she has been convicted. the plea is equal to conviction. she was charged with espionage. she could have been charged with treason and could have been exposed to the death penalty. when you're convicted of treason and someone dies as a result, even though you didn't pull the trigger, you could be executed. stuart: now she's coming out in may. >> free as a bird, can't vote and can't carry a firearm and the other disabilities for federal convicts, but free as all of us.
stuart: it was an insult to the military, wasn't it? >> i understand that a lot of military and intelligence community folks feel that way. i a know a lot applauded what she revealed and they complained up the channel and were punished. >> ash carter opposed it, just fyi. stuart: judge, one more for you in a moment. dow 30, now down 40 points. 19, 786. the dow this calendar year has gone nowhere. how about this? donald trump's inauguration two days away, at least 60 house democrats will not attend. they're going to boycott. i'll say it again, this is outright contempt for the incoming president and our way our democracy functions. i've got a question for napolitano who is going to stay. is this an attempt to undermine our constitutional republic? your insurance company
won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. make the switch and find out why 96% of our customers are satisfied with liberty mutual.
j.c. penney taking it on the chin today. and 60 democrats boycotting the inauguration. judge napolitano is here. the screen will be full, these are the boycotters. judge, should we be worried that so many are boycotting in this fashion? >> yes. stuart: why? >> because i think they give moral cover to people who severely dislike the president by questioning the legitimacy. i don't know if all 60 agree with ajohn lewis, donald trump is not the legitimate president, i don't know if all 59 degrees with that. but they're giving the impression that it's okay to disregard him as the president. that will send a message to people who may use that message as an impetus to do something. that's a danger. is it protected speech? of course. stuart: ever right to do this. >> we're not talking legally on
constitutionally, we're talking morally. it's dangerous for them to do that en masse at the a public event. stuart: it's the standing of our society. if the inauguration itself is undermined and the legitimacy of the president is questioned, you are undermining the way our society works. that's where i'm coming from. >> so the first time nancy pelosi shows up at the white house might be next week. hey, nancy, one third of your troops still think i'm not the real president? >> you're saying that a political price will be paid? >> yes, a political price will be paid. stuart: and it will be paid by the left? >> yes, yes. you need your friend as a federal judge in your district? wait until your guy is in the white house. >> i wonder if it can be 0 preemptive move because they know they have no power whatsoever. how do they explain to their constituents they get nothing done, they can't block president trump. >> without revealing a secret,
i'm going to tell you this is not under his skin. this is absolutely not under his skin. stuart: you're a man who could know these days. >> from yesterday, this was one of the things-- it may be unfair for me to say this and he's probably happy i'm saying it. it's one of the things we talked about. we addressed the moral issue. it's not under his skin. stuart: in case you didn't know, judge napolitano had a one-on-one with mr. trump at trump tower. >> he actually wants their tickets. stuart: and three confirmation hearings on the hill. this is a show down right there in washington and you're going to see it. back in two minutes.
passionate defense of president obama's legacy, his policies. now first off, dr. tom price, he will come under sharp attack if confirmed as health secretary he will roll back obamacare. democrats will demand price's replacement plan. they will attack him for investments in health care companies. scott pruitt, mr. trump's pick to run the epa, he would roll back president obama's climate rules. that is another pillar of the obama legacy. pruitt's hearing will be very contentious. wilbur ross for commerce, he is a billionaire. he wants a different approach for trade. he will be attacked on both counts. we're covering all of this and growing list of democrats boycotting the inauguration. it is very much a divided nation. second hour of "varney" and company begins. ♪
stuart: the hearings are about to begin. there will be gavel to order momentarily. as we told you there are three contentiohearings today, four in total. three in particular will be very contentious. the gentleman you see right there, center screen, dr. tom price. he is president, present elect donald trump's pick to run health and human services. particularly contentious hearing for this man because as we said at the top of the show, he is going to roll back obamacare. very much the centerpiece of president obama's legacy. he is warming up. he will make an opening statement shortly. we know what he is going to say. pretty much boilerplate stuff. liz: he will say, by the way he is for saving and strengthening medicare. he diverges from the president having medicare negotiate drug prices. president-elect trump says you should do. you can expect fireworks on his stock holdings. we know one congresswoman, louise slaughter out of new york
sent a letter, fec, saying you tom price, violated law making trades in health related stocks. he disclosed them. the trump transition team is saying fighting cnn, retract the story. stuart: the left is going to attack. one of the grounds he will attack. he did invest in health care stocks. ashley: how can you categorically confirm no one will be left holding the bag with no health insurance at all? that will be hammered away from him. if you repeal obamacare, what will you replace it with. >> can i assess some blame for the allegations against him that he personally will roll back obamacare, because the authority given to the secretary of health and human services to roll back obamacare was given by the democrats when the secretary of health and human services was a democrat, kathleen sebelius. should be a decision made by congress but they gave so much bureaucratic authority to the secretary. now it is in the hands of someone they dislike and
distrust. >> this is one more issue which democrats have created an enormous, sort of secondary world where today in the "new york times" they're talking about 32 million people might be dropped off of health insurance. it is all just -- because they have nothing, they can't do anything. they're basically outnumbered, unless republicans come on board with all their angst, that could happen maybe in the devos situation or whatever, not going to happen with tom price. these people are all going to be confirmed. stuart: i predict that the democrats in that hearing today will bring up the congressional budget office study. liz: yeah, they will. stuart: when they said if you repeal obamacare you will leave millions -- liz: the cbo study didn't take into account, cruz has a plan, paul ryan has a plan, there are multiple plans out there. should be noted cbo overstated the number of people who would be on the exchanges and understated number of people who
stated would be enrolled in medicaid. stuart: that is senator bernie sanders said that thousands will die if obamacare is repealed. i would expect him to ask some pointed questions today. sorry i interrupted you. >> i was about to pick up what emac said. the democrats hate plans paul ryan, rand paul and ted cruz because they're based on the free market and they're based on individual choices. they're not based on nanny state central planning which is only thing they believe in, which we now know is a failure. ashley: as i said from the very beginning, that is what he is going to be hammered on. we can't even get an answer out of rand paul when you asked him this question. stuart: about an hour ago, senator rand paul was on the show this morning and i asked the straightforward question, will any one person who has health care coverage now be without any health care coverage on the very day that obamacare is repealed? he did not answer the question, not directly at least. he has his own plan.
liz: can we talk about what is happening now? new numbers out of kaiser. companies that have 50 or less employees, the number of workers there who have coverage plummeted. that is as astonishing. stuart: repeat that. liz: small businesses that have 50 or less employees the number of workers who now have insurance coverage has plummeted over the last eight, 10 years because of kampf bear. they can't afford it. they're not covering their workers. new numbers coming out of kaiser. correct. stuart: i would like to see a republican note those numbers give in the hearing today. >> can give you answer to rand paul the answer is no. most states require so much notice before the termination of coverage, there is a federal statute that has a floor of 18 months. some states give more. you have all that time period during which to get more coverage. >> by the way obamacare can be
repealed with future end date. doesn't have to be repealed and gone tomorrow. >> correct. >> it can be repealed at end of 2018 or something else. let's not forget the democrats are dying to republicans at that i can ownership for health insurance mess they have been pummeled for six years. they don't want responsibility for obamacare any longer. let someone else do it, and they're thrilled this is all theater. stuart: left-hand side of your screen, ladies and gentlemen, dr. tom price, republican from the state of georgia. he is mr. trump's pick to be health and human services secretary. he is about to -- the panel has been gaveled to order. to his right is senator johnny isakson. i believe that is another georgia republican who will be backing up mr. price, essentially saying what a good guy he is. the chair of the committee is taking his opening statement as we speak. then you will go to tom price's opening statement. we're not going to listen to that.
