Skip to main content

tv   Your World With Neil Cavuto  FOX News  March 7, 2017 1:00pm-2:01pm PST

1:00 pm
break in. breaking news changes everything hahn fox news channel. a slightly down day on the dow. if you were in on the snap what chat purchase yesterday, it has plummeted today. "your world" with neil cavuto starts now. >> so many meetings, so little time. welcome. i'm neil cavuto. you're looking at the capitol and the white house where we're getting and idea about some twin developments. not only the progress of this obamacare repeal and replace that has republicans fairly divided as shep pointed out, but in the united states capitol we're waiting to hear from nunes on the so-called russian probe and the role the president said the former played on him tapping the phones. we'll be hearing from speaker paul ryan later this hour and other top lieutenants of the
1:01 pm
republican house leadership and senate leadership here. they're pushing this trumpcare that changes the landscape for healthcare. moderates and conservatives divided on this. moderates say it goes after planned parenthood too much. conservatives say it's another albatross by another name. blake burman has nor. >> hi there, neil. we're awaiting comments from the top republican on the house intelligence committee. devin nunes set to speak in minutes, what he might possibly unveil. so far no details on the exact topic here. >> neil: i want to hold on. devin nunes is speaking now. see what we can find out about the russian matter. >> we have more information to address to get out to the american public. today we're going to announce we're having our first public
1:02 pm
hearing on march 20th, monday march 20th at 10:00 a.m. this is meant to be an initial hearing for people to come on their own accord. we have an initial list of people that we invited. we will invite possibly more. we hope everyone will accept our invitation to come and freely testify in an open hearing. i want to conduct as many of these hearings in open in the public. that's a little rare for the intelligence committees to do because of the seriousness and the accusations involved on all sides, i want to make sure that we hold as many of these hearings in public so the miles per hour people and all of you can attend and report on. so the initial list, i want to clarify, this is an initial
1:03 pm
list. we have director comey of the fbi, former director brennan from the cio, former director clapper, miss yates, former acting attorney general, mr. henry from crowd strike services. so with that, i'd be glad to take any questions that you have. >> you said you want to avoid a witch hunt. you're already down playing the issue and the outcome of this investigation. >> no we're trying to get as many of the facts as possible. we're announcing we're going to have an open hearing and we're inviting people that obviously would have some information as relates to this investigation. >> we no invitation for general flynn? >> general flynn is invited to attend. if there are people out there
1:04 pm
that would like to attend, we would like to have them. encourage them as long as they have something to do with this investigation. at this point, we invited the people that we feel are directly in line with either having information about this investigation or all sides of it. general flynn is obviously a tangent to some of this because of his name being involved in a lot of the leaks. >> the democrats have called for the resignation of attorney general sessions. how is it working out right now a about the relationship on the committee and -- >> this commit think is bipartisan in nature. it long has had a history of that. mr. schiff was invited to be here today. he's giving a speech somewhere. he will address you later in a couple hours. the initial list, i want to make
1:05 pm
sure you understand, the list of people we're inviting is an initial list. we'll add to that as we see fit. these are names on a bipartisan basis that have been invited. >> have you seen any evidence to support the president's point that he has been wiretapped? >> yeah, i have not seen that evidence. as you know, a lot of that was maybe a little bit -- the multiple tweets were perhaps a little bit strung together. i think the bigger question that needs to be answered is whether or not mr. trump or any of his associated were in fact targeted by any of the intelligence agencies. that's at the heart of many of the questions you have asked on numerous occasions. at this point, we don't have any evidence of that.
1:06 pm
we also don't have any evidence of in people being named in multiple news stories that are supposedly under some type of investigation. >> could he have made those comments over the weekend -- >> he's the president. not me. he can do what he would like. >> what did you mean the tweets were strung together. >> there were multiple tweet. if he's asking a question about whether or not he was -- was he or any of his associates targeted? if you -- i think it's a valid question, if indeed it was a question, that if you look at general flynn, why was he being recorded? was it incidental or was it something else? was there any other additional incidental recordings of phone calls? >> you're saying you think it
1:07 pm
was a question he was posing, not a statement. >> i haven't talked to the president about it. i can only -- i do know that they have asked us to look into it. we were going to look into it anyway. when you take it in its totality, all of the leaks, if you have taken -- fisa is involved in this, whether or not they were implemented properly, just regarding general flynn. and you know, you have been asking these questions for many weeks now. the names that are circulating in the press stories are those people in fact under investigation or not. we need to know that, if those investigations are during. >> if you've been in touch with the white house either on this issue or other elements? have you been coordinating that? >> no. >> ask you about a series of -- >> that was public. that was a public statement.
