tv Morning Joe MSNBC June 29, 2012 3:00am-6:00am PDT
this hour. our producer has a couple of answers. >> i have muffy in los angeles. i am up doing laundry, praying angry birds and gloatinging about the scotus ruling. >> i wouldn't be doing too much gloatinging if you are up at 2:30 in the morning angry birds. >> joyce in kentucky i'm up because it's that time of year, skunk mating season. i must be at ground zero. >> is it skunk mating season? we got no. we're looking right now. sounds terrible. "morning joe" starts right now. >> it should be pretty clear right now i didn't do this because of politics. i did it because i believed it was good for the american people. the highest court in the land has spoken and we will continue to implement this law and work together to improve on it where we can. but what we won't do, what the
country can't afford to do is refight the political battles two years ago or go back to the way things were. >> what the court did today is say obama care does not violate the(n> constitution. what they did not do is say obama care is good law or good policy. obama care was bad policy yesterday, it's bad policy today. obama care was bad law yesterday, it's bad law today. >> good morning. it's friday, june 29th. welcome to "morning joe." with us on set this morning, we have the executive editor at random house,ueá winning historian and "time" magazine contributing editor jon meacham and msnbc political analyst and visiting professor at nyu, former democratic congressman harold ford jr. and in washington, msnbc and "time" magazine senior political analyst mark halperin and msnbc political analyst and former chairman of the republican national committee, michael steele, and nbc news chief foreign affairs correspondent
andrea mitchell. >> what a -- >> great way to start the morning with these folks. >> hey, tj, really quickly, would you show everybody the headline, straight ahead, "the new york times," screaming headline obviously the fight for majority with john roberts in the majority which is just absolute stunner. i expected it, if it were a 6-3 majority but not a 5-4. i don't think anybody expected that. still standing, says the usa today keriaked today. "wall street journal" says the court backs obama on health care. locally here, since this is a local manhattan upper west side show "the daily news" to your health, and then with the softest touch of all, the subtly, you have t"the new york pos post". >> let's get to the headlines 5-4 decision the supreme court has preserved the heart of the affordable care act. the individual mandate requiring all americans to carry health
insurance or pay a federal fine. in the end it was conservative chief justice john roberts who joined the liberal wing of the bench in upholding the sweeping overha overhaul. roberts nominatedç to court by president george bush says the law was constitutional under the government's law adding it's not our role to forbid or pass upon its wisdom or fairness. president obama was eager to give mitt romney special recognition for supporting the idea of a mandate when he served as governor of massachusetts. >> even though i knew it wouldn't be politically popular and resisted the idea when i ran for this office we ultimately included a provision in the affordable care act that people who can afford to buy health insurance should take the responsibility to do so. in fact, this idea is enjoyed support from members of both parties, including the current republican nominee for president. >> but romney attacked the health care law, saying it will hurt the economy.
>> obama care is a job killer. businesses across the country have been asked what the impact is of obama care three quarters of those surveyed by the chamber of commerce said obama care makes it less likely for them to hire people. if we want good jobs and a bright economic future, for ourselves and for our kids, we must replace obama care. that is my mission. that is our work. and i'm asking the people of america to join . >> in the 12 hours following the supreme court's ruling the romney campaign raised $3.2 million for more than 20,000 donors. house majority leader eric cantor has scheduled a full house vote to repeal the law for july 11th. >> you know "the new york times" had i thought a great rundown, a great summary ofç what just -- chief justice roberts had to say about this. this was, of course, i think the great shock for everybody. harold, your -- you've got a law
degree like me and we've studied this stuff closely through the years. on the judiciary committee and beyond. i don't think anybody expected john roberts to be where he was in a 5-4 decision. i think a lot were expecting him to be there if he was a 6-3 decision f anthony kennedy decided to uphold the law. this was a real shock. let me read what the "times" said about it and get your reaction. chief justice roberts suggested that even he did not find the tax argument especially plausible. that was the argument he used to uphold the law. but he quoted justice holmes to explain why it was good enough. as between two possible interpretations of the statute, by one of which it would be unconstitutional, and by the other it would be valid, justice holmes wrote, our plain duty is to adopt that which will save the act. as chief justice roberts
explained at his confirmation hearings seven years ago, his approach to testing the constitutionality of federal laws involved significant deference to the elected branches. quote, all judges are acutely aware of the fact that millions and millions of people have voted for you and not one has voted for any of us. he told orrin hatch. that means you have the responsibility of representing the policy preferences ofç the people. he made the point more sharply in the decision yesterday, and part of the opinion in which he spoke only for himself, he said, quote, it is not our job, he said, to protect people from the consequences of their political choices. and harold, some conservatives, some conservatives, would define that as judicial restraint. >> some would. i thought the decision was brilliant, brilliantly written as i think your comments and
tone suggest this morning. he satisfied all of the questions that were asked, there were those concerned that the commerce clause was being expanded too broadly and congressional powers interpreted almost infinitely. he put restraints and limits saying the constitutionality of health care was premised on the ideas of the taxing power of the congress. two states raised concerns about the expansion of medicaid. he answered that question in the second part of his decision. and finally, laid out for all of those who were concerned and you all shared this on the show, you articulated this yesterday on the show, joe, when you thought this could be a 6-3 decision, which was not too far off, i might add, because roberts was a part of the majority, distinguished himself not only as a fine jurist but as a chief justice. he will be remembered for this decision, regardless of what happens going forward. barring some other traumatic set of events. >> of course, it is -- >> he distinguished himself in significant way and his court above politics. >> it is fair to say that 30
seconds before this decision came down, jon meacham, every liberalç commentator i was hearing speak, was comparing john roberts to begin gus kahn and within 30 seconds, because liberals got the outcome they wanted, john roberts transformed himself from gingis kahn to justice oliver wendell holmes in a flash. >> he evolved. >> he evolved. >> listen, you know the thing is, this is the guy that wrote citizens united, our supported citizens united. this is a very conservative man. but we've talked ate this for a very long time. there is conservative with a big "c" which he is and there is conservative with a small "c" which as chief justice he's like okay, do we really want to be responsible for overturning the most significant work, if there
is a way. let's just strip down the facade, this is a tax. barack obama may not have wanted to call it a tax, but it is a tax. if we can save this piece of legislation, landmark piece of legislation, by calling it what it is, well, i'm not going to have my court remembered as somebody that threw out the work of two years of a very contentious debate. >> right. i think last night in the times piece to my mind one of the most interesting. it's not our duty to protect the people from the political consequences of their choices which is a very conservativeç lower case "c" sense. it's -- it's curiously using judicial review to step back and i think it is restraint. and as we've talked about an activist court is a court you disagree.