it is largely, forgive me if i say boilerplate stuff. that's what it is. his opening statement will not announce his plan to repeal and replace obamacare. forgive me, judge, i said it was boilerplate stuff. >> i know what you mean. you're not being critical. you're just being accurate. stuart: right. >> we've already seen it. they gave us copies of it. stuart: precisely. >> i doubt that he will have a plan to lay out today because as. david: mentioned, there are three or four different plans kicking around. they obviously haven't brought them all together and decided on one. anything he puts out there that is concrete they will be able to attack and he will avoid that. >> camera focused in on al franken. he is on this committee. that will be fireworks last night's hearing on betsy devos al franken went after her on spurious issues. he said to her, miss devos, do you still believe in conversion
therapy? controversial, convert homosexuals to heterosexual behavior. >> what ds ha to do with her running -- liz: family relatives gave money to a group that advocates that. that creates massive depression in gay people. it hasn't been successful. she disavowed that she set that aside and said i support all students, whatever, whoever, whatever, however they come in the door. stuart: by the way, it is the same committee now on the left-hand side of your screen grilling tom price which grilled betsy devos last night. you see the same senators asking maybe different questions. ashley: great. stuart: but the same senators. >> you're so generous, you could have said you will see the same cast of characters. liz: or worst. stuart: i don't think we should be pejorative. keep the lid on things. >> she is not pejorative,
phillip. stuart: watch the proceedings unfold in the tom price hearings. elsewhere in capitol hill there will be more contentious hearing for scott pruitt. scott pruitt is from oklahoma. he is president trump's, or president-elect trump's pick to be the epa guy. now mr. pruitt, he is a global warming skeptic, i think i can say that he certainly wants to roll back president obama's climate rules. now that is the equivalent of blasphemy because, and well, it is. environmental system almost a religion in america. if you oppose that, you are blasphemous. liz: lose out on grants and lose out on positions. it is. stuart: all hell breaks loose with scott pruitt later on today i do believe. then we have wilbur ross the pick for commerce secretary. that will be contentious. there he is waiting for his hearing to get underway. it is underway. the wilbur ross is a billionaire. he want a trade in our trade
policy. that is anathema to th left, puts a billionaire t the start puts you out of bounds. left will go after him on those ground big time. ashley: in his opening statement i'm pro trade and i'm pro sensible trade. something donald trump said all along. i'm not against trade. i want to make sure everybody get as good deal. >> the democrats are on shaky ground. hillary clinton and bernie sanders both campaign against the tpp, obama's favored trade pact. it will not go forward because there is opposition to it. by the way, wilbur ross is opposed to it. he has a common ground with democrats. stuart: but he is billionaire. >> it is like a disease. hope you don't catch it. it is very destablizing, that is true. stuart: money can't buy you happiness and health? >> love? stuart: i'm determined to give it a try. sorry. moment of lefty there, why not? meanwhile, the, you know, the stock market is pretty much on
hold. i think the market situation to see what happens in these confirmation hearings because if any of the con -- nominees are rejected, that will imply that maybe mr. trump is going to have a hard time getting his business-oriented, very conservative outlook on politics and the past the gate. liz: if it is not rejection, a delay in getting nomination. >> congressman, dr. price has to be approved by two committees. he has to be approved and get a second hearing before the senate finance committee because there is so much cash that goes to the department of health and hewlett-packard services, another committee has jurisdiction over his committee besides this one, chaired by senator alexander. stuart: really? >> yes. that is next tuesday. this guy has his work cut out for him. stuart: how did you know that and i didn't? >> i raid the emails. [laughter]. >> nonetheless, very hard to
construe a scenario where any of these people will actually be blocked. one of the reasons you could argue for the market churn there is all this resistance d basically a wall being erected by democrats suggesting we won't go along. the truth is, what choice do they have? at the end of the day, we have the senate, we have the house of representatives. i think trump can do a great deal. by the way, obama set precedent for that. congress doesn't go along you have your pen, and your sword. it is not that, the pen and the phone. we know trump is eager to use it if not more than obama was. liz: trade deals. >> exactly right. >> very interesting to see what he signs on monday. he is prepared to do a lot of signing at 9:00 on monday morning. >> that's true. stuart: we have to bring the judge back, because many people in our audience do not know that twice you have been to trump tower for one-on-one discussions with the president-elect. and you're implying that after your visit yesterday, you
concluded that mr. trump will be signing a lot of executive orders. >> yes. stuart: on day one, hour one of his presidency? >> yes. stuart: you know that for a fact. >> part of that conclusion is pro public statements. stuart: that's true. >> he did say will not do it over the weekend. will wait until monday and has a lot of signing to do on monday. stuart: and executive orders. >> i believe it is, yes. >> rescinding executive orders. >> yes. >> i know people in the transition committees, basically what they have been doing for weeks, coming up with what could be taken away. >> any executive order signed by president obama can be ignored, modified or rescinded by president-elect donald trump. stuart: he signed a lot of executive orders. >> some have been the subject of supreme court litigation. stuart: what have you got, ash? ashley: dnc released statement on nomination hearing on tom price. first tinge out of the price, tom price's self-dealing policy making is core result and can only be rivaled about
donald trump's me first politics on business. stuart: you can go after the guy on financial dealings and business and if you have dirt. liz: this is the "wall street journal" story we're talking about, 300 to you dollars. stuart: i'm really interested in policy here. will tom price be able to repeal and replace obamacare? because that is his job. the market will react how well and if he can do that job and if he is going to be confirmed. liz: that's correct. stuart: the dirt, if the dirt is real bad, maybe tom price looks like he will not be confirmed and that will affect the market. liz: one of the important trades, biomet, the trump transition team is heated about this coverage by cnn demanding a retraction. saying his morgan stanley account was only going to be traded, made $300 on it according to sean spicer. they are saying this is not a story. he didn't really know about the trade. stuart: what you said to elizabeth, or somebody said it, don't expect tom price, the gentleman on the left, don't
expect him to come out with his plan for the replacement of obamacare today. however -- liz: there will be bills. stuart: on the panel asking questions is senator rand paul who was on this program about an hour ago. ashley: he has a plan. stuart: he's got a plan. i would expect him to use this occasion to say what that plan is. you'll love it. you know what it is. >> i know it is based on your ability to tailor your own policy, even from out-of-state insurance carrier which today today inexplicably is illegal. stuart: i will not guarranty but senator paul will say, here is my plan, dr. price what do you think? we're concentrates on tom price's hearing. i think lamar alexander introducing -- they're not asking questions yet. they're sort of introducing and making opening statements from the panel. but there are two other potentially contentious hearings
that are going to go on today in washington. scott pruitt is the nominee for epa. he is a climate skeptic, i think i can call him that. he would repeal and get rid of many of the epa climate rules. now that is extremely contentious. i said that was blasphemy, judge, earlier. >> this is the unique situation where he is being appointed to run the epa in order to dismantle portions of -- you remember the famous churchhill line, i did not become the queen's first minister in order to preside over the dissolution empire. he is becoming head of epa to head the dissolution of portions of it. the portion that wants to regulate a rainwater puddle in your backyard. stuart: like setting cat among the pigeons. scott pruitt is the cat and environmentalists are the pigeons. that might be pejorative. >> court intervened with epa
regulations. pruitt can basically oversee the furthering of protest against a lot of these things. he does not have to be a climate skeptic or embrace that kind of position in order to oppose what they're doing because what they're doing is basically overturning 1/6 of the economy. >> again because the legislation that created epa and support that gives so much discretion as to the administrator how the laws will be interpreted, enforced, applied, ruled upon and how you will pay for this. stuart: if you look around all these nominations, these hearings, confirmation hearingses what they are, as i look at all of them, i see every single panel with a majority of republicans, and if the republicans stay solid, then every single one of the nominees is confirmed. the democrats have to rely on a couple of republicans waiverring, defecting and saying no, we're not going to vote for this particular person. >> you have marco rubio who made his most recent sort of name for
himself going after rex tillerson, that maybe today it is rand paul going after, you know, somebody, going after price on health care but other than that, other than what i would describe as grandstanding by some of these young senators -- liz: rubio is pretty powerful. he sits on senate foreign relations. >> he made a big show being tough on tillerson's supposed ties to russia. stuart: there is one opening line of attack. that is senator patty murray right there. she is in the tom price hearing on that committee, complaining about the lack of time. saying we don't have enough time to ask all the questions we want to ask. exactly the same thing she said last night in the confirmation hearing for betsy deif voss. >> to quote the judge, if they stop whining they have more time to ask questions. stuart: there is no constitutionally guaranteed open-ended time frame where you take as long as you like. >> what is guaranteed each house
of congress writes its own rules. the senate written rules, limit questioning to whatever it is. i don't know what it is, eight minutes per member. three round of questions. ashley: same for obama confirmation hearings? >> it was a different senate. the democrats were running. ashley: did they get longer? >> i believe approximately the same. may have given nine minutes about basically the same. liz: they need more times for questions. should be noted tom price has been in office since 2005. >> there is no time limit what she can say on the floor of the senate. stuart: but in committee hearing like this, in a confirmation hearing, there are strict limits. >> did she challenge mrs. devos's wealth? she is as wealthy as mrs. devos is. stuart: is that right? >> yes. stuart: she is wealthiest member of the senate. >> from sweat of her own brow in silicon valley. stuart: she made money as technology entrepreneur? >> yes, she did. stuart: so. being a billionaire is not a problem. >> right.
one billionaire challenge the wealth of another billionaire as basis to vote against her. stuart: i don't think dr. tom price is particularly well i this. i don't believe he is. she is questioning him or about to question. they're just trying to make the case if they had more time there is lot more stuff they could bring up that would be damaging to these candidates. they have want people to go away feeling dissatisfied and thoroughness of hearings. ashley: that is all they have got. all they have got. >> exactly right. stuart: by the way the dow industrials are down a mere 20 points. that means that the dow industrials are dead flat on this calendar year. earlier today, we turn negative for this calendar year, now we're back to dead-even. the truth is, here, that the trump rally, so much in evidence right after the election on november the 8th, has clearly stalled. it approached 20,000. we got within one point of 20,000. backed off. we're at 19,800.
that trump rally has clearly stalled. do we start the rally rolling again? ashley: dollar come back. opposite day from yesterday. financials have come back today. the rally, you're right has been stalled for five weeks now. stuart: if we hear in the first the first 100 days of the administration, yes we get tax cuts, yes we roll back obamacare, yes, we get deregulation, you may well see -- i don't want to forecast this. ashley: right. stuart: but the sense around this table that the trump rally will resume. if there is long, drawn out timetable for getting rid of obamacare, getting tax cuts, restructuring taxes for corporations, and restructuring financial reform, if there is a long delay i don't think the market rally hold. >> for example, there will be increased volume of deals being announced because obama administration put a lot of speed bums for acquisitions. nothing drives the market faster
than other companies taking over other companies. i guarranty that will happen in the first quarter. >> are you ready, willing able, to predict the momenthich w hit to thousand? stuart: no. >> no. stuart: i will digss one second away from the hearings and i've got a question for the judge as we watch people assemble in committee hearing rooms. looks like there is a a proker in the pruitt hearing. they escorted him out. it is book to normal in the pruitt hearing. i was drawn up short by some of our viewers that i referred to america's democracy. i am told that is incorrect. i should refer to america's constitutional republic. >> yes. stuart: that is a little nitpicky. >> i think it's a little nitpicky, decan mock sy with lower case d referses -- refers to you elect the government.