1:08 pm
a public statement that was -- i don't know when it was said. >> your staff has indicated -- >> not that i'm aware of, no. >> [inaudible question]. >> as you know this way this works, if someone's under investigation, that's not the way it would go. is it possible president obama new about general flynn? we don't know the answer to that question. is it possible that president obama went to court to seek a warrant? i don't know. >> this came up at the briefing today. the president declared a
1:09 pm
statement that this was done. now your committee is using time and resources and press availability to investigate this. is that a proper thing for the president to do? he wasn't asking a question. he made a statement that the former president wiretapped him. >> as you know, the president is a neophyte to politics. he's been doing this a little over a year. a lot of the things he says, you guys sometimes take literally. sometimes he doesn't have 27 lawyers and staff. at times it's refreshing and sometimes we have to have a press conference like this asking questions that you guys are asking. at the end of the day, tweets are a transparent way for a politician to communicate with their constituents. i don't think we should attack
1:10 pm
the president for tweeting. i don't want him to be complete lid lawyered up, but at the same time, i want him to be clear an what he's asking and the assertions that he's making. you know, names appear in press reports. they involved supposedly russia hacking, russian involvement in our election process. serious questions that this investigation will try to get to the bottom of. let me switch here. >> [question inaudible] >> yes. so we've had initial inquiries to the i.c. these appear to be very, very serious. at this time, that's really all
1:11 pm
the information that i have on it. just to say that we are extremely concerned, and we're following it closely. and you know, this potentially could be an additional leak that we'll have to get to the bottom of. let's let the appropriate i.c. agencies get to this. i'm sure at the proper time, they will brief us and brief you. >> are you concerned about their phones and mobile devices being turned into surveillance? >> i've long said this. e-mails and many of our electronic devices are not safe. they're primarily not safe from our adversaries like the russians and the chinese and others who are actively trying to get into government institutions and private businesses. at this time we don't know who is responsible for this -- for what has happened in the latest
1:12 pm
wikileaks round. so let's leave it at that and let them brief you at the proper time. i'm be ready the take your questions as soon as i have for information. >> you said we shouldn't take the president literally. apparently his tweet was enough for you to say you'll investigate his claims. >> that would be under the assumption that we not interested in the leaks coming out and whether or not there were trump or trump associates that had been put under investigation. those are the assertions that have been made in multiple news stories. so we are already look into that. >> what about the leaks? he was talking about the wiretapping. >> yeah. i think in general he's continually -- he's continually been accused that he has some
1:13 pm
connection to russian agents or russian affiliates. i believe that's what he was referring to, at which we are investigating anything to do with any political cam pains. remember this. don't just think that we're not going to find anything on other political campaigns, whether it's in this country or other governments that are currently holding elections or have held elections. >> [question inaudible] >> i think it's very problematic. i've expressed this concern to the i.c. we have sent them many follow up questions as it relates to
1:14 pm
intelligence that's been collected. we expect prompt answers and we also expect unprecedented answers from them of the information that we're going to be asking for. because you know, typically we've had great trust with our intelligence agencies. i continue to have that trust. we have to verify that all of the tools in place that we oversee, are being used ethically, responsibly and by the law. if anybody has abused those, we want to know about that. that is part of the reason why it's important for us to know whether or not as some press reports have indicated, whether or not the department of justice or any other agency tried to get a warrant on anybody related to the trump campaign or any other campaign for that matter. >> the fbi has been accused of
1:15 pm
withholding information from the gang of eight. you believe his concerns have merit? what are those points of contention there? >> i like just mr. trump's comments, i can take from them what i think -- i'm going to try to glean from mr. schiff's comments. the gang of eight, is this for a reason? we're supposed to be up to speed on counter intelligence investigations. if that didn't occur last year -- if trump or any other political campaign associated with trump was under investigation, that clearly should have risen to the gang of eight level. so what we would like to know going forward, what is the structure of the gang of eight going to be, what will the gang of eight be read into.