an overreaching judge -- >> we're going to hear a lot of fabulous things from the mainstream media about justice john roberts right now they would have called him a no good, dirty, partisan sleaze bag if he had gone the other way. because he did what a lot of people wanted him to do in the media, he's going to be hailed as one of the great judicial minds of at least our time. >> or this week. >> or this week. >> i was going to say, until, until -- >> until he comes down on the wrong side of their opinion, the affirmative action decision tomorrow or next week. >> whatever. >> it moves fast. i do think -- >> it moves fast, doesn't it? >> but i do think partly because he seemed to go out and, you know, he seemed to go out of his way to find a reason to uphold this. sort of taking the commerce, you know. it's a great country when we're talking about the commerce clause this early in the
morning. >> this early in the morning. >> which, by the way, it is important for me as a conservative with a large "c," say hold on a second, you cannot expand the commerce clause that way. that's important to me. did i like the decision. >> no. is it the way i wanted it to come down? no. i understood why he did what he did and as a conservative with a large "c" i'm very glad he didn't p]si the commerce clause even further, having the federal government compelling people to go out and buy something. if you want to call it a tax, fine. call it a tax. we'll talk about that on the campaign trail this fall. >> i didn't mean to say he's brilliant. that was a brilliant decision. i didn't want to put me in this camp of liberal commentators. >> you are but we won't put you -- >> andrea mitchell, i'm going to get to you in a second. first, michael steele, former chairman of the republican national committee. i would love you to give a more partisan republican view if you
have it, because we conservatives, i will put myself in this group, have been wringing our hands for decades about republican presidents appointing nominees who then stab them in the ideological back. i'm not suggesting john roberts did that this morning, but just about every other conservative in washington is. >> they are. i mean, there were flashbacks, i guess, for some folks back to earl warren who was a conservative justice who ushered in a very different era during his tenure as chief justice. i think that we've kind of pegged roberts right out of the box. he is a very consistent in his practicing na tism and he approached this from a bottom up. recall when he -- during his confirmation hearings he said he looks at the law from the bottom up. from how it's -- how it's developed organically and what it turns into it, what it is,
what it does. i think you saw a little bit of that yesterday. áhp)e frustrated with that. a couple of members of congress saying that, you know, they'll look for remains to remove him from the court. that's silly. >> just shut up. >> you have those levels of silly extremes with respect to him and you're absolutely right. the left love him today. they hated him a few weeks ago. >> and by the way -- by the way -- for my fellow conservatives. >> oh, boy. >> liberals will hate him tomorrow. >> absolutely. >> for the next 25 years. >> there you go. >> they will. i mean, andrea mitchell, you've seen this before. >> absolutely. >> jon meacham said it perfectly judicial acty vifrm is when the court does something you disagree with. >> you mentioned the affirmative action case. there's doma. a number of cases coming up where he can certainly prove his conservative with a small "c" credentials. it is judicial restraint in the broadest sense and i think he's
also thinking about the court, the policization of the court, the way people view the court. he is the chief justice and that is a different role. he does not have the same role as scalia. i even if he wanted to he would have given the kind of dissent scalia issued from the bench this week on the immigration case which attacked president obama's decision on the deportation or the nondeportation of some children of undocumented immigrants. that's not the kind of, you know, not the kind of opinion he would deliver from the bench or otherwise. >> you know, i remember willie, when he first came in to office and i asked a lot ofç people vy close to the court, that followed the court, and were great analysts, and also some federal judges, said what kind of guy is he? all these liberals are saying they love him because, you know, he -- they -- because he's so eloquent, and seemed so
brilliant and handled the confirmation hearing. you know, everybody else said he's very conservative, but there is justice thomas, who would overturn a law tomorrow like roe v. wade he would overturn it tomorrow and then they said, john roberts, will not overturn roe v. wade tomorrow, but he would be the type of guy that -- that year by year, would strip away at the intellectual foundations of -- they weren't saying specifically roe v. wade but saying, he would strip away at the intellectual foundations that he disagrees -- which he disagreed over time because he knew that legitimacy mattered. they were saying this about john roberts seven years ago. >> that's what he did yesterday. he made very clear, if you read his argument, that the commerce clause argument which was so important to conservatives didn't hold up here, you can't
compel people into commerce. charles krauthammer calls the tax argument a dodge, john roberts way out to get this vote. >> sure it was. >> it was his way, but mark halperin, this tension for chief justice roberts of the institution versus the constitution, how -- i guess my question is how much should a that matter be thinking in his - mind about whether or not the public perception of the court will be injured by a decision? should he be strictly looking at the law and reviewing it or thinking about the public perception in light of go back to roe v. wade or bush v gore, weighing on chief justice roberts yesterday? >> i think it's a proper for him to take it into account. seems like he did. but in the times we're living it's broader than that. if you imagine him joining the other side and writing as justice kennedy did just a scathing denunciation of the law, repudiating and throwing out the whole thing, given where we are right now in american history it would have been a
war. without regard what you think of the substance of the law he did protect not only the reputation of the court but also kept us from having another huge partisan battle about the president, what the president considers a signature achievement. if you're looking for trends or moments in our history where people do things that calm the waters, rather than inflame them, there's no question his decision to join 5-4 with the liberals did that without a doubt, and it may be a mistake long term, but short term i think it was the right thing to do if his goal was to preserve the reputation of the court and keep us from being inflamed in a partisan way over such a big issue. >> that said, i agree with mark there, but he did also hand mitt romney a great campaign platform in the fall. romney looked pretty good yesterday talking about join me in this fight. >> i'm going to ask about that. >> to overturn an unpopular individual mandate. i want toç go back to, jon
meach meacham, to something. i believe that people understand this about the decision yesterday. krauthammer called it a dodge. i think it was a dodge. but it was -- and in fact, as "the new york times" reported and others have commentated on, roberts didn't even particularly like the tax argument and he said so. >> i'm not a big fan of this, but -- and then he went on. institution versus constitution. i think it's important we draw a distinct here. if john roberts had basically said i think this is unconstitutional but i'm going to -- or this causes me constitutional concerns but i'm still going to affirm this for the value of the institution, that's just -- that's -- i think would be a dereliction of duty. that would have been what sandra day o'connor and anthony kennedy had done after one abortion ruling saying i think the missouri abortion ruling, where