it is federal constitutional republic. the states are sovereign as well as the federal government being sovereign. libertarians think individuals are sovereign but let's not go there. >> next we'll talk about the e.u. stuart: i wishing i had never brought this up. dear lord. when i swore the oath of allegiance to become an american citizen i think i did swear an oath of allegiance to the constitutional republic. >> at the same time you renounced the queen. he renounced me, phillip. i haven't slept since then. stuart: did i swear an oath to theconstitution and republic which it stands? >> that is the phrase. stuart: to the constitution and the republic -- >> for which it stands. stuart: for which it stands. is flat pledge of allegiance. >> the language is nearly identical to the oath you took. stuart: i'm getting myself in trouble. >> most of us never given two
seconds thought to the phrase. stuart: our viewers did. a lot of folk writing, you're a disgrace, varney. i'm a citizen, come on, give me a break here. we're down four points now. we've come back from a minus 60, minus 70, to a minus 3. maybe the market is paying attention to these committee hearings, maybe. maybe there are other factors in play. essentially we have a stall on our hands with the dow around 19,800. i believe patty murray, senator patty murray continues her statement. she is not asking questions. she is the asking about women's issues. it is her opening statement, birth control, women's issues. now, mr. price, dr. price is going to be or nominated to be health and human services. she's asking really about planned parenthood and whether dr. price would defund planned parenthood? that is the nature of the
question now. it is not a question. it's a statement. >> really interesting, what can trump do, what does he need congress for and what does he need congress for? he needs congress repealing obamacare around cutting taxes. he doesn't need congress to basically build the keystone pipeline. to basically do over these trade deals. he can even propose term lmi on congress, i think the judge would agree. he can canc payments -- do executive orders to the judge's point on monday morning rescinding payments to the u.n. climate fund. stuart: you're down to monday morning, you're right. it is monday morning when he signs a lot of executive orders. >> barack obama signed a series of executive orders immediately after inauguration. donald trump says he is waiting until monday morning. he wants to celebrate on friday and work on monday. stuart: by the way, senator murray, in her opening statement, just brought up her concerns about the stock trading which dr. price has indulged in while he was a member of congress. now i'm going to ask you
quickly, elizabeth, would you just summarize the charge against dr. price for his stock trading. liz: that he benefited from stock trades based on legislation he was weighing in on, however, the trump transition team says it was morgan stanley's call to make these trades. that he had -- their implication he had no knowledge of these trades. >> blind trust or something of that sort? liz: it was his account and they were making trades for him. ashley: dnc said he invested up to $90,000 in six pharmaceutical companies before leading a fight in congress -- stuart: sorry to interrupt you, ash. there is the wilbur ross hearing. he is laughing about it. they escort ad couple of protesters out. >> what do they protest at his hearing? stuart: he is republican billionaire. ashley: conflict of interest. >> another mark against him. liz: ash makes a good point about conflicts of interest, that is a theme, classic
government corruption with the incoming trump administration. that is what the democrats will be talking about. stuart: one line of attack. >> someone will point out all these guys like wilbur ross and rex tillerson are willing to serve for a dollar a year. actually made enormous financial sacrifices. liz: some are donating earnings to the treasury. >> right. stuart: the line of attack which democrats will take against dr. price is being outlined now. let's listen in to senator murray. >> i would urge you to commit to providing us with additional information and answers to any follow-up questions we have in a timely and thorough manner. i'm looking forward what i hope will a rigorous and open discussion today, and i hope we all arrive at the right decision for the families and communities that we serve. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator murray. before i introduce senator isakson i would like to put in the record the information about the last six hearings. stuart: so the line of attack is becoming apparent.
senator patty murray, in her opening statement, wanted more information, more investigation of dr. price's stock dealings and stock transactions while he was a member of congress. he has indeed, his account, has traded health care stocks to his profit. that's a line of attack from the democrats. another line of attack again from senator murray, was look, we need more time. we want to spend more time asking the questions which we think america should have answered and that's why, that is in fact another line of attack. this is very early in the proceedings, but what kind of attack is going to be leveled against dr. price is beginning to emerge. opening statements right now from some of the committee members. >> it will be. >> because i'm not going to read them. i have a unique honor and privilege to introduce a friend of mind for 30 years, someone i know to be a great politician a
great practicing legislator, a great family man, great community servant and friend of mine and honor for me to do so. stuart: i will transfer away from the dr. price hearing and go to the hearing for scott pruitt who is the nominee to head the epa he is making his opening statement. let's listen in please. >> mckenna is graduating from oklahoma university this spring and heading to the white house of university of virginia law school. and my son will be graduating high school and heading to oklahoma university following hi sister's footsteps to be a boomer sooner. lot of change of in their lives around lots of change for people in the country. people hungry with change, with change comes opportunity for growth. an opportunity to assess how we can reprioritize as a nation. when i ponder leading the epa, i get excited about the great work to be done on behalf of our nation and being a good steward of the natural resources we have
as a nation. with could be more important than protecting our nation -- stuart: i want to come out of that hearing for dr. price. liz: pruitt. stuart: i'm sorry for mr. pruitt. i want to go to greg abbott, governor of texas joining us now. governor, thanks very much for being with us. we appreciate you being here. >> my pleasure, stuart, thank you. stuart: we've heard a line of attack against dr. price this morning. so far they, democrats want more time to ask questions. and they want more information on dr. price's stock trades whales he was a member ever congress. i think they will shift the line of attack, will anybody lose insurance on day one after obamacare is repealed. would you answer that line of attack, please. >> stuart, you know what they really want, they want more time to extend obamacare even longer. we've all seen, we've all seen the disaster with obamacare. we've all seen promises that
were made were not lived up to. as you know, stuart, americans should know the united states house and senate have plans prepared that they can implement as soon as possible. what we need is for dr. price to get confirmed, so he can work with the house and senate to get those plans approved immediately so we can insure that americans are going to haveccess to the health care they need where they can reconnect with their doctors as opposed to losing their doctor as they have done under obamacare. stuart: here's question which i think will be asked of dr. price. will you, sir, guarranty that nobodyhas insurance now will be left without insurance on the day that obamacare is repealed? nobody left out at all. i think that will be the question. would you answer it. >> well, first, let's remember again that was one of the failings of obamacare. people did lose insurance who wanted access to insurance. secondly, going to dr. price and going what i think the trump administration wants to do, they want to insure that americans will be able to maintain health
insurance coverage including some of the premier aspects of it, not losing preexisting condition coverage, being able to have family members stay on the insurance rolls at least until age 26. there are some positive aspects of providing good, quality coverage that i know dr. price will be able to provide. they want to do it as quickly as possible. we don't need holdups by the united states congress and all these hearings. we need to allow the people to get to work so they can achieve that as quickly as possible. stuart: what will health insurance look like in the state of texas if mr. trump gets his way, obamacare is repealed and replaced? >> we are going to restore the dr. patient relationship. stuart, we have bureaucrat-run health care. bureaucrats making medical-based decisions. casing people. a, to lose access to their doctor. b, they didn't know they bought into the obamacare plan they would have these high deductibles.
hence, even though people may have health care insurance on obamacare they don't have access to health care. we want to reinstitute health care in a way people have access to health care, not just health care insurance. stuart: you also have, your state of texas has a very strong interest in the nomination of scott pruitt to be running the epa. as i understand it, you, sir, you governor greg abbott, you led the charge against many of these epa rules. so i take it you are a very strong backer of scott pruitt and epa? >> scott pruitt is a friend. he is outstanding scholar. great constitutionalist. a man who follows the law. i was involved with probably about a dozen lawsuits when i was attorney general of texas when scott pruitt was the attorney general of oklahoma. we filed these lawsuits against the epa for one reason, and that is because the epa refused to follow the law. the epa was making up the law. what scott pruitt will do, he cares about our environment. he cares about clean water, clean air. but he will not make up the law.
he will allow congress to make up the law. stuart: as you are speaking, governor, i got this news alert coming right into my from "the new york times." here's the headline. earth set as temperature record for the third straight year. your comments, sir? >> well, listen, we will, we will look at what science shows, and we will insure that we have an epa, for example, that is going to be following the law, making sure that we take care of our environment. what scott pruitt will not do, however, which is what his predecessor did do, that is to make up the law as they go along. only one body in this country is authorized to make up law, that is congress. epa under barack obama was rewriting the law, just like barack obama did some times. we'll finally get this country back on to the rule of law where bureaucrat officials will follow the law, not make it up. stuart: governor, we appreciate you being with us, mr. abbott, we really do. on a very, very important day for your state and for the whole country indeed.
greg abbott. appreciate you being here. >> thank you, stuart. stuart: thank you, sir. what you're seeing on left-hand side of the screen, that is scott pruitt. he is making his opening statement before the committee which will consider his confirmation at the epa we'll listen in briefly. >> to protect our natural resources, to protect our water quality, improving our air, helping protect the health and welfare of our citizens is key to the leadership of the epa. where enforcement is necessary, a vigorous enforcement. i have done that as attorney general in oklahoma. i've taken very constructive steps against those that violated the law but we have done so i think in very decisive an meaningful way. mr. chairman, with that in mind. >> one other question. then i will reserve the balance of my time for interjects and questioning throughout, but there -- stuart: now, just a few rooms away on capitol hill, dr. price has just begun his opening statement.
he has biographical information which he releases at this point, basically saying who he is, that is how it works. who he is, perhaps introduce wives and relatives and children. and what hopes for wives, children and relatives. forgive me as saying it is boilerplate stuff. he will go into his background as a doctor, elizabeth. liz: i noticed that. stuart: the contentious stuff has not yet started although senator murray gone after mr. price on the grounder she wants more time to ask probing questions and what is all this about stock trading as member of congress. stuart: i believe we have her ready, marcia blackburn, congresswoman marcia blackburn, republican from tennessee. welcome to the program. >> thank you. stuart: as you look at hearings are going to be contentious but all three nominees, whether dr. price, scott pruitt, wilbur
ross, all three will be accepted and take exception in the cabinet if all republicans on committee stay strong, stay solid and stay unite do you think that is going to happen? >> i do expect that is going to happen. they are all qualified, they are ready to do the job. you have mr. pruitt and mr. ros coming from outside of washington. dr. price who had outstanding career before going to the georgia senate and on to congress. he is well-prepared to take the reins at hhs. stuart: i want to talk about scott pruitt, who is nominated to run epa, the environmental protection agency. his hear something already underway. just as it started "the new york times" released this headline, for the earth sets a temperature record for the third straight year. now scott pruitt is portrayed as a climate skeptic.