1:16 pm
we have questions whether or not that we were read into everything that we should have been. i'm not trying to translate mr. schiff's comments. we share the concern over information from counter intelligence. >> have you learned things that would lead you to believe -- do you have reason to belief you weren't told things last year? >> we don't know. that's the question. it depends on the accuracy of multiple press reports that we've discussed. >> are you saying mr. trump was under investigation last year and they didn't brief the gang of eight? >> we have no evidence of it. we haven't seen it. the that's the case, we would like to know. if it was the case, why didn't we know? we should have known that if there was an actual
1:17 pm
investigation, especially through fisa or somebody tried to get a warrant. >> the ranking members used the word "subpoena." is that something that you would consider? >> at this point for our hearing on march 20th, we'll have people come on their own free will. like i said, we have our initial invite list. we're going to probably invite others. if there are people out there that have some relevance to this investigation and would like to come and speak before the congress, we would be willing to look at those -- that interest also. at this time, we're not going to subpoena any one for the march 20th hearing, just to be clear. if we have to, we will subpoena all information that is pertinent to this investigation if people either number 1 don't
1:18 pm
want to appear or appropriate agencies don't provide the information we've asked for. >> is there a dispute between the fbi and the dnc in whether or not the fbi had access -- st. -- is this going to be settled at some point? in the breadth of our report it will be looked at. you're talking about the dispute between the dnc and the fbi? from the evidence i've seen so far and addressed subje eed pub question was out there. it's fact. what happened after that, who talked to who and was it the appropriate people? if you ask the democratic leadership that run the dnc, they have an opinion a and the
1:19 pm
fbi has another. i don't know how that sorts out. other questions? >> [question inaudible] >> this is our first hearing. we want it public. we want all the hearings public. we may be adding to that list. >> we don't -- you don't have evidence, period, right? you're just beginning your investigation. >> in terms of the body of evidence that went into the report, director clapper produced in the middle of january, before the inauguration, we have an agreement on that now. that's where we're close to an agreement on where that information will be housed.
1:20 pm
we've sent a series of other questions and letters to dni, fbi and other agencies to see -- to ask for additional evidence that we're still awaiting. but in terms of this initial list, we will probably build and add to this list over the course of the next week. we'll keep you updated on >> >> [question inaudible] >> not with this list. anyone on that list wants to have a private session with us to provide a deposition of some kind and they think it needs to be in a classified nature, we would meet that need for that witness if that's what they preferred. >> senate investigators have been going to langley to look at the documents underlying the russia assessment. has your committee done that? are you going to do that? >> yes, we've had some initial trips out there and we will have
1:21 pm
more trips out there. that's part of the agreement that we're trying to put together, which i think is essentially finished. >> are you going to be able to have access to the information here or all at langley? >> likely be both. i don't want to get specifics. >> let me share here. >> neil: we're monitoring twin press conferences rights now. you've been listening to devin nunes. they're planning a march 20 meeting to handle this. let's listen in. apparently there's no sound there. i'd hike to go back -- wait a minute. >> this is something that president trump campaigned actively on and something that all of us campaigned on since the law was passed years ago. we have seen over those years the devastation that obamacare has caused to families.