they actually wrote, well, we can't overturn this because well, it might hurt our credibility. i mean, you know, he looked at this and again, he drew a line in the sand saying i am not going to tell you this is something that it is not. i'm not going to tell you that this is a legitimate exercise of the united states congress to expand the commerce clause to a point where they can compel people to buy something. okay. this tax argument i'm not a big fan of it, but you know what, it's in effect it's a tax. we're going to uphold this. you guysç go out and debate th in the fall and as roberts said it's not our job to protect voters from their choices. that is the difference between institution and constitution. there were times when anthony kennedy and sandra day o'connor in upholding roe v. wade, basically said, never mind the constitutional arguments, we're just going to stick with the
institutional. john roberts didn't do this yesterday. he drew a line in the sand and he was pragmatic but he did not throw conservative constitutional principles out the window. he just didn't. >> no. and not to compare him -- to compare him but not put him in this company quite yet, obviously, but great chief justices play a long game. >> exactly. >> john marshall being the great example. earl warren. and they understand, you know, when they have to, as you put it a moment ago, just you chip away. and you understand that it's a decade's long process and i think that with this decision, he puts himself in the possibility to be remembered in -- because there aren't that many chief justices can name. >> you're a historian. >> sort of. >> you play one on tv. >> exactly. >> during the week. >> ike called earl warren the
biggest dam mistake he ever made. >> dam fool. >> yeah. >> george w. bush going to come out in crawford, texas, or dallas, texas, and make the same statement. >> i will bet. >> he will not. >> no he will not. >> he will not. >> because he understands robertcç and people that knew roberts from the beginning said, again, he plays -- you said it perfectly, this guy plays the long game. >> remember h.w. bush, his father, nominated justice suter, who faced criticism. >> he deserved it. do not remind us conservatives of justice suter. >> i wasn't trying to inflame you. >> you're not -- seriously you're not inflaming me. i'm not inflaimds by justice suitor. >> don't even go -- that's like -- >> let us -- mike, is michael -- michael's mike back? really quickly, i have to say, and i've been trying to explain this as -- as a constitutional
law guy, i do have to say, though, this is an open wound. i will show this side. for conservatives we are always charlie brown. we are always running towards the football. >> that's the point. >> we always get to the football and lucy always picks it up and we fall flat on our back and it happened again yesterday. >> that dam lucy, yeah. you know. but having said that, i think there's a lot of merit to the long ball argument here. there are going to be a lot of other redeeming decisions if you will coming down the pike. but yesterday was a head turner and a scratcher for a lot of conservatives, but they have to understand, i think ultimately what this did, it opened up a very good political argument now. now we can talk about health care tax. and we can talk about -- >> exactly. >> this election in the context ç care taxes will cost the american people beginning next year and that's a big opening.
>> it is a great political opening. >> great conversation. >> and if i were running for congress this year, i would -- i would love to be running on the obama health care tax. it's going to be a big issue. but i will just say, mika, conservatives that are upset with john roberts today will be glad he's sitting where he is for the next two decades. >> was anyone at this table or in washington not surprised? >> no. again there were people who said what i said yesterday, that if kennedy went with the majority john roberts would join the majority, see a 6-3 majority, and he would narrow the ruling. well, i -- >> you didn't think he would make the ruling. >> i was absolutely floored. here's the thing, he did narrow the ruling, he made the majority and he made it as narrow as possible saying forget the commerce clause and this tax argument, i think it's kind of stupid, but you guys debate this out in the campaign trail and
we'll leave it to the voters. you know, there are conservatives like george will, i have to say this also, who say this sort of quote judicial restraint is -- is a dereliction of duty. there is an intellectual argument to say what he did yesterday was too clever by half and i think it's going to be great debate among conservative jurists for, god, the next 100 years. >> coming up -- >> this is a huge decision. >> it was amazing. and surprised. >> comifg up -- >> by the way, everybody today, we just have to say, even though we've gone too long, mika, let's just not pretend today that i wouldn't be hosing everybody down in manhattan on city streets if john roberts had gone the other way. >> right. >> no. >> i mean, what i heard yesterday -- >> keep your mouth shut -- >> willie you heard it, the screaming and yelling, the
weeping and the nashing of teeth, there were ashes, cloth, be locust descending from the heavens eating flesh off of people all because of john roberts this man was the scourge of humanity and then 15 seconds later, poof. >> we love him. >> this guy -- >> never buy his own coffee at starbucks again. >> it's so true. >> he will never ever buy his soy latte. i mean the soy latte is -- >> watching the evening news, he was the man of the hour. it was unbelievable. >> so funny. i love the mainstream media. >> fantastic. coming up, we'll talk to house majority leader eric cantor, senior adviser to the president david axelrod will be on set. former attorney general al ber gonzales and dr. zeke emanuel and willie's week in review. bill karins with a check on the weekend forecast. >> a very hot weekend forecast, mika. good morning. millions of people woken up by large thunderstorms through the
heavily populated areas, new york city and baltimore this morning. they're about ready to exit. coastal new jersey getting hit. one point almost 3,000 lightning strikes. a lot of active lightning over the storms and a lot of loud thunder. yesterday we had four major cities have their hottest temperatureç they've ever reco in the month of june. indianapolis, louisville, st. louis, and little rock, were all 105 to about 110 degrees. today we're going to be just as hot in those areas. the only areas that will get the exception, chicago a little cooler with detroit. look at those temperatures today. finally the 100-degree heat has made it to the east coast and as we go through the weekend i think we're he going to have three days in a row of 100-degree heat from washington, d.c., all the way down through richmond, raleigh, charlotte, all the cities in between and atlanta and even on sunday, it's still just as hot. this will be quite a stretch of heat that we're going to see in the southeast. we've never really seen a heat wave like this in the month of june. so the thunderstorms are gone from new york city. of course we'll have some added
humidity now. yeah. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. the postal service is critical to our economy, delivering mail, medicine and packages. yet the house is considering a bill to close thousands of offices, slash service and layoff over 100,000 workers. the postal service is recording financial losses, but not for reasons you might think. the problem ? a burden no other agency or company bears. a 2006 law that drains $5 billion a year from post office revenue while the postal service is forced to overpay billions more into federal accounts. house bill 2309 is not the answer.