how do you, what is going on here? "the new york times" release this is headline just as his hearing gets underway, what do you make of this marcia? >> i think they're trying to do anything to interject uncertainty, and to cause individuals to question. but we know stuart, is that going back talking to different climate scientists, looking at different reports, looking at earth's coartem ture, not just in decades or centuries or longer periods of times and it warms and it cools, it is a cyclical pattern. i expect you will see mr. pruitt to take that stance. and to have a healthy dose of skepticism when it comes to being an absolute. it is not a settled science as many of the climate scientists would like to say. stuart: marcia, i'm going to read you a little bit more from "the new york times." first sentence, first paragraph. marking another milestone for a
changing planet, scientists reported on wednesday the earth reached highest temperature in 2016, trouncing a record already set earlier year earlier which beat one set in 2014. first time in modern era of global warming data that the temperatures broken past previous record three times in a row. i would expect to see that information around headline used very much against scott pruitt, that gentleman right there, when the hearings get underway. where are we producer? are we back -- we're going to back to dr. price. he is about to get into the meat of his opening statement. listen in please. >> what is best interests of the patient. it became clear to me our health care system was losing focus on the number one priority, that is the patient. as a result i felt compelled to broaden my role in public service and help solve the issues harming the delivy of medicine. so i ran for the georgia state
senate. i found the state senate in georgia off then to be remarkably bipartisan and collegial relationships were the norm. this is where i needed to legislate to work across the aisle to get work done. in congress i've been part of collaborations that broke through party lines to solve problems. this past congress it was bipartisan effort succeeded in ridding medicare after broken physician payment system. which begun creation of a new system, which if implemented properly, would insure that seniors have better access to higher quality care. so if confirmed my obligation will be to carry to the department of health and human services both an appreciation for bipartisan team driven policy making in what has been a lifetime commitment to improving the health and well being of the american people. that commitment extend to what i call the six principles of health care. affordability, accessibility, quality, responsiveness, innovation, and choices.
but health and human services is more than health care. there are real heroes at this department doing incredible work to keep our food safe, to develop new drugs an treatment options, driven by scientists conducting truly remarkable research. there e hear rose among the talented, dedicated men and women working to provide critical social services helping family, particularly children, have higher quality of living and opportunity to rise up and achieve their american dream. role of health and human services in caring for lives, it must be efficient and effective and accountable as well as willing to work with those in communities already doing incredible work on behalf of their citizens. across the spectrum of issues an services that this department handles, there endures a promise made to the american people. we must strengthen our resolve to keep promises made to our
senior citizens and those most in need of care and support. that means securing and strengthening and today's medicare for future beneficiaries and today's generation. it means insuring the nation's medicaid population has access to the highest quality care. it means main takenning and expanding america arrest leading role of medical innovation and treatment and eradication of disease. i share your position for these issues, having spent my life in service to them, and yet there is no doubt we don't all agree or share the same point of view when it comes to addressing everyone of these issues. our approaches to policies may differ but surely, surely there exist as common commitment to public service and compassion for those that we serve. we hope we help improve the lives of the american people to help heel individuals and whole communities. so with healthy dose of humility and an appreciation for the scope of the challenges before us, with your assistance and with god's will, we can make it happen. and i look forward to working with you to do just that.
mr. chairman, i thank you for the opportunity to be with you today. stuart: dr. price just concluded his opening statement. come on in again please, marcia blackburn, republican from tennessee. i picked up on one phrase right towards the end of dr. price's statement, he said we must keep the promises made. that implies to me that nebraska will be left high and dry on the day that obamacare is repealed. what say you? >> i agree with you, and i agree with dr. price on that. there is a way to phase out obamacare and and phase in a patient-centered option. hb 3200, dr. price's bill, his legislation he filed to replace obamacare is empowering patients first. just as he said in his remarks, dr. price like many of us in congress have been committed to restoring access to affordable health care for all americans.
that is what we want to see happen. and government control is not the way to do that. the way to do that is patient centered sectors. stuart: marcia, dr. price has just been asked, what is the goal of replacing obamacare? he is now answering. we'll listen in. >> today many folks have coverage because they don't have care because they don't have access to physicians they like to see. so choices are absolutely vital. >> isn't one of the primary means for achieving these resources putting health care out of washington, putting is back in the hands of states and patients and health care consumers? >> closer you have the decisions to the patient, keeping focus on patient, the better. >> responsiblities are headed towards the states or some responsibilities would that not necessarily involve a fair amount of extensive consultation with governors and state insurance departments about and how to do that, what the implementation schedule ought to
be. >> absolutely. folks at state level, having served there, know their population better than we can know them. >> they suggested that obamacare would be replaced and in manageable pieces. there are four major areas where americans get our health care insurance. one is medicare, 18% of the americans. one is employer insurance, 61% of americans, get their insurance own the job. one's medicaid, and one's, which is 22%. one is the individual market. only 6% and exchanges we hear so much about are just 4% of that 6% but that is where so much of the turmoil is. let me ask you this, this bill, any effort to replace and repeal obamacare, is this the bill to reform medicare? >> absolutely not. >> so we would be focused on employer, medicaid and individual insurance. are those accurate categories or would you categorize them in
different way? >> i think the challenges that we have to address immediately are those in the individual market and in the medicaid market as you identified. >> is it possible to work on one of those areas at a time? rather than in a comprehensive -- let me put it this way. i said, don't expect senator mcconnell to wheel in a wheelbarrow with a big, comprehensive republican health care plan. that is because in my opinion, we don't believe in that. we don't believe in replacing a failed washington, d.c., health care plan with our own failed plan. we wanto work on it step by step, large piece by piece, is that a, how do you respond respond to that? >> i think that is fair. for individuals, the american people need to appreciate last thing we want to do so go from a democrat health care system to a republican health care system. our goal would be to go from what we see as democrat health care system to an american health care system that recognizes the needs of all.
>> i know your plan won't be presented until after you're confirmed, but, the president-elect has said, let's go repeal and replace simultaneously. to me that must mean that, that any repeal of parts of obamacare wouldn't take effect until after some concrete, practical alternative were in place for americans to choose. is that accurate, or do you have a different idea of what simultaneous might mean or what the sequencing might be as we move through this process? >> i think that, i think that's fair. one of the important things we need to convey to the american people is that nobody, nobody's interested in pulling the rug out from. we believe it is absolutely imperative that individuals that have health coverage be able to keep health coverage and move hopefully to greater choices and opportunities for them to gain coverage they want for
themselves and their families. i think there has been a lot of talk about individls losing health coverage. that is not our goal, nor our desire are nor is it our plan. >> let me ask you how long this might take, repairing the damage, working on these three big areas, individual market, medicaid and employer. my sense of it is, we've been working on this so long, although we have different opinions about it, we ought to be able to make most of our votes in the next few months about what to do but that the implementation of whatever we decide, especially since it will be going, some of it back to the states, to the department that you hope to lead, might take several years. is there a difference between the votes we might take and then a longer time for implementation of what we decide to do? >> no. i think that's fair. i would point out that, that our health care system is continually evolving, and should. we ought to be always looking at how it's working, whether it's working for patients, whether it's working for individuals that are working to provide the
highest quality care for folks. when it is that's fine. when it isn't, it is incumbent upon policymakers to make certain we do the kinds of things to adjust that policy so it can workers specially for patient. >> my last question is about the individual market, the 6%, the obamacare exchanges are 4% of all of us who have insurance. our insurance commissioner in tennessee says the market is virtually collapseing. i'm told by many people we need to basically have a rescue plan, a reform plan for the individual market in place by march the 1st so that insurance companies, who make their decisions about the year 2018, can make those plans so that people have insurance to buy in all of these states. do you agree that the market is collapsing and we need a rescue plan and march 1st is important approximate date for decision for action? >> we're clearly seeing changes in the individual and small
group market that are adverse to the patient. whether decreasing access to coverage. whether it's increasing premiums. whether it's higher deductibles. something is going badly wrong out there. it is imperative, i believe for us to recognize that, then to put in place the kinds of solutions we believe to be most appropriate. >> in your plan we're likely to see in february will include recommendations how to do that? >> we look forward, should i be given honor of leading health and human services along with the president we look forward to work with congress to come forward with that plan. >> thank you, dr. price. senator murray. >>hank you, mr. chairman, before i start i want to ask consent to 11 democrats important second round of questions on nominee. i asked unanimous consent put in 25 letters signed by 193 organizations opposing congressman price's nomination to lead the department of health and human services, and i also have a petition signed by 500,000 people from the across
the country opposing this nomination. i ask to put in the record. >> it will be. >> congressman price, recent press reports about your investments in the australian biotech company inate immunotherapeutics raises serious question about your judgment. i want to review the facts. you purchased stock in innate immune though therapeutics, company working to develop new drugs on four separate occasions january 2015 and august 2016. you made a decision to purchase that stock, not a broker. yes or no? >> that was a decision that i made, yes. >> you were offered an opportunity to purchase stock at a lower price than was available to the general public, yes or no? >> the initial purchase in january of 2015 was at the market price. the secondary purchase in june through august, september of 2016 was at a price that was
available to individuals who were participating in a private placement offering. >> it was lower than was available to the general public, correct? >> i don't know that it was. it was same price that everybody paid for the private placement offering. >> well, congressman chris collins who sits on president-elect trump's transition team is both an investor and a board member of the company. he was re, reportedly overheard just last week off the house floor bragging about how he had made people millionaires from a stock tip. congressman, price, in our meeting, you informed me you made these purchases based on conversations with representative collins, is that correct? >> no. what -- >> that is what you said to me in my office? >> what i believe i said to you was that i learned of the company from congressman collins. >> what i recall our conversation was that you had a conversation with collins and then decided to purchase the stock? >> that is not correct. >> that is what i remember hearing you saying in my office.