1:22 pm
constituents that i hear from every day tell me about sky rocketing premiums. one mother in my district told me about a $11,000 deducts -- deductible that she has that makes it i believe possible for her to use her insurance. we've seen doctors leaving the healthcare marketplace. we've seen hospitals closing. we've seen limited access to healthcare because the law doesn't work for families. so as we've worked over the months to put together a bill, tomorrow we officially start the process of moving the bill through the committee. house energy and the ways and means committee will take up this legislation. president trump committed in our meeting that he's all in on making sure that this bill gets to his desk so he can sign it into law. that's really encouraging because over the last eight years, we've seen a president that didn't want to work with congress and we've seen the
1:23 pm
devastating results to our economy. we finally have a president that refreshingly is eager to follow-through on the promises that he made to the american people. he complited ed ted t ed ted to doing everything he can to sign the bill into law and rescue families from the devastation of obamacare. when you look at what's in the bill, it's important to know that not only does it zero out the penalties of obamacare, the individual mandate, unelected bureaucrats in washington will no longer be able to tell family what's they can or can't buy when it relates to that personal decision of choosing a healthcare plan but it strengthens health savings accoun accounts. focusing on tax credits that will allower people income to by the plan of their choice. a small business owner wants the
1:24 pm
opportunity to get get health care. they'll get the same tax advantages that a large corporation has. so empowering families. getting rid of the men dates and restoring the trust in people. it's excited that we started the process of repealing and replacing obamacare. i'd like to introduce patrick mchenry from north carolina. >> high, good afternoon. we had a productive meeting with the president today, the deputy whip team. these men and women put together the votes in the house. they work with policies and to get 218 votes on important pieces of legislation. the american care act is the first presidential power. our president wants to pass this piece of legislation. time price endorsed it in detail. he put all the resources of the
1:25 pm
administration to work on capitol hill to work the house and the senate to see that we repeal and replace obamacare. we spent a lot of time of us not acting. the action is there for us to move, to save the american people the heart ache and the pain of what has been obamacare. this team is front and center in counting the votes. he's thanked the teams for their efforts. much work will be done in the next couple weeks. he asked us to take immediate action, to make sure our colleagues know that he supports the plan in detail and it's working its way through the commerce and ways and means committee. we know we have his endorsement to act and we're going to act. >> one of the two chairman to lead the process is the chairman of the ways and means committee
1:26 pm
and a proud member that we're glad to have on the deputy whip team, kevin brady from texas. >> the president made it clear, this is his bill. there's no excuses. it's time to act now. the americans have waited way too long. they are looking for relief from healthcare law that has failed to meet any promise that was made. it's clear that he is putting his presidential weight behind this legislation. he knows republicans are unified behind repealing this terrible health care law but more importantly to getting the important steps of restoring state control so health care can be designed for local communities and families and not washington and restoring the market. families have greater choices of
1:27 pm
what they need, not what washington needs. we're going to move forward in this process. know this as well. the president said this. this is a huge step but it's only the first step. repeals, unwinding that awful obamacare law can't happen with just one bill. we'll take steps in the weeks and months to give people more choice in affordable healthcare. >> now i'd like to introduce the chairman of the health subcommittee of the ways and means committee. >> neil: all right. i counted at least seven times there these representatives have being saying their measure, their obamacare repeal and replace measure has the full support of the president of the united states. that is pivotal. you heard about 40 minutes ago, leading conservatives in the house and the senate say it doesn't have their support and
1:28 pm
they don't care if the president is standing by it. they call it obamacare light. it's an albatross. they don't have time for it or interest in it. they say a lot of the onerous taxes with the affordable care act remain in place through the end of this year and next year. it's not scored by the congressional budget office and they say to add insult to injury, it doesn't do much to correct the problems, run away costs. no guarantees that this will do anything to reign in spending. and then there's states to use medicaid dollars as they see fit. paul lepage joins me on the fast-moving developments. thanks for your patients from these competing press conferences. >> thank you for having me. >> neil: conservatives willing
1:29 pm
to buck the leadership and the president saying this isn't the measure for them. what about you? >> what i've looked at thus far, the first step and i'm unencouraged. it's repeals and replacing. next thing we have to start reforming. our state is the oldest state in the union. we did not expand under the obamacare program. i have some concerns and the devil is in the detail. i'm waiting. i sent a letter to speaker ryan today. i'm going to washington friday to meet with secretary price. it's very, very important that we get it right. the american people deserve to gets it right. as i see it right now, some of the things -- i'm concerned about the per capita cap. instead of giving complete flexibility to the states, that concerns me a great deal.