30 past the hour. time to take a look -- >> guys we're on tv. >> the debate -- >> there's like the nerd argument. okay. from our parade of papers -- >> nerd on parade. >> the tampa tribune another big decision from the supreme court hitting freedom of speech against american military honor. the court struck down the so-called stolen valor act which punished people who lied about having medals or military service. justice kennedy wrote the first amendment protects the speech we detest as well as the speech we embrace. >> sunday, willie, by the way, that's great news for us, you
knew i was going to say it -- >> stop it. >> we could continue going with the vfw and free drinks. >> wherever where we go. >> willie pushed it too far -- >> no. >> like last week he was at omaha beach. willie, you just -- little -- >> higgins boat.ç >> what's wrong with you two? >> bonjour. >> i hope they don't look too close at the medals. it's an elementary reading award i got. keep it right here. >> sunday "parade" magazine, a look at which five founding fathers were rock stars of their time from jon meacham's thomas jefferson and his $10,000 wine bill at the white house, to ben franklin's advice on choosing a mistress. we should also mention next week on "morning joe," we're bringing all of jon meacham's mistresses out. i'm sorry. we're bringing together an all-star panel of historians,
i'm sorry, keith, a look at the lasting legacy of the american president. that is -- and we've taped some of that stuff already -- those are -- again, i'm a historian, i'm a nerd. those were great even though meacham was involved in it. >> despite that. >> talking about the presidents and we have bob karo on lbj and you and doris krns goodwin and evan thomas. >> they're all stars. >> all stars. >> never actually been called that. $10,000 bottle of wine or wine bill at the white house? >> he came out -- he spent $10,000 entertaining. >> yeah. >> really? >> ice cream. >> what's coming up? >> what do we have, willie? >> still ahead, tom brokaw is here, chuck todd and david axelrod. >> that is murderer's road, gehrig, ruth -- >> mantle. >> the third guy, theç '27 yankees. >> plus, a stunning upset at
focus lolo, focus let's do this i am from baltimore south carolina... bloomington, california... austin, texas... we are all here to represent the country we love this is for everyone back home it's go time. across america, we're all committed to team usa. looking for a better place to put your cash? here's one you may not have thought of -- fidelity. now you don't have to go to a bank to get the things you want from a bank,
like no-fee atms, all over the world. free checkwriting and mobile deposits. now depositing a check is as easy as taking a picture. free online bill payments. a highly acclaimed credit card with 2% cash back into your fidelity account. open a fidelity cash management account today and discover another reason serious investors are choosing fidelity. olaf's pizza palace gets the most rewards of any small business credit card! pizza!!!!! [ garth ] olaf's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! put it on my spark card! [ high-pitched ] nice doin' business with you! [ garth ] why settle for less? great businesses deserve the most rewards! awesome!!! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet?
. welcome back to "morning joe." a little sports now. last night the nba draft, the big color was blue. kentucky blue, carolina blue. wild cats and tarheels had four players and kentucky had six players taken overall. >> kind of disappointing because, you know, actually going to step down in pay now. >> that's it. >> going to the nba. >> tough thing about kentucky. >> leave calipari alone. >> it's funny. >> it's a joke! it's a joke! >> so that was number one pick. anthony davis, we knew that, number two pick in the draft michael kidd gilchrist, small forward. >> not happy to be going to the bobcats did you see that. >> one pick later. not bad money to be number two pick in the draft. harrison barnes first north carolina player taken seventh overall golden state warriors. all four north carolina players went in the first 17 picks. >> seriously, theç question th everybody will be asking this morning, across america, across the plains, what about the vandy
players, did any vandy players get drafted? shoe i'm glad you asked. you have to understand this doesn't happen to us, vanderbilt, three players drafted last night, two of them in the first round. john jenkins went 23rd to the hawks, festuk ezeli, and jeff taylor in the second round, almost in the first round, went to the charlotte bobcats. >> his parents obviously "gun smoke" fans. you don't know the reference. >> i do. i'm just saying that i don't know that his parents -- >> they get "gun smoke" wherever he's from. >> five of the first ten picks were freshmen? >> i don't know off hand but that would make sense. >> it's like five of the first ten picks last night were -- were freshmen. >> i'll tell you -- >> i believe it, one, two, three, four -- yeah, four of the first tive.
>> four of the first five. >> three of the first five. thomas robinson was not -- harrison barnes. barnes is the first -- >> gill gres cyst, barnes -- >> barns is a sophomore. >> three of the five. >> that's how it goes. >> five of the first ten too. >> yes. >> so that was good. so nadal -- nadal lost at wimbledon. >> just go with it. >> i'm with you. >> in a 5-10 decision. >> mika is a tennis fan. nadal lost. >> why? he's the one that -- >> he's whatç is this. >> great player. >> left-hander. he lost to the 100th player in the world. soccer, football yesterday. semifinal -- >> shocker. >> italy and germany. germany the favorite in the game. 36th minute, mario batali, gets behind the defense, look at the strike. >> the guy is crazy. absolute -- >> rips off his shirt. >> odd stripes on his back. the 21-year-old, second goal of the game. italy holds on to beat germany, 2-1. now advances to play spain in
the euro finals on sunday. >> oh, my. >> joe -- >> by the way -- >> a huge shocker, germany considered the favorite by many other than spain and everybody in the soccer world was looking forward to a germany/spain final. in fact, the head of -- i mean the head of the association said he was looking forward to that final. this was a huge shock. >> and now spain is the favorite over italy. >> spain is the favorite over italy. >> that game on sunday. mika's must-read opinion pages next on "morning joe." ♪
why not make lunch more than just lunch? with two times the points on dining in restaurants, you may find yourself asking why not, a lot. chase sapphire preferred. there it is ! there it is ! where ? where ? it's getting away ! where is it ? it's gone. we'll find it. any day can be an adventure. that's why we got a subaru. love wherever the road takes you. wow, there it is.