in that conversation did representative collins tell you anything that could be considered, quote a stock tip, yes or no? >> i don't believe so, no. >> well, if you're telling me gave you information about a company, you were offered shares in the company at prices not available to the public, you bought those shares, is that not a stock tip? >> that is not what happened. what happened was that he mentioned, you talked about the company and the work that they were doing and trying to solve the challenge of progressive secondary multiple sclerosis which is very debilitating disease and opportunity to treat patients when i was in practice. i studied the company for period of time and felt that it had some significant merit and promise. and purchased the initial shares on the stock exchange. >> congressman price, i have very limited time. let me go on, your purchases occurred while the 21st century cures act which had several provisions could, that could impact drug developers like innate immunotherapeutics
was being negotiated. days before you were notified to prepare final vote on the bill. congressman, do you believe it is appropriate for senior member of congress actively involved in policy making in the health sector to repeatedly, personally, invest in a drug company that could benefit from those actions, yes or no? >> that is not what happened. >> well -- let me say i believe it is inappropriate and we mead answers to this, regarding whether you and congressman collins used your access to non-public information when you brought prices, bought at prices that were unavailable to public and -- >> i had no access to non-public information. >> well, we will go on. congressman price, just last week you and republicans in congress voted to begin ripping apart our health care system which would cause nearly 30 million people to lose their coverage and raise health care costs for families. without telling the american people specifically what you
plan to do instead. president-elect trump and republicans in congress promised to deliver a plan that prevents anyone from losing coverage and leaves no one worse off. just days ago, president-elect trump said his plan would provide insurance for everybody. do you share those goals? >> i think it is absolutely imperative we make, have a system in place that has patients at center and allows for every single american to have the opportunity to gain access to the kind of coverage they want. >> you share his goal of insurance for everybody? >> that has been always my stated goal. what we worked on throughout my entire public career. >> okay. if your repeal plan, empowering patients first act was signed into law, would you consider these commitments to insurance all americans leave no one worse off be met? >> the goal of the bills that i worked on here in congress and understanding that the role, if i'm privilege of leading -- but my role in congress was to always make certain that individuals had the opportunity to gain access to the kind of
coverage that they desired and that they had the financial feasibility to do so. >> okay. >> that is what different about the plans we put forward. >> i think it is really important we have clear answers. let me just say this. your bill, only allows people with preexisting conditions to obtain health insurance if they main enat thatted continuous insurance for 18 months prior. millions of americans with preexisting health conditions lack insurance for short periods of time. under your plan, insurance companies could deny those americans coverage for preexisting conditions. yes or no, under your bill? >> it broader question than that we would put in high-risk pools and individual health pools that would allow every single person in the individual and small group market, ones challenges with preexisting illnesses to gain access to the coverage they want. we believe through that plan every single person would have the opportunity and financial feasibility to gain the coverage that they want for their families. >> we disagree on the consequences of that. your bill is also, your bill would repeal, dependent coverage
available to young adults up to age 26, that is correct, right? >> bill i authored did not include coverage up to age 26. the insurance companies have said they were working that that they were including that in their plans going forward. and so we felt it was covered. >> okay. and your bill takes away current benefits which include prescription drugs, mental health and substance abuse disorder benefits and maternity coverage among others that is correct, right. >> again, different than the legislative arena than in the administrative arena but other factors we would put in place to make certain individuals have the care and coverage they needed for whatever diagnosis would-be fall them. >> i disagree with the consequences but your bill didn't cover that your bill also repeals the lifetime limits on coverage that helps a lot of people who are sick and have high medical expenses like a person with cancer, yes or no. >> against it is a larger question because what we would put is different construct in place that would allow for every single person to gain access to
the coverage they want and have nobody fall through the cracks. >> i think just with these questions i am very concerned that your vision for health care system is very different than one that i think millions of americans are counting on. >> thank you, senator murray. senator enzi? >> here's the question, some hostile questioning there from senator patty murray. my question to you,. david, and ashley is, who won that exchange, ash? ashley: oh, without a doubt mr. price. i mean he knows more, which yu pointed out he also doesn't really need to be there. she is trying to make a point. when he tries to answer. she -- he doesn't even get to finish his question. clear what the agenda is. she is trying to make a statement. he happens to be in the room. stuart: david? liz: i agree. even though he said you're wrong, he should say you're totally wrong so media pick up she is saying she is wrong. she barreledded ahead, well i don't agree with your answer.
stuart: see tried to attack him on investmented he made in health care companies while a member of congress. ashley: insider trading. stuart: that's right. liz: they were disagreeing overpolicy as well. stuart: they were indeed. to me, it came across that dr. price knows more about this subject than does senator patty murray. that was my initial reaction to it. do we have chris stirewalt? we do. stirewalt. con on in please. i know you've been watching all of this. >> oh, yeah. stuart: did you watch that exchange there between senator patty murray an dr. tom price? i conclude that dr. price won the exchange. he came across as more knowledgeable on the subject they were addressing. what say you? >> well it doesn't matter because she is not going to vote for him no matter what. she is hearings as one of you guys just mentioned, he didn't need to be there for that because except for this par. she was trying to get him on the record to say that donald trump's plan is to inre
everyone. and you want to insure everyone, you want to insure everyone. donald trump has been saying, in an interview with, that he gave today, is backing away from the idea of coverage for everybody, and focusing instead on subsidized care or free care for poorest people. these are very important distinctions. and what murray wanted to get him on the record saying we support coverage for everyone so that later democrats can say they lied, they said they wanted coverage for everyone but that is not their plan. stuart: as you see right there, that is governor cuomo, governor of new york state arriving at trump tower, getting into the elevators for a meeting with mr. trump one-on-one. that is happening very, very soon because he got in those elevators just literally moments ago. like our own judge napolitano got into those same elevators just yesterday. sorry, i interrupted you, chris. let me put it to you like this. tom price will be confirmed as
secretary of health and human services if all republicans stay solid and vote for his confirmation. >> right. stuart: to me it look loose likely to happen, he looks likely health and human services secretary. and you? >> very much so. unless, and this is the only hanging part, if he has weathered the storm on the conflict of interest the stock, of the this is second or round of this stuff he has. wealthy person who invests quite a bit. he had these problems before. that was really democrats best hope to scare, to scare a republican away. looks he will hold the line and have 51 votes he needs. stuart: that is dirt as opposed to policy. republicans are united on issue of policy. hold on a second. you i want to bring in ken abramowitz. he run as venter capital fund that invests in health care companies, is that correct, sir? >> yes. stuart: you have a couple million dollars in the fund. >> yes.
stuart: 450 million? >> yes. stuart: you know what you're talking about? >> i think so. stuart: if dr. price is confirmed, health and human services and obamacare repealed and gradually replaced with a new system, what health care stocks companies, should i buy into? come on, you're on the spot. you have got to tell me. >> i hate to say this, but what hapns in the government doesn't have a huge effect in the stock market or venture capital market. stuart: wait a second, you're saying whatever happens to obamacare is not going to affect the health insurers and drug companies that much, is that accurate? >> you should bear in mind that 100% of americans have health care. stuart: right. >> 90% of people have health insurance. stuart: yep. >> okay. so the big debate is how do we get health insurance to the 10% of the people that don't have health insurance but 100% of people have health care. stuart: got it. >> so, for example, someone needs a pharmaceutical or has to go to the hospital, they get it. 100% of the people get it.
the difference for the 10% of the people who do not have health insurance, the drug companies give away free drugs. and hospitals give away free hospital beds. so if there is health insurance for that 10%, then the drug companies get paid for the 10% of the drugs that they hand out for free. and hospitals pay for 10% of the beds they hand out for free. helps a little bit for drug companies -- stuart: at the margin. at the margin. stuart: that they will have to bid to get the price down. that is big deal for the pharmaceutical companies. >> that is and isn't at the same time. remember, politicians make promises and but congress actually has to aee to something like this. now in europe, the governments do control the price of drugs. they have price controls. you have to get drug approved
through their legal authorities, like fda, but you also have to give approval for reimbursement from the government. in the u.s., they have to get insurance companies, pharmacy benefit managers to approve a price. but since many of the drugs are single source drugs, particularly the biologicals, injectibles, high technology specialty drugs there is really not that much competition on price for them. if the government were able to dictate price, have price controls, yes, the government can lower the price, but unfortunately people will die 10 years later because drug companies look for needles in haystacks. you want the maximum number of drug companies looking for maximum number of needles and maximum numbers of haystacks. when you have price controls innovation suffers. stuart: this is fascinating. we all assumed that all obamacare and what mr. trump says is so very, very important for these health stocks. it's not. thank you for being with us. >> it add as little bit of
emotion and excitement from time to time but it is not the basic issue. stuart: got it. you run a venture-capitalist fund so you're investing on the ground floor of promising up-and-coming health care companies, right? that's what you do? >> actually manage two funds, a venture capital fund and public equity fund. both long-term oriented and short-term or remember ended simultaneously. stuart: hold on a second. i will go to the hearings. bernie sanders, is about to start questioning dr. price. watch this. >> congressman, on may 7th, 2015, let me begin by saying all of us know we have come through a very unusual election process. president-elect trump received almost 3 million votes less than secretary clinton but he won the electoral college. he is going to be inaugurated this week. he won a number of statesrather.
during the course of his campaign, mr. trump said over and over again that he would not cut social security, not cut medicare, not cut medicaid. let me read some quotes. on may 7th, 2015, mr. trump tweeted, i was the first and only potential gop candidate to state there will be no cuts to social security, medicare, and medicaid. on april 18th, 2015, he said, quote, every republican want to do a big number on social security. they want to do it on medicare. they want to do it on medicaid. we can't do that. it is not fair to the people that have been paying in for years.
i'm not going to cut it and i'm not going to do all of the things they want to do. but they want to really cut it and they went to credibly substantially, the republicans and i'm not going to do that. on and on and on. point being, this is not something he said in passing. i think it is likely he won the election because millions of working-class people they heard him say he was not going to cut social security, medicarend medicaid. congressman price, a very simple question. as the president-elect, mr. trump going to keep his word to the american people and not cut social security, medicare and medicaid or did he lie to
the american people? >> i haven't had questions that i have no reason to believe he's changed his position. >> so you are telling us to the best of your knowledge, mr. trump will not cut social security, medicare and medicaid? >> i've no reason to believe that position has changed. >> congressman price, quoting mr. trump released their freezing, just last week he said roughly speaking firemen is getting away with murder. he recalled that? >> i do. >> there are many of us on the side of the aisle working on legislation that would do at least two things. number one, and the absurdity of the american people being ripped out by the pharmaceutical industry who two years ago made top five companies make $55 billion in profits while one out of five americans can afford to fill prescriptions their stock or spray.
will you and will the president-elect join us in legislation we are working on which number one well about medicare to negotiate prices with the drug companies and lower prices and number two comment about the american people to bring in less expensive medicine from canada and other countries. is that simply he will work with us on? >> you should drug pricing and cost of the reconsidering 12 americans. it's important to appreciate the couple years we've had significant success in a generic area where costs are significantly less than a half an pure >> you are aware. we don't have a lot of time. we are pained by five highest prices. you don't disagree with that? >> i think that the case didn't have to look at this mistakes. there's a lot of reasons for that. if we get to the root cause, we can solve it bipartisan.