1:30 pm
one thing that is missing that i think is crucial and important for me to sign on, a work requirement for able-bodied people. if there's no work requirement and it's free, i can only say this. free is very expensive to somebody. >> governor, there's so much we don't know. maybe i'll get into this more with time price tomorrow on this show. one of the things he mentioned in his remarks to reporters earlier, it's not perfect but in is a lot better than what we've got. i'm paraphrasing there. yes, conservatives are upset with this. some might have a problem keeping the medicaid expansion is. but -- >> we didn't qualify. >> neil: what do you say? >> what i say is this. what i read from the house today, like i said, first step. i was more encouraged listening to the comments by secretary price when he said buying a
1:31 pm
cross state lines, saying the cost of drugs would have to come down. that we need more flexibility in states. that's encouraging. at the same token, maine did not qualify for the medicaid expansion because we expanded early on in 2000. we were considered an early expander. we never got the 90% and 100%. that concerns me. looks like the 19 states that did not expand could be thrown under the bus. >> governor, real quickly. do you think that it's going to be a problem for republicans if we're still dealing is with a lot of theme that could potentially lose their healthcare coverage? upwards of 19.5 million right now through obamacare that a. that a.m. -- a good many could lose it.
1:32 pm
net-net of the costs will slow. it won't be that onerous and the time will come when they can get it back. that's the pitch that some were making. >> i will say this. let me expand on that. this year, maine was not an expander. .7 of 1%, less than 1%. we have adjusted. we're in. what i'm concerned about is the expansion state, if they continue with the expansion, they're going to force our budget like it was in 2011 when i took over. every six months, i have to ask legislature for a $250 million appropriation because healthcare is out of control. unless they deal with the cost drivers and they have a work requirement for able bodied people. in maine what happened in 2010, everybody dropped their commercial insurance and went to
1:33 pm
medicaid and blew the budget. >> neil: do you think this is dividing republicans and the conservatives that this still seems like a government program, moderates saying this was defending planned parenthood? this was taking a leap too far? what do you think? >> i think you have to get together and get this done. if you do nothing, in 2018, you're all going to be outside looking in. >> neil: governor, thank you. congress woman, thanks for your patience with the developments and press conferences. what do you think of the plan you heard outlined? a lot of details we don't me and devils in the details, i'm sure. what do you make of what you've been hearing. >> as my mother would have said, this plan is debtor -- deader
1:34 pm
than a door nail. millions will lose their healthcare and 600 plus billions will go to the wealthier who will get tax relief from the legislation. if you look at what the outside groups, the heritage foundation and freedom works and the club for growth, et cetera are saying about it, plus when you have four senators and you have a number of house members, including freedom caucus that are saying no. and governors like my governor, different from the former -- the previous governor you talked to. he's concerned because we were -- we are a medicaid expansion state. one out of four illinoisans get medicaid. that would be a disaster for illinois and three million illinoisans. >> neil: let me ask you about that. the benefits you're talking about would be the sur taxes for
1:35 pm
the wealthy that partly funded the affordable care act. now the question going forward, the republicans have pushed back removing those until next year. having said that us it was an acknowledgement, i don't know if you felt this way -- that something had to be done to fix this. it was not sustainable as things were going. i don't know what those fixes could have been. one idea was to tax more, maybe curtail the benefits or provide more market force benefits. the way it was going, the way it is going -- i know you're not a plan of this fan, not sustainab sustainable. you agree with that? >> for the seven years that the affordable care act has been out there, we have been wanting to sit down with our republican colleagues. we know that networks have been narrows. we think we could do much better in terms of providing benefits
1:36 pm
and affording the benefits and making sure that even more people are covered. the president of the united states has said how about lowering the cost of prescription drugs. so of course, we understand a big program like that has a number of problems. we've seen them in illinois. >> neil: congress maybe, the democratic plan and this plan, whatever -- however it advances, insura rap seems to be they continue setting the tone and the costs just as they did under the affordable care act and gives them too much weight and power? >> i agree. that's one of the reasons i proposed a public option. there's so many counties that there's one insurer available. if there were a public option available, it would not only bring down prices but --
1:37 pm
>> neil: are you sure of that? people look at that and say, the last thing you want is the government in that central powerful a role. that's what it would be. >> that's what some people think. a lot of people think that they want their healthcare and have another choice. people love medicare, which is a public program. the idea of having one within the affordable care act i think is very positive for a lot of people. >> neil: congressman, do you see -- i see this on the left and the right. the problem always seems to be getting young people more to the point to sign up. republicans are looking at it, give them a $2,000 tax credit to incentivize that. even if you game them a $10,000 credit, they feel they're bulletproof. they feel they're indestructible. we were all there at one time. if that is the problem, you can't change the math when the young ones would absorb the costs for older, sicker patie s