recently, students from 31 countries took part in a science test. the top academic performers surprised some people. so did the country that came in 17th place. let's raise the bar and elevate our academic standards. let's do what's best for our students-by investing in our teachers. let's solve this. ♪ 43 past the hour. >> is this not one of the great -- i'm sorry, one of the great '70s songs sneaks up on you. >> nice. >> live look at the white house. time now for the must-read opinion pages. >> she's never heard the song before. >> i have.
i like this song very much. >> all right. >> all right. this is charles krauthammer why roberts did it. it's the judiciary's nixon to china. chief justice john roberts joins the liberal wing of the supreme court and upholds the constitutionality of obama care. as a conservative he is appalled by his conservative colleagues by the administration's argument that obama care's individual mandate is a proper exercise of its authority to regulate commerce but he lives in çunea coexistence with roberts, custodian of the court, acutely aware that the judiciary's air rowgation of power has eroded the esteem it was once held. how to reconcile the two imperatives, one philosophical, the other institutional. assign yourself the task of writing the majority opinion. find the ultimate finesse that manages to uphold the law but only on the most narrow of grounds, interpreting the individual mandate as merely a tax, something generally within the power of congress.
>> and charles krauthammer, said it for a long time, one of my certainly one of my favorite columnists michael steele, seems to understand, he was threading the needle yesterday in a way that only a guy with a mind of john roberts can do, which again, is an argument for those who say, just throw any conservative on the court or throw any liberal on the court, a vote is a vote. a vote is not a vote. john roberts yesterday showed that. >> yeah. i think that's absolutely right, joe. i think folks, particularly conservatives, need to think back to why they embraced john roberts in the first place. it was that intellect, it was that ability to make the powerful argument. now yes, on this decision, conservatives don't like the argument he made, but i think again, to the earlier part of our conversation, the long ball strategy here of chipping away, of slowly carving out that space where these conservative principles can see the new light
of day is something i think john roberts in terms of the court is more interested in doing than having a political knee-jerk reaction and responseç to the whims and politics of the moment. >> david brooks, "new york times," modest city and audacity. washington full of arrogant people who grab power whenever they get the chance. there is at least one modest minimalist in town and that's john roberts jr. in his remarkable health care opinion thursday the chief justice of the supreme court restrained the power of his own institution. he decided not to use judicial power to overrule the democratic process. he decided not to provoke a potential institutional crisis. granted, he had to imagine a law slightly different than the one that was passed in order to get the result he wanted, but roberts' decision represents a moment of, if i can say so, burkean minimalism and self-control. >> we've read two conservative
columnists, two of the most well-known conservative columnists for the major papers and neither one of them breathing fire. both of them understanding that intellectual dance that john roberts and the balance that john roberts was striking yesterday. >> and david brooks goes on to make the point that let this innovation begin. let's see what really is going to happen. he prefers the republican approach or what we think is the republican approach because we don't really know the specifics of what mitt romney would do, but we really have this fee for service system that rewards quantity over quality and it's basically bankrupted our health care system now. you're going to talk to zeke emanuel later in the morning and i had aç conversation with him yesterday on our program and he believes that this will eventually save money. there are a lot of people who think that the up front costs of changing the system and building new technologies and putting those into the system are going to initially bankrupt the system
even further, before you get those cost savings. the cost savings are all not yet proved. but zeke will make the counter argument to that and says that already they see great projections for big, big cost savings in states like california. >> mark halperin, we were predicting what was going to happen when this bill -- when this law was overturned. it's upheld. and somehow it, at least in the first 24 hours, seemed to focus mitt romney. i think it's a huge win for president obama. and probably in the long run a huge political win for president obama. but the romney people actually have a narrative now where they can make their man seem a bit more relevant. >> well, it certainly -- >> and a conservative champion. relevant especially to the conservative base. because he's now their champion to overturn this by getting elected. >> look, it's certainly substantive win for the president. the reason he gambled his presidency on this he knew if he
didn't pass this law first year plus in office he would never get a chance to fulfill the democratic dream, the american dream of not being the only industrialized democracy without universal health care. i'm not sure it's a long-term political win. he lost mid terms largely over this and you look at republicans who aren't focused on roberts as much as they are on what the political implications are and say the tea party giant which had been slumbering is now goinç to be awakened and the decisive force in this election. i'm not predicting that but think it's a possibility. the law is more unpopular than popular. mitt romney has not been a great grass roots fund-raiser in the last, you know, less than 24 hours, he has been. but the president as you said yesterday, he's done what he thinks is right and he's willing to take the political hit if there is one, there could be one. >> house majority leader and david axelrod, willie's week in review is next on "morning joe." [ male announcer ] let's say you need to take care of legal matters.