>> one of the root causes every other major country on earth negotiates drug prices with the pharmaceutical industry. in our country, drug companies can raise prices. today they can double prices. there's not a lot to prevent them from doing that. will you work with us so medicare negotiates prices with the pharmaceutical industry? >> you have my commitment to work with you another is that the drug pricing is reasonable and have access they need. >> i wasn't quite the answer to the question that i asked. congressman price, the united states of america is the only major country on earth that does not guarantee health care to all people as the rate. canada does that come every major country in europe does. do you believe that health care is a right of all americans whether rich or poor? should people because they are americans be able to go to the
doctor when they need to come a go into hospital because they're americans? >> we are compassionate society. >> we are not a compassionate society in terms of our relationship to poor and working people are record is worse than virtually every country on earth. highest rate of childhood poverty and half of our older workers have not been set aside for retirement. so i don't think compared to other countries we are particularly compassionate. my question is in canada, other countries, all people have the right to get health care. do you believe we should move in that direction? >> if you want to talk about health care systems, there are consequences to the decisions they made. i look forward to working with you that every single american has access to the highest quality care and coverage possible. >> as access to does not and they are guaranteed health care. i don't have the money to do
that. >> we believe it's appropriate to put in place a system that gives every person the financial feasibility to purchase the coverage they want for themselves and family. not with the government forces them. >> at the longer story. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you him, senator sanders. senator hatch. stuart: interesting question. if health care is right? america is the only country in the world where health care is not a right. i don't know whether it's factually accurate or not, but i want to talk to judge napolitano first of all about the right to health care. you've got health care in america. >> as eric has just articulated, if you're poor and sick and go to an emergency room, anyone in the united states will take care of you. that's not what he's talking about. we have negative rights in the bill of rights. it doesn't encumber shall grant freedom of speech. they shall not interfere with freedom of speech.
he wants a positive right which will say it shall be the duty of the congress to provide health care for all persons. stuart: so you want a single-payer. >> we don't have that. even when his party controlled out houses of congress and the white house they couldn't get that. stuart: ken abramowitz, the senator said that, we don't have the right to health care in america. but everybody, you know this, everybody does have health care. walk into a hospital and are going to serve you. >> we have a de facto right to health care in this country. on the constitution and bill of rights. you can't sign any legislation that says that. through the years about the regulation of progress in the country, 100% of americans have a de facto right to health care. >> at the 20 robots sitting on the books since 1986 that hospitals cannot deny care to anybody who walks in the door. for bernie sanders to say moments ago the u.s. is not a
compassionate society, that's a stretch. >> were to compare access to health care to access to purchasing a $10 million home. that is an absurd and preposterous comparison. if a person goes into an emergency room to get taken care of whether they can afford it or not. stuart: come on, please barely looks to us like senator sanders was asking a question deliberately phrased to get mr. price to say gas we need that right, therefore we've got to have single-payer government provider health care. that's the way it looked to me. how about you? >> or more likely you want him to say it now. so bernie sanders say you see what the republicans believe. the reason that democrats like bernie sanders supported, he's an independent, but you know what i mean. supported obama carrots even though they didn't like the public private partnership benefit and didn't like the
mandate. the reason i supported that was because they felt for the first time it enshrined the duty of the federal government to provide health insurance to the citizenry and that's why they really liked it and they were afraid that's going to get rolled back and they want to punish republicans politically for opposing the concept. stuart: thank you for being with us. and they've got to run. the politics of overseeing right here. >> you're in good hands with the judge. [laughter] tree into a great connection, this guy. ed renzi is with us. ed renzi used to run the donald's, has first-hand experience of running a giant corporation. welcome to the program. you've been listening to this exchange between dr. price and leading senators, asking him questions about the repeal of obamacare and what replaces it. i'm intrigued for your answer on health care is a right. what do you make of this?
>> the judge that it passed and your guests have said it exactly well. there's been lots on the books that say if you're ill you need radical help, you're going to get it. dial 91 9-1-1. england shows up, takes you to the hospital. no other society or been to is as rich in its care for his people. i traveled the world over working for mcdonald's and i tell you when bernie sanders makes the ridiculous statements he makes about how bad it is to live in america, he's just wrong. he's got a point of view politically driven and he doesn't give a about the american citizen. only his philosophy. he's a political hack and i've no interest in anything he has to say. stuart: that's a pretty dramatic response. let me ask you this to follow up with peer of all the questioners of dr. price of fire, has anyone made a political glove on him?
>> now, i don't think so. he's a position. goodness gracious, we might have someone actually helping us with health care without grass en masse. come on. he's more qualified than anybody sitting in that room. stuart: do lke his responses so far? >> yes, i do. but they are ridiculous, clinical point of view, trying to trap him. i think it's an embarrassment to our government functions this way. they goodness trump is coming out saying we will change the way we do business. trade to one thing we like on this program is straightforward declarative statements or i guess another talking about. ed renzi, you are right. please stay there. more of this in a moment. looking around the table, does anybody believe any senator has yet made a glove on dr. price? >> i don't believe anybody has laid a glove at all. true to this event? liz: no. stuart: he comes across while handling television. was that you shouting in the
background? what if you got now? >> i was just leaving. stuart: at the moment, dr. price has been questioned by republicans, relatively friendly questioning because the republicans are pretty much in lockstep. mr. price, his time will be elapsing really soon. i should tell our viewers that there were two other hearings going on elsewhere on capitol hill. one of which will be perhaps even more contentious than what we are going to see from dr. price. and that is the nominee to run the epa. that is scott pruett, a man who is considered to be a climate skeptic, a man who will roll back the epa climate rules. that is going to be one and nervously contentious -- authority on the way by the way. you rejected either. >> no, i don't expect them to
reject. he's offering exactly what donald trump promised many, many times during the primaries and general elecon tha he would roll back these reglations. stuart: and the other hearings for wilb rossto become the commerce secretary, democrats are having a go at him on all kinds of issues. i'm going to play you a brief sound bite were senator nelson, democrat from florida is asking wilbur ross who is in line to become commerce secretary. he's asking him about rising sea levels. watch this. >> do you consider the rise of sea level as valid scientific data? >> it's very hard to parse which part of data is why appeared but in general, i think that they would be a very big report forthcoming every three years they send a report to the
international climate group. that should be coming out very, very shortly and i think will be very, very interesting to see what they're updated findings are. stuart: i thought that was a pretty good response. i don't think wilbur ross was expecting questions about rising sea levels. pick up the question and i'd did he answered it rather well. >> he's in the wrong hearing room. scott pruett exactly. stuart: revolt that soundbite as a demonstration of the length to which democrats opposing republican nominees will go to put out some dirt on never catch the nominee. ashley: it's all they've got. these guys are going to get through. true >> is the job to make it easier for people and groups to become wealthy. who could oppose that?
republican democratic, progressive, who could oppose that? stuart: i can't answer your questn. ed renzi, i know you're listening to this. what you ask of the designate to be asking questions about sea levels. you're pretty dramatic guy. give me a dramatic response. >> wilbur ross has got credentials that are outstanding for this position and for us to belittle him with that kind of inane question for political purposes creates an atmosphere of fraud as far as i'm concerned. i don't understand why they don't ask him substantive questions about how they will be conducted around the world, america commit the united states the benefit of everybody. last thursday it might have done both. every tag comes then, every tide goes out. [laughter] stuart: you are biased, though.
you've got to admit, you are biased. you have run a gigantic business and he liked the idea of business people being in the trunk in a day. i can tell which side you're wrong. >> well, i don't choose sides other than the fact i'm a citizen of the united states, the grand child of immigrant parents who worked in coal mines and on a benefactor of this great society of ours and we have diminished it and diminished it and diminished it. it's time to get people in place in government they care about the growth of this country and liberty and freedom and opportunity for all. we have suppressed african-americans in center city is. we brutalized hispanics. it's time for us to break up and welcome immigrants come to give opportunity to bring society forward. to the oceans go up and down? what a ridiculous question to ask a man of substance. stuart: you're having far too much fun. you should be paying us.
eering him on. give me 2 seconds i'm not. >> he has a wonderful understanding of the deleterious aspects of continued government growth and how shrinking government produces individual freedom and press rarity. stuart: i want to change the subject because i got a new development here. when we been on the air at 9:00 eastern time, 60 house democrats have said they will boycott the inauguration. that number has now gone up to 62, in addition of two house democrats. there's more of this. john kerry, secretary of state will not be attending the moderation. stuart: has he said why? does he join the nonsense? stuart: i know that house democrats have said he will not be a legitimate president. john lewis has sent in some of the others, but not all of them. i believe john kerry has questioned the legitimacy of
president-elect tron. it is undermining the peaceful transition and amicable transition ofwer. >> listen, i've never defended this woman, but the woman who suffered the most i donald trump's victory is going to be there to cheer him on, hillary rodham clinton because she respects the system. i wish the democrats would take early. stuart: interesting point. we have 62 house democrat not going to the inoculation. john kerry, secretary of state not go in. ashley: 32%. stuart: one thing about democrats and house are not going. liz: started out with five and accelerated when john lewis brought up the racial appeared stuart: that a senator cory booker, democrat new jersey. is questioning scott pruett. >> -- on air quality. when they go through some of those. >> without objection.