1:38 pm
patients. there's little in the way to do that because there's little in evidence the democratic plan to date that does that. >> first of all, let me say in order to entice more young people, there's saying that we can charge senior citizens five times as much, which would put seniors in a bad position. i agree with you. it's a challenge. the mandate is important -- >> neil: meaning demanding that you get healthcare. >> that's right. or pay a fine. >> neil: the republicans don't have that in their plan. >> no, they don't. but you're not going to see many sick young people that don't have health insurance. it's going to be a challenge. we have to take that up to make sure that young people do understand the importance of insurance. look, you have to get auto
1:39 pm
insurance. i don't care what age you are. we think it's important for people to get healthcare. >> neil: you mentioned the auto insurance. it's a very good example. if you have accidents, you pay more because of that. you think that is the way that healthcare coverage should go as well? >> i haven't thought about that. >> neil: i only say that because i get a lot of speeding tickets. i know that first hand. >> well, be careful. no, i haven't thought about that but i do recognize get morgue age divorce population in insurance. i don't think the answer is to say five to one senior citizens will that that much more thank young people. it's a dangerous proposal. >> neil: congress woman, thank you. >> my pleasure. >> neil: we'll be hearing from speaker paul ryan on this. it seems to be to the
1:40 pm
congresswoman's point and to advocates on the republican said side that donald trump, the president, supports this house and senate leadership measure. that he has placed his bets with them, that this is the way to go. the problem is not all conservatives agree. the votes are not there. forget about what is going on in the senate. remember, that house conservative caucus, the freedom caucus, if you will, 40 plus members strong. a prominent member saying that he thinks more than half, far more than half, would not accept this, which means in the house itself where this was considered safe passage, it's dead on arrival. more after this. tech: this mom didn't have time to worry about a cracked windshield. so she scheduled at and with safelite's exclusive "on my way text" she knew exactly when i'd be there,
1:41 pm
so she didn't miss a single shot. i replaced her windshield giving her more time for what matters most. tech: how'd ya do? player: we won! tech: nice! that's another safelite advantage. mom: thank you so much! (team sing) safelite repair, safelite replace.
1:42 pm
1:43 pm
>> neil: a lot of press conferences on the right. we're waiting to hear from paul ryan on this. he was not at the white house
1:44 pm
pow-wow with other republican leaders. he's going to spell out what the american healthcare act, what the republican alternative means. a lot of crowing on the part of those that came up with this, that they have the full support of the president of the united states. let's get more from the white house where we have erin standing by. is that true? you're hearing that that is the case, that donald trump has thrown his weight behind this measure, not the conservative alternative that doesn't like this measure? >> neil, i call that mostly true. the reason for that is tom price, the secretary of health and human services joined the briefing earlier today. i counted a number of times that he called this a work in progress and he wouldn't throw his weight behind every single thing in the bill. reading between the lines, it's a work in progress.
1:45 pm
step one of phase one. the time line will get kicked back a lot. we heard from paul ryan saying they wanted some part of this done by easter recess. i can't see that happening, especially when they're trying to get all house republicans on board. we heard earlier in the day there a couple of senate republican holdouts. they're not close on getting all house republicans on board with this. so they have a long way to go. the other thing i point out, you mentioned the provisions that the conservatives don't like. one of the things in the briefing are the tax credits that they want to give to americans that are not getting health insurance through players. tom price called that an equalizer on a tax treatment. you'll hear that line played over and over again. strict conservatives won't like that language at all. >> neil: it's interesting. they're splitting hairs on this.
1:46 pm
they're saying at least we're not getting into the wealthy. here's speaker ryan. >> good afternoon. this is the american healthcare act. it's been a long time and coming. this bill, american healthcare act keeps our promise to repeal and replace obamacare. it delivers relief to americans fed up with sky rocketing premiums and fewer choices. removes it from the broken status quo to a patient centered system. that means lower costs for hard working families. more choices and competition so you can buy the plan you need and you can afford. greater control of your healthcare. as you know, this is a culmination of years long, of an inclusive process that wife done here for years. last june as part of our better way agenda, we put forward our vision for healthcare. after the election, we began to
1:47 pm
work with our counter parts in the senate and with the trump administration on this plan. i want to thank president trump. i want to thank president pence and thank secretary price for their support and their hard work in getting it to this repeal and replace point. i also want to thank chairman brady joining us in a minute and chairman walden. now this will go through the process in the house. i urge americans to read this online at doing big things is never easy. we made a promise and we're going to keep it. we made a promise to repeal and replace obamacare. that's why we're here. thank you. >> i do want to echo a couple things the speaker said.