wouldn't it be nice if there was an easier, less-expensive option than using a traditional lawyer? well, legalzoom came up with a better way. we took the best of the old and combined it with modern technology. together you get quality services on your terms, with total customer support. legalzoom documents have been accepted in all 50 states, and they're backed by a 100% satisfaction guarantee. so go to legalzoom.com today and see for yourself. it's law that just makes sense. thin coffee shops. people who i thave been out of work. you can
tell it wears on them. narrator: he's fought to pull us out of economic crisis for three years. and he still is. president obama's plan keeps taxes down for the middle class, invests in education and asks the wealthy to pay their fair share. mitt romney and his billionaire allies can spend milions to distort the president's words. but they're not interested in rebuilding the middle class. he is. i'm barack obama and i
>> at number three, youk-gate. >> i didn't think i would get any boosb >> chicago white sox fan president obama stirred up red sox nation at a fund-raiser this week in boston when he reminded them his sox had swiped former fenway folk hero kevin youklis in a trade. >> i should not have brought up baseball. i understand. li mistake. my mistake. you got to know your crowd. >> the white house argued that the audience was not booing but that boston fans merely were paying tribute to their dearly debarted "youk"! after a careful review of the tape, forensics experts agreed, that nobody cares. at number two, congressional bieber fever. >> justin bieber and selena gom gomes, these people have overcome their different national origins and become
apparently a happy couple. >> illinois congressman gutierrez argued on the floor of the house this week against the arizona immigration law with an assist from the all-american looking but ultimately canadike bieber. >> when you perform in phoenix remember to bring your papers. >> his point about ethnic perceptions was undercut by his claim that c-span has young viewers. >> for our young c-span. justin bieber and selena gomez. >> the number one story of the week, upheld. >> one of the most anticipated decisions in decades -- >> the supreme court has upheld the health care case. >> breaking news topping this hour. >> this was the centerpiece of his administration. >> this is a big victory for the president. >> in a 5-4 decision the supreme court upheld the affordable care act. >> with an unlikely hand from chief justice john roberts, a george w. bush appointee and new
progressiveç icon, president obama's signature legislative achievement survived. >> today's decision was a victory for people all over this country. >> the jubilant feeling inside the white house was summerized best, perhaps, by a former obama adviser and current executive director of the dnc who tweeted after the ruling -- it's constitutional [ bleep ]. on the other side of the spectrum, sarah palin called the president a liar and boldly declared the death of freedom. while mitt romney and other heartbroken republicans vowed to well, repeal it. . >> what the court did not do on its last day in session i will do on my first day if elected president. i will act to repeal obama care. >> millions of americans may have an irs problem. >> a full repeal. >> repealing this harmful law. >> i've scheduled a vote for total repeal. >> with a stinging defeat on health care, republicans scrambled back to their core critique of president obama.
that he is insensitive to the concerns of everyday baseball fans. >> i'm just saying, going to have to change the color of his sox. -- socks 37. >> white house maintains he was not booed there. >> of course. even though he was. >> now stop it. >> can i say for the record, freedom may have died -- >> according to sarah palin but hyperbole, doing really well. >> alive and well. >> like the hyperbole through the roof. can i ask you, how many times can freedom die? >> thisç is a point. >> freedom is resilient. >> this is -- it's -- >> freedom is res puttent. >> that's something. >> look at that. gene robinson, david gregory, chuck todd next. if you have copd like i do, you know how hard it can be to breathe and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema.
spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? ask your doctor if spiriva can help.
that's why programs like... ...the mickelson exxonmobil teachers academy... ...and astronaut sally ride's science academy are helping our educators improve student success in math and science. let's shoot for the stars. let's invest in our teachers and inspire our students. let's solve this. we charge everything else... maybe it's time to recharge the human battery. only the beautyrest recharge sleep system combines the comfort of aircool memory foam layered on top of beautyrest pocketed coils to promote proper sleeping posture all night long. the revolutionary recharge sleep system from beautyrest... it's you, fully charged. get a free set of sheets when you buy a select beautyrest mattress. hurry, offer ends soon.
welcome back to "morning joe." how many people felt that way? jon meacham and harold ford jr. with us with michael steele in washington and also from washington, the moderator of "meet the press," david gregory. and pulitzer prize winning columnist and associated editor of "the washington post" and analyst eugene robinson. good to have you on the show. >> good morning. >> let's get right to the headlines this morning so we can talk about it in a 5-4 decision the supreme court preserved the heart of the affordable care act, the individual mandate requiring all americans to carry health insurance or pay a federal fine. in the end conservative chief justice john roberts who joined the liberal wing of the bench in
upholding the sweeping overhaul. roberts nominated by george w. bush says the law was constitutional under the power to levy taxes adding, quote, it's not our role to forbid it or pass upon its wisdom or fairness. president obama was eager to give mitt romney special recognition for supporting the idea -- >> [ inaudible ]. >> it was his idea to have a mandate in massachusetts when he was governor there. take a listen. >> even though i knew it wouldn't be politically popular and resisted the idea when i ran for this office we included edd vision in the affordable care act that people who could afford to buy health insurance should do so. this is enjoyed by members of both parties including the republican nominee. >> there may be a campaign message blooming on the republican side. mitt romney undeterred by the court's ruling pledging to undo the law one day if elected president.
>> what the court did today was say obamacare did not violate the constitution. what they did not do is say obama care is good law or good policy. obamacare was bad policy today, it's badç policy today. obamacare was bad law yesterday. it's bad law today. >> and since the supreme court's ruling the romney campaign has raised $4.2 million from more than 42,000 donations. house majority leader eric cantor has scheduled a full house vote to repeal the law. that's scheduled for july 11th. he'll be on the show today. >> yes he will. david axelrod coming up. "the new york times" actually summed up justice roberts' delicate twist and wrote this, chief justice roberts suggested that even he did not find the tax argument especially plausible. but he quoted justice holmes to explain it was good enough.
quote, as between two possible interpretations of a statute, by one of which it would be unconstitutional and the other valid, justice holmes wrote, quote, our plain duty is to adopt that which will save the act. as chief justice roberts explained at his confirmation hearings orrin hatch seven years ago, his approach to testing the constitutionality of federal laws involved significant deference to the elected branches. quote, all judges are acutely aware of the fact that millions and millions of people have voted for you and not any have voted for us. he also went on to tell mr. hatch that means you have the responsibility of representing the policy preferences of the people and justice roberts said this a bit more sharply, in his decision yesterday, when he spoke for himself and not the rest of the court and he said, quote, it is not our job toç protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.