>> two lawsuits, mercury and air toxics standards who filed a lawsuit 215 national ambient air quality standards for ozone. you filed four lawsuits challenging the epa's planned power plant. you have sued the epa 111 e. standard for carbon dioxide emissions from new power plants and you lost those who do challenge the epa's federal implementation plan for oklahoma under the regional haze rule. you you're familiar with those i imagine? be my guest, senator. >> you followed lawsuit across state air pollution rules, standing in new jersey were very concerned with. and are you aware that role which he lost and not sue, scientists estimate that alone prevents 400,000 asthma attacks each year. are you aware? >> yes, your honor. yes, senator. >> and they continue.
i don't have much time. each of these lawsuits i went through that we analyzed, all of them challenged attempts by the epa to reduce air pollution. you followed those lawsuits joining with polluting companies that were all so is doing the epa. and so in addition to filing lawsuits, with some of the companies are at least one specifically mentioned by two of my colleagues, you used a substantial portion of the letters from those companies, put them under official attorney general letter had an assertive surprising to me when you asked about this in the public company basically represented by its actually called representative government in my view of the world. your testimony here says you are representing industry. you're representing polluters. if all of these lawsuits are filed and with all of these letters like this one written to the epa on behalf of the industry is that are causing the
pollution, it seems clear to me the fact pattern on polluters is clear that you work very hard on behalf of these industries. negative externalities by the pollution. they questioned specifically. you know how many kids roughly have asthma. >> i don't know. >> according to data published by the nonpartisan group the american lung association, more than 111,000 children in oklahoma, which is more than 10%, more than one in 10 of all the kids in oklahoma have asthma. that's one of the highest asthma rates in the entire united states of america. this is a crisis of similar data for where i was mayor. i can tell you firsthand the devastating impacts that kids lit as my house on children and
families, affecting the economic well-being. parents have to watch their children struggle to breathe. people have to miss work, russian kids to the hospital. one in 10 kids having a disease, missing school is a significant problem. you've been writing letters on behalf of polluting industries. i want to ask you how many letters did you read to the epa about this health crisis? if this is representative government, does she represent those children? i want to know what actions you've taken as protector of the welfare oklahoma citizens to protect the welfare of those 111,000 children. did you ever let any of them write letters on your letterhead to the epa did you even fire one off to on behalf of those kids and help them to have a healthy life. >> senator, i have a list of
cases with respect to enforcement steps we've taken in multiple pieces of environment of litigation. with respect to a solution in some of the cases referred to, the state has to have an interest before it can bring those cases. you can't bring a lawsuit if there's not been to an injury to the state of oklahoma. >> my time is expired, but if i could say injury, clearly asthma is triggered and caused by air pollutants. there's an air pollution problem. in the lovely represented are causing the pollution is problematic when he said in a position that is supposed to be affecting this reality. the number one reason, help reason why children in america miss school. mr. chairman, thank you. >> for the record, first an article from the tulsa world from scott thompson. epa will be in good hands.
the executive director of the environmental quality talks about the excellent work done and as work done in as "epa will be in good hands with scott pruett. i would point out that between 2004 and submit this for the record. the most recent employers. stuart: what we saw moments ago with senator cory booker, democrat of new jersey, putting questions -- he did not put a nominee for epa. he made an long statement about asthma and whether or not scott pruett had taken action against asthma and his home state of oklahoma as he was the attorney general of oklahoma. i don't believe that mr. pruett had a chance to respond. ashley: the chair could have given enough time to chose not to. >> democrats are complaining we
don't have time to ask the questions. they're not giving the nominees time to answer. >> today lay a glove and don't let it respond? >> there was a surprise question on the man. how many cases of asthma are there in oklahoma? the very specific question. >> dr. ran paul questioning dr. tom price. stuart: dr. barrasso questioning scott pruett. he got the doctors online day. i was in out of the blue question. how many children in oklahoma suffer from asthma? >> yesterday, right? >> i agree with you. i don't think anybody has laid a glove and i think he will be the target that democrats would love to pick off more than any other. >> because they disagree with the political and constitutional
that resulted in his nomination, namely the epa has gone well beyond the authority of the congress gave it and is far too regulatory and the use of private property. >> overstep its bounds. >> twice. the supreme court to stop the epa for enacting regulations govern our authorized by congress. stuart: scott pruett is now answering a question. was that the question about asthma? he's answering it now. >> you mentioned several cases from air pollution and the rest. i believe the cost of air pollution is a very important statute that epa should enforce. i believe that there is down with dates contributing to non-attainment endowment states that there should be responsibility. we have that issue attacks at that time.
they are not questioning the authority of the epa to regulate under the cross state air pollution rule. more they were trying to assess damages against certain state in the allocated chair. each of those cases i'm an advocate on behalf of the state of oklahoma. it has to be in play to say this about any one company is just simply not right. there's no standing i have is attorney general on behalf of the private citizen or a company. there has to be a standing injury to the state's interest to bring those. i would ask you to consider this. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you for a complete response. stuart: let me summarize what's going on here. there is a hearing for scott pruett who is nominated to be
the epa administrator. there's a hearing for dr. tom price is nominated to be health and human services secretary and there is a hearing for welfare laws as the commerce secretary. all three of these nominees would reverse standard obama policy. therefore, all democrats asking questions would seek to find weakness in the nominees said they can oppose them, to expand essentially his agenda. what's the word? so far, it doesn't look like any of these three nominees have been injured politically in what would seem best fire. dr. price is now answering questions. we'll are going to do shortly is take you to the dr. price
hearing because very shortly, and senator al franken is going to be asking questions of dr. price. it is starting now. mr. franken says they're starting to ask questions. let's go to that now. >> i would defer to you. you've obviously got it on the page in front of you. >> i actually know this before i put it on the page. if smoking. >> that his home. i lost my dad. he was a lucky strike smoker from world war ii to emphysema and he prided himself on the fact that he never smoked a cigarette with a filter for years and years and it was an incredible tragedy. >> i lost my dad, too. as a physician, you may know, i guess you didn't, that smoking kills approximately 480,000 americans each year and totals
$170 billion each year in health care costs. and yet, between 1993 and 2012, you were a shareholder of tobacco, big tobacco companies, meaning that she personally benefited from tobacco sales. meanwhile, he voted against landmark legislation in 2009 that gave the fda the authority to regulate tobacco. >> congressman price committed to the hippocratic oath, he pledged to do no harm. how do you square reaping personal financial gain from thisas an addicted audit because millions of americans every decade but also voting against measures to reduce the death toll inflicted by tobacco.
>> well, it's an interesting question, senator and a curious observation. i have no idea what stocks they held in the 90s are the 2003 than now. all of these decisions for all of us i suspect through mutual funds or pension plans. i would bet -- i would suspect that in your pension plan there are components of god better held that may have something to do sometime in your history with tobacco. >> i find it very hard to believe that you did not know you had tobacco stocks. i find it a little hard to believe that in the questions about your stockport olio, you said you didn't know things. just over the last for years he traded more than $300,000 in health related stocks, but the same time sponsor in advocating
legislation that could affect the performance of those stocks. we talked a little bit about the dinner biomed. your broker you say. you didn't know this, but it on march 17, 26 team. you did introduce a bill federer, a week later on march 23rd, 2016. you say you did not know then you have the stock. it was to delay a federal rule to delay a rule that would hurt the company once you've found out your broker bought it, you can't stop. he purchased a 50,000 to $100,000 worth of stock. we talked a little bit about the
single largest purchase in the past three years in a private deal that was not made available to the public. i find it absolutely amazing that you responded that you did not know you've got a discounted price. that is absolutely amazing because we discussed this. >> the definition i believe is the nature of private place has been offering. i paid exactly -- >> it went to about 20 people, including representatives from your colleague, chris collins, his chief of staff and a prominent d.c. lobbyist. he reported 50 to $100,000 in profits on this purchase. it really pays when you say you
got a discount on this. this is a private offering to a very small number when you have the budget committee, when you have congressman, chief of staff these sound like sweetheart deals. our job in this body and congress is to avoid the appearance of conflict and you have not done this. i want to talk just about empowering patients first act. some of it is detailed in this article from the new england journal of medicine. care for the vulnerable versus cash for the powerful. trumps pay for hhs. i'll just read a random paragraph.
prices record with concern for the sake, the poor and the health of the public and much greater concern for the economic well-being of their position carevers. i recommend this to every member of the mmittee before making about because what you're plan does, it gives a tax credit to americans to buy health insurance. it is no different for someone who's poor, someone who makes 20,000, or the thousand and two bill gates. it is an incredibly repressive system. you've talked about you guys want to end the expansion of medicaid. that has people in minnesota scared out of their minds. i've heard a lot obamacare has
been a disaster. first of all, you have to admit that it spent the cost curve. but the cost of health care in this country has grown less than it did in the previous 10 years. it's also covered 20 million mark people, but forget them. in 2008 i would go around the state of min in every vfw hall, every café i would see a bulletin board where would have a burger bash for spaghetti dinner for someone who had gone and grab because they had gone through the annual cap for their lifetime cap. i am very frightened about what you are going to do and so are millions of americans. and frankly, i know that you do
things that help physician groups. you've put in provisions that would prevent these findings by efficiency and innovation boards that would have to be cleared by a physician group. icu as someone who was there for the doctor and that this is a cover. this is not going to create access for all americans, what you talked about, the empowering patients first act. this is going to unravel something that has given a lot of americans peace of mind, knowing that their kids can stay on health care until they are 26. knowing that they have -- if
they have a preexisting condition, that won't stop them from getting care. that is what this hearing should be about. you're a smart man. >> senator, we are in minute over. >> okay. my second round i will be in minute short. thanks. >> time is a good there's a question about how much time senator franken actually had. he's complaining again. about the time available to senator franken. he has complained twice about that. it wasn't questioning. it was a rather harsh statement from senator franken directed -- hold on a second. i've got to go back to the because dr. price had no chance to respond, but now he's given some time to respond to al
franken. >> the concerns expressed by the senator are valid concerns. the conclusions he joined the policies that promoted and will continue to promote our absolutely incorrect. we all share concern for the american people and how we best make certain that access to the highest quality care that the world knows. and so i hope -- and i understand why he's doing it. i understand that. we will work together if i'm given the privilege of leading and serving as health and human service is. >> dr. price, is not true by the dated may 15th at every year -- stuart: thou asserted a confrontation between senator al franken and dr. price. i want to know what points were scored at the expense of dr. price by al franken. ed rensi, new ceramic donald.