1:48 pm
i want to thank the president and the vice president, i want to thank our new secretary, tom price as well. i just listened to the president meeting with the deputy whip team. he said he was proud to support this new bill. why? because of the years of work that has gone into it. we know why we're here today. obamacare did three points. one, created exchange. we know the history of what happened to that. the failures. the companies pulling out. now you have a third of the entire country, 1,022 counties with only one healthcare provider. created 23 coops. 18 of them have collapsed. it expected medicaid. we know it can't sustain itself. we have to put medicaid to sustain itself. that's what i want to thank chairman greg walden and the
1:49 pm
works he's doing. today is a new day. we stand proud with our president that he supports this bill to move forward, to keep the promise that we made to repeal obamacare and replace it, to put the power back with the individuals. >> good afternoon. i want to thank our colleagues, the president, vice president, secretary brady, dr. burgess who has put in incredible amounts of time and work, this bill went pup last night about this time. it's available online to see. this is the alternative to obamacare, this is how we're going to give choice back to people, rescue the failing market. we're proud of this piece of legislation and look forward to marking it up tomorrow. remember, we made a promise to the american people that we're going to keep it right here,
1:50 pm
right now, replacing obamacare with something that will work for them, this is the first step. this begins the process of transforming the health insurance market. it also amounts to the biggest entitlement reform since bill clinton signed welfare reform into law. we're going to restore to the states the authorities taken away from them, make they can not to have to come here and allow them to innovate. to best use those dollars and with medicaid, it amounts to per capita allotment. so they'll know what they can expect. it works for them. we worked closely with the governors. so tomorrow at 11:00 or 10:30, we'll begin the markup. we're going to make sure those with pre-existing conditions will continue to get healthcare
1:51 pm
and health insurance. we're going to make sure there's no lifetime caps and we're not going to kick your kids off the plans until after they turn 26. we'll hope you kick them out hoff the basement but not health insurance. this is important work and we look forward to improving on it. we look forward to help the people that sent us here to get this job done. >> i think mr. brady is still at the white house. we were going to have him go next. we'll go to questions. >> when democrats tried to tackle healthcare. it was led in the house by nancy pelosi who did a very effective job wrangling her members and getting it done. are you prepared to do the same thing? >> i'm prepared to lead our conference to doing what we said we would do. we actually ran on a repeal and repla replace plan. that's what this is. i believe in regular order. i believe in going through the
1:52 pm
process the way it was meant to go there. we didn't write this in my ace on christmas eve and jam it through to the country. these committees are writing this legislation. these committees will be marking up the legislation tomorrow and then it goes to the budget committee and then the rules committee after that, which is regular order. so i'm excited that we're doing this the right way. i'm excited we're doing this in plain sight. go to what i want to tell my fellow citizens, the nightmare of obama is about to end. we're doing what we said, repeal and replace this law that is crashing. let me say one more things. obamacare is collapsing. obamacare isn't staying. if we did nothing, the law would collapse and leave everybody without affordable healthcare. we are do an act of mercy repealing this law and replacing
1:53 pm
it that we as conservatives have been arguing for and fighting for for years. >> some groups, the freedom caucus, are skeptical about this. a lot of this bill is in your agenda. are those criticisms a repudiation of what you crafted in the better way? >> i don't think so. let me give you a list of what conservatives should be excited about. number 1, it repeals obamacare and number 2, it repeals the taxes. it repeals the obamacare spending like the medicaid expansion and subsidies. it repeals the mandates on individuals and businesses. it ends funding for planned parenthood and send that money to community health centers. it ends the biggest entitlement reform for decades. it doubles the amount people can said to health savings accounts. it's crucial. it equalizes the tax treatment
1:54 pm
of healthcare. i've been doing conservative healthcare reform for 20 years. for 20 years, we as conservatives have been arguing for equalizing the healthcare for all americans so we can have a vibrant individual market to have choice and competition. look, here's -- there's two ways of fixing healthcare. have the government run it and ration it and put price controls. that's what obamacare does and that's what the left does. or do what conservatives have wanted for years. stop the discrimination of people that want to go in the free marketplace and buy the healthcare of their choosing. this allows choices. the most important thing it does, it takes out of washington, takes power out of bureaucracy and puts it back to the doctors and patients where
1:55 pm
it belongs. >> i've heard reports of 10 million people could lose their coverage. does that matter to you? >> what matters is we're lowing the cost and giving the power back to the people. if we mandate everybody buys what we have to buy, the government estimates they'll buy it. that bogus. that doesn't work. the fact is that we're not going to have the government tell you what you must do. tell you what you must buy. we're going to allow the market to do that. people have to decide what they want to do with their lives. we want lower costs and more competition and equalizing it all. >> [question inaudible] >> we have two weeks. we'll have 218 when it comes the floor. i can guarantee you. >> what do you say to the folks that look at the bill and say it's a big fat tax break for the rich. >> read the bill.