david gregory, those political choices come more sharply, i think, in relief today, after the decision, as mitt romney has clearly found a, quote, obama health care tax to run against over the next five months. >> no question about it. i mean it's an expanding target so he can go after him for raising taxes, being the tax razor on health care as well as going after the policy. i, like you, joe, find the remarkable what the chief justice said in essence, my job is to find a way to uphold this law legally, constitutionally, that's ultimately what he did. but in the same opinion, he said, this is still the will of the people. we decide constitutionality. we don't make a judgment about whether this is the right policy. we don't protect people from congress's choices and so here we go off into the politics of this over four months to debate the way forward. and everybody's focused on the
5-4 number. the other number that i think is important is 2014. that is when key provisions of the health care law actually go into effect. and proponents of the law that i spoke to yesterday, some have said this publicly as well, despair over the fact that 2014 is when keyáz provisions go int effect. there's a lot of running room for republicans now to seek to overturn this and to replace it before the bulk of the benefits, plenty that's already in effect that's helping people, before the bulk of the benefits actually go into effect. much harder to take something away once it's been given. >> the tax angle is a strong opening for çrepublicans. >> republicans could just say, listen, right now we're not going to focus on the law between now and the election. we're going to have votes on overturning the obama health care tax. you go that way and make the democrats in the senate and make the president continue to support this. what has now been labeled by the high court as a health care tax. >> they'll definitely go -- i
mean it's a fair argument. having said that, eugene robinson, talk about the significance of what happened yesterday and not gloating, i was totally surprised by it. this is a president who got something done that, you know, presidents before him could not. that seemed impossible. and it now counter to the republican angle that you're talking about now that i think is a fair opening, they will look like they're trying to undo what this president got done. which i'm not sure is necessarily going to be that effective in the long run. what do you think, eugene? >> i tend to agree, mika. i mean, now the benefits of the law have gone into effect or the provisions of the law, some would say they're not benefits, but keeping your adult children on the policy, that's already in effect, and democrats can talk about the day coming when preexisting conditions will not disqualify you for insurance and all the things we know are in
the law, along with the newly minted tax that used to be a penalty. i think it's very difficult, much more difficult, for republicans frankly to make the argument that we should take away thingsç that we know vote like because why wouldn't they like them. at this point, i think it becomes a tougher argument and i would actually be surprised if health care ends up being the central focus of this campaign that some people seem to think yesterday it's going to become. >> but michael steele, we've been complaining, and this past week mika called this a "seinfeld" campaign, because it was a campaign about nothing, if i'm running mitt romney's campaign i focus like a laser on what the supreme court of the united states is now calling the obama tax. i focus like a laser on it. if only because it finally gives my candidate something to talk
about that will help connect him with the base that doesn't like him, doesn't trust him, doesn't really want to get out and, you know, knock on doors for him. this changes that equation, possibly if they handle it the right way. >> there you go. that's the caveat right there. they're waking up this morning with $4.2 million more in the bank account. they've got a new stride in their step, a new walk about them. there's a fresh look at this campaign through what was termed the obama health care tax and they're going to run with that. here's the flip side on that you got to keep in mind. the president will come back and say, that's great but it was modeled after the very same massachusetts health care tax that mitt romney put in place. and so the reality there, becomes one where they have to navigate like the chief justice did, in threading that needle veryç carefully so that base y talked about doesn't walk away
intere from him. >> we talked about, harold, on this set, people like presidents that get things done, even if you don't agree with it. before this ruling, we were expecting some sort of loss and couldn't parse it any other way. a loss would have been a loss and a win is a win for this president. >> there's no doubt about it. two things in context. the court the commerce clause for the justification for this, labeled this as a tax talked about this morning. the medicaid component allows states to opt out of the medicaid aspect and not lose their current funding. so we talked about the po litization of this. understand, roberts is on sound legal footing to do this. my question is for david, are there democrats -- are democrats campaigning on the health law and in light of the supreme court decision are your sources, gregory, suggesting that now members of congress and senate running for re-election will campaign on this law and the fact or how will they defend against what is obviously going to be an onslaught of criticism from republicans that this,
indeed, is a tax? >> harold, my sense from talking to people is that members of the house or the senate, democrats particularly in tough re-election fights are going to be reluctant to put this as a centerpiece. even the white house and the president can certainly argue this is a central legislative achievement, upheld by the court and he can begin to make the case to a still skeptical public, even his advisors i spoke to yesterday, the overall theme is going to be middle-class security and this will be part of it. i'm not sure he wants to own this issue. he owns it, of course. i'm not sure he wants to beat it day after day in the way that i think mitt romney çdoes. i think a lot of people in congress who are still skeptical about it but they can do battle on this tax question. i mean the reality is, in massachusetts, the number was not huge of people who didn't ultimately buy the insurance so it wasn't a huge percentage that ultimately had to pay the penalty under the law that mitt romney had passed. i think this is going to be something that democrats can stand up and fight on since it
was always, you know, there's going to be some financial penalty. they can frame this as, you know, doing the right thing and doing your job as a citizen. >> joining us now from the supreme court, nbc news justice correspondent pete williams. pete, we were watching you yesterday as the decision came down. >> that's a high wire act. >> hello. >> i have no idea what just happened but this law has been upheld. i just -- i -- >> look -- >> i tell you what -- >> he was great. >> a little more articulate than that. >> but we were looking at you as you were doing this, it was a high-wire act and pete, once again, you got it right. that was -- i mean, mika, seriously -- >> of course he did. >> he did it right. >> but i'm telling you, that was really -- that was for us, drama going god, we hope pete got the -- >> the sobering thing is always in, you know, in the cool moment to sit and read the opinion and think, this isn't so hard to understand.