>> franken is speaking to his constituency in minnesota, so i think he scored a lot of points with them. as far as solving the issues of health care in this country and how we will become more proficient and provide care at a much deeper level, that's affordable and manageable is necessary to get to take place. a single-payer system is it going to work because we'll get the health care rationing and death committees that say you're too old to get a kidney transplant so i'm not going to do it. that's what scares me. government does a lousy job of running everything and health care would be the worst. stuart: you've got a man on my left here cheering you on. but i do have to ask. the democrats want to score a point. they want to lay a political club blast. >> is my new friend, mr. ramsey has said, it depends if his
minnesota is scoring points. if the audience is republicans who did that to pry loose from the voting inbox that for dr. price, use getting nowhere because you are not going to damage the candidate isn't it true. the last 30 seconds to you, sir. all those numbers will go to the inauguration not to get their tickets to high school graduates in washington d.c. that would never have the privilege to make an oath to defend the constitution of the united states and walk away from it. it's embarrassing. stuart: at frenzy with other clarity of vision and would like and they'll be back. thank you very much for joining us, sir. i will repeat this.
there are now 62 -- i've got a new number. it is now 64 democrats will not attend the inauguration. it was 62. i give him is at 9:00 when it was 60. furthermore, john kerry, secretary of state will not be attending the inauguration. i don't know the reason for that, but not going to be there. >> production of the organized this in his behind it. question them as to what kind of message they are trying to hand it to the american public. stuart: moments ago in the prewitt herein, mr. prewitt was asked about whether he believes in i may change, whether it, whether as human cause they think is the question. i want to roll tape on his response, please. >> you agree that global warming
is a hoax? >> i do not come a senator. >> donald trump is wrong? >> i do not believe it's a hoax. >> is important for the presidency here. stuart: you know is going to come out. scott pruett is nominated to lead the epa, environmental protection agency. he is known as a climate skeptic, to want to reverse much of president obama's epa rules. with us now is tw shannon, former oklahoma speaker -- house speaker in the state of oklahoma who knows mr. prewitt personally. he has just sad that it is not a hoax. did he say that before? >> thank you for having me. i've known dhe for a long time. he's a good friend. we served in the oklahoma legislature together and he's ready to leave. he's a constitutional expert.
he said the climate is changing. there's no doubt about it. with the actual contribution amendment effort is making towards that effort. he's ready to lead and certainly wants to look at what the legitimate sinus, not what the political rhetoric is. >> it was a pointed question. senator markey asked the question. mr. trump thinks it's a hoax. do you? whereupon -- what was his exact response there? so he avoided contradict being the president-elect. that was pretty neat work. >> well, scott pruitt you'll find -- i'm afraid the senators who may think they've underestimated his ability. this is a very sharp, very talented ethical public servant who's ready to be from day one. as it relates to climate change, he been very clear about it. there is no doubt the climate is changing. but we've got to base all of our
policy on the idea of what is legitimate science, not just political rhetoric. i'm excited about the leadership of scott pruitt. i'm excited about the president-elect has done in select in men and women ready to lead this nation, ready to turn around the failed policies of president obama has instituted for the past eight years. we are ready to put america first and scott pruitt is a great symbol of that effort. stuart: scott pruitt was certainly reverse president obama epa rules. that would be a clear reversal of a big chunk of president obama's legacy. last question, tw. were you surprised when you heard that scott pruitt had been nominated to lead the epa? must have come as a shock to you. >> i don't think there's anybody in the country has done more to hold epa accountable to the mission is to ensure that that clean air and clean water, which i believe republican and democrats both are for.
scott pruitt has said is we got to be prudent about making sure we are fueling america's economy, but also keeping our environment safe. tracks are going to interrupt for a second. i'm going back to the scott pruitt herein. looks like a vigorous exchange going on. let's listen in. >> finally, if confirmed would you commit to opposing any and all because of the point of obligation under the program from refiners to lender is good! as you know, the epa is involved in a comment. on that issue and to prejudge the outcome i would not be able to do that. there are many aspects of the program in the trading program, monitoring of fraud in the system that need to be better administrated by the epa. these are administration issues could epa has created uncertainty. we talked a minute ago about the amount of investment that's gone into the infrastructure because of the 2005 law. those individuals need certainty and confidence that will be
enforced pursuant to congress. >> but if you are to do that, you have to answer yes because it is actually one of those ways you can actually undermine the standards, which you yourself just now said was to increase the biofuels blended into the fuel suly the unite es. this is my problem. on one hand your entire track record shows he could be someone who opposes the rss and yet in front of congress and meeting with senators, you get the vague answers that sound right but rarely open saucers of backdoors for you to oppose the renewable fuel standards. all across the midwest. to strengthen national security that the dangerous dependence on foreign oil, i'm incredibly
concerned about the future of american producers biofuels under a scott pruitt led epa. i'm also concerned about what you will do in the environment. what the role of the epa is, you spend five minutes talking before you said protect environment. you talked about reducing epa's influence over state if we got to the environment. by his soybean producers could stuart: forgive me for project in a moment of levity. we've been discussing all morning the boycott of the inauguration and those people who will not be attending. we do have a letter sent by bush 41, george h.w. bush to mr. trump explaining why he could not be at the inauguration. i'm going to quote from the
letter. i will give you this. dear donald, barbara and i are so sorry we can't eat there for you or not ration. my doctor says if i sit outside in january, a leg we will put me exceed under. so i guess we are stuck in texas. there's all this acrimony about who will be there and who will not be there. next up for house democrats will boycott this weird john kerry, secretary of state will not go. is the nastiness in the air. if i go outside in january will put me six feet under. that's exactly what we need. >> we will be with you in spirit. stuart: don't you love it? 92 years old. i think he was admitted to the hospital. >> last night or this morning. >> are currently doing -- he will do well. forgive me ladies and gentlemen
intervene in there with a moment of levity. i think it was worthwhile because always seen today is contention and acrimony and it's very nice to go to a man who has a sense of humor and put it in writing in a letter to donald trump. liz: and it's not feeling well and he makes a joke. >> is self-effacing. if you want me six feet under rock on. stuart: meanwhile, throttle this acrimony, the boycott of the inauguration hearings in washington, but not market has done absolutely nothing. we are down 18 points on the dow jones industrial average. it may be the on hold for stock trading on the grounds that investors want to see, what are we going to get in the trump administration? will any of the nominees in the confirmation hearings, what any of them be rejected? will any of the reversal of obama policies be stopped? that's what they're waiting to
see. ashley: absolutely. we've been in the same mode for the last five weeks. the trump ump was on the enthusiasm behind his proposed policies. now we see the proof in the pudding. we need to see those policies put in place. stuart: throughout the morning, ken abramowitz has sat patiently next to me, hardly getting a word in edgewise. that's unfair because demand is a venture capital fund which invests in health care stocks. he's been watching the price confirmation hearing. i guarantee there is nothing you've heard thus far this morning which make us any difference to your investment in the health care industry. am i right or am i right? >> that's exactly right. 90% of what happens in health care happens because different companies, with new products are different competitors. only 10% of what happens has something to do with washington. stuart: fair point. one other question. you invest in startup companies. you're a venture capitalist or
hundreds of millions of dollars it was the most promising area of new erepreneurial companies? in what area are they engaged? >> i look at medical devices and pharmaceuticals. stuart: heart valves. >> they are full of innovation not companies -- the companies say graduate students and hard thoughts about cutting open the chest. the pharmaceuticals and mina oncology is a field where new drugs have been developed they don't have to use traditional chemotherapy but boost the body's immune system. stuart: and he could care less what happens to dr. price. >> i do as an individual, just not as an investor. stuart: i care about heart valves because i just had one of those echocardiograms. you can look on the screen to see the valves opening and closing. mine are okay by the way. it was a pleasure having you on the show. 90 seconds left before we go to
neil cavuto. let me summarize what's going on here. i want our people to summarize this. so far i have not seen a glove laid on any of the nominees. am i right? >> good and not none of them tumbled. none of them answered questions that were embarrassing and none of them gave republicans a reason for pause about whether or not to vote to confirm. ashley: that is true. they did these questions are coming. they've been well telegraphed before. it's a smear campaign. so far so good. rex tillerson was great. this group doing a good job, too. train for the lethal charges against tom price, but that seemed to dissipate when he answered that morgan stanley made the trade, that's what they claim, without his knowledge. stuart: does far i've not seen anything in any of these hearings, all three of them. i have not heard anything that suggested a republican on this
committees will vote no on any of the nominees. and that is the key. if they all stay unified, supporting the nominees, they will all be confirmed. >> that is why frank and was bloviating because he couldn't try any of his colleagues. stuart: your word not mine. my time is up. neil cavuto, it is yours. >> you had echocardiogram done. >> ij. because if you actually. >> i'm glad they found a heart. i can't tell you how many times. i had to throw it back at you. >> when i heard going in for open-heart surgery, i realized him so older than you. i better get myself checked out and i've got a clean bill of health. neil: i'm very happy to hear that. i heard that remark once or twice. to continued good health. we are following not only all of these concurrent confirmation