1:56 pm
go to >> this is the first step. vice president pence said he was open to negotiation -- >> it's not that this is open for negotiations. we envisioned three phases occurring here. let's describe what the three phases are. number 1 is this bill is reconciliation. as you know, you can't filibuster a reconciliation bill. this is what we passed for reconciliation. phase two, all the regulatory flexibility that the secretary of hhs has to deregulate and stabilize the market. that's what tom price will do. there's 1,400 instances in this law that gives the secretary discretion. secretary price will use that to bring more market freedom and more market stabilization. that's phase two. phase three is to pass the bills that we want to pass that we cannot put in reconciliation because of the budget rules.
1:57 pm
what is an example of that? interstates shopping across state lines. we love that policy. it's critical. as you know, you cannot put that in a budget reconciliation bill. we believe in association health plans. let people through their trade associations, farmers, small businesses through the nfib plan, both buy their health insurance in buying pools. we believe in that policy. but we know the rules don't allow us to put that in reconciliation. the medical liability reform. they're cranking up healthcare costs, practicing of medicine, which makes healthcare more expensive. we can't put that in reconciliation. we'll push those to the finish line. those will take 60 votes in the senate. so phase one is this repeal and replace bill. tom price regulates the market and brings certainty to have more choices and more plans and gets the states back in the game
1:58 pm
of being able to regulate healthcare. phase three, pass the reforms that we believe in, that we think will make it better, but we know we can't put in reconciliation because of the 60-vote threshold. thanks very much. appreciate it. >> neil: all right. you heard it there. speaker ryan very optimistic he can get it done with the 218 votes. heavy lifting. real quick from our kennedy. we have charlie gasparino. kennedy, they can get 218 votes. that was not the read i was getting from a host of conservatives throughout the day, that they have the votes. >> not a chance. go to social media to see what some of them are saying. they're not happy with it. i think they're right. when they said this was obamacare 2.0, senator rand paul calls it obamacare-light.
1:59 pm
it adds up to subsidies that -- >> neil: that's what they've been saying, charlie. real quickly. >> you can't make rome in a day. taking apart obamacare is a difficult task, this is a good first step. it's an iterative process. they're saying that. they have to gone with it. it's not going to be redone tomorrow. >> neil: senator what do you think? >> you're not going to do health reform overnight. there's a number of challenges here. i still don't think they have the votes. but when you have the issues like tax credits, i don't think they will be for those that make hover $75,000 but have a sufficient tax credit to go on the open mark. a lot to talk about. >> neil: so many competing press conferences. again, thank you very much. meantime, here's the gist of where we stand. healthcare law replacement
2:00 pm
measure is out. ironically it's not democrats that are tearing apart, it's fellow republicans convinced this is not the way they want the party to go. tom price on that tomorrow. >> hello, everyone. welcome to "the five." i'm kimberly guilfoyle. we just heard from speaker paul ryan and other house republicans at a press conference on the american health care act. ryan says republicans will have enough votes to pass the plan in the house earlier, we heard from the president on the measure. >> proud to support the replacement plan released by the house of representatives and encouraged by members of both parties. i think we're going to have something that's going to be much more understood and much more popular than people can even imagine. i think it's going to go very quickly. i hope it's


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on