but -- >> but in the heat of the moment, i think actually because -- >> trying to read it while you walk out of the court, it's a little different. >> and, of course, as you know better than any of us here, so many times you read the beginning of the opinion that will suggest -? >> exactly right. >> suggest one conclusion, but then you you will find out that they are just setting up that legal bowling pin to knock it down. that didn't happen yesterday. got to say, though, i was absolutely floored that justice roberts was in the majority in a 5-4 be decision and not a 6-3 decision. what about you and court watchers? had you heard anybody around the court predicting this, that roberts would be the deciding vote? >> well, yes, and no. i mean yes, there were several people right after the argument who said, you know, chief justice roberts might be in the majority if the court decides to uphold it. i don't know anybody that predicted it would be on the taxing authority. none of the lower courts that
upheld this law, upheld it on that basis. it was always on the other issue, on the commerce clause issue, which the court -- this is two decisions in one. 5-4 decision saying you can't do this under the commerce clause and with a different line of judges and chief justice roberts again in the majority, 5-4 saying you can do it under the taxing authority. even though there were some people who predicted he would be in the majority i don't know anybody who predicted it would be based on the taxing authority with the possible exception of walter dellinger, a former solicitor general in the clinton administration. >> willie was bringing that up to me last night. >> in the break. >> did that congressman who taped prepared statements for the outcome, did he -- >> mr. mourdock. he's a candidate. >> did he prepare for his one? >> he did them all but that one. >> darn it. >> we've been talking about this tension for chiefç justice roberts between constitution and institution. generally speaking how much of -- is it a part of the job of
a chief justice to think broadly about public perception of the supreme court and not just to look at the law? >> well, it's -- i guess you can say it's an unofficial part of it because i think all the modern chief justices have worried about it or at least have thought about it. there's only so much they can do about it, of course, because like any of the rest of them, the chief justice has just one vote. and, you know, they all are very independent thinkers and he can't really push someone to vote one way or the other. but you're right, i mean they do think about it. i don't know how much there is that they can do about it. >> one other thing, pete, before you go. another surprise for me, anthony kennedy, sounding like a strident conservative yesterday in the decisions not the anthony kennedy that we've gotten to know over the past 20 years. >> well, i think on him, you know, stlifirst of all whatever opinions are they tend to be
clearly articulated. he's not a person who parses his words. sometimes he does join with the courts liberals. think about the decision, the lawrence v texas decision, you think about some affirmative action cases, but on the other hand he can be quality joining the conservatives. think about partial birth abortion stands out in my mind. so, you know, the term swing justice means that sometimes he's with the liberals when he's a full voiced with them on those issues and sometimes with the conservatives. i guess i'm not surprised. >> yeah. >> wow.ç >> he remains the most fascinating vote. thanks so much, pete williams. while pete was talking -- you did a great job. >> thank you. >> and while he was talking, david gregory, we had a graphic up for a second talking about the number of times that the conservative justices had sided with the liberal wing and i think -- john roberts one time. he picked a heck of a time. one time he sided with the
liberal wing since 2005. so this was, obviously, a very deliberate move to the center or left. >> it's so interesting, i was doing reading and talking to people, going back to 2007, when he became chief justice and his views about the role of the chief justice and the role of the court and the chief justice has been quite vocal and outspoken about his concern that too many 5-4 decisions are not durable over time. that they ultimately undermine the integrity of the court. you know, i think that was -- had to be in part on his mind. i don't think we'll know. there were those that would argue he made an intellectually honest decision, but there will be a lot of debate about that. this idea of being concerned about how polarized our institutions of government are, is pretty interesting. you know the story the new deal story about the associate justice rogers. you know, who had been
overturning new deal legislation and roosevelt talked about enlarging the court, court packing and when he changed his vote on a minimum wage vote he was -- he was talked aboutç as vote switched in time to save the nine. a lot of those -- people cheering for this chief justice who said this was his own version of sort of saving the integrity of the court. that will be those who believe this was an institutional choice. >> john meacham. >> gene, wanted to ask you, quickly, this is also the court that gave us citizens united. there's going to be people who are looking at roberts as a hero this morning, who will have to look at him in full. where do you think that will settle down particularly among people on the center left and -- >> yeah. i think the answer is we don't know. he's a young man, relatively young man. he's got a whole lot of judging to do over the next years. and it's certainly premature, way too early, to say this is
john roberts' legacy. this is certainly an important piece of it, but we're going to have to see is he going to continue this sort of, you know, umpire of the umpires' role that he seems to have played perhaps in yesterday's decision. will he be, once again, a full-throated conservative voice on the court? you know, with?o he'll see, as some very important decisions come up. next year they could take -- take a look at the constitutionality of the voting rights act next year among other cases. so we have a lot of seeing to do. >> and mika, gene robinson, of course, in "the washington post" has a column this morning, the supreme court helps heal the nation. he had an alternative column ready toç go which was entitle "the supreme court helps unleash a flood of blood in the streets of america." >> see. >> he was ready for anything.
>> the streets ran red with blood. >> thank god he set the right -- >> who do you have on "meet the press" this sunday? >> we'll talk to nancy pelosi on the program about this and other matters including that contempt vote in congress. also a debate on how this affects people's lives, this health care law and where it goes from here. debate between howard dean and governor jindal and our political round table as well. can i say, this does not underscore how elections are because presidents choose supreme court justices that has to be said. >> absolutely. just when it was getting -- >> it's great point. again, this is one way if the romney people play it well, this is one way for him to energize his conservative base. >> find the campaign. michael steele and eugene robinson, thank you as well. >> thank you, guys. >> we'll see your column eugene, in "the washington post." still ahead -- >> that column again, the supreme court helps heal the
nation. >> all right. the conversation continues with nbc's tom brokaw and chuck todd, also senior adviser to the obama re-election campaign david axelrod here on set in new york. up next, house majority leader congressman eric cantor with the republican response to the supreme court's decision. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks.
how do you know which ones to follow? the equity summary score consolidates the ratings of up to 10 independent research providers into a single score that's weighted based on how accurate they've been in the past. i'm howard spielberg of fidelity investments. the equity summary score is one more innovative reason serious investors are choosing fidelity. get 200 free trades today and explore your next investing idea. thought they were dead. huh? [ male announcer ] should've used roundup. it kills weeds to the root, so they don't come back. roundup. no root. no weed. no problem.
the critics say it is a tax increase. >> my critics say everything is a tax increase. my critics say i'm taking over every sector of the economy. you know that. look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we're going to have an individual mandateç or not, but -- >> you reject it's a tax increase. >> i reject that notion. >> welcome back to "morning joe." it is 25 past the hour. and that was president obama back in 2009 in the heat of the
health care debate arguing that the individual mandate was not a tax. yesterday, chief justice roberts disagreed, ruling that the law was constitutional under the government's power to levy taxes. that kind of complicates the conversation a bit. with us now from capitol hill, house majority leader and representative from virginia, congressman eric cantor. congressman, good to have you on the show this morning. >> thank you, mika. good morning. >> first of all, let me just let you respond to the ruling. >> well, you know, listen, i think most americans don't want the government coming in and telling them what kind of health care to have and most americans like the health care that they have now, they just think it's too expensive. and so the obama care law now having been sanctioned by the court, essentially sets up a big choice for the american people in november. but we've always been against this bill. we don't think it's the right direction for america to go and
we're going to continue to try to fight and repeal this bill and so the american people can realize for them once and for all the health care they want. >> let's address where this goes from here. joining the table tom brokaw and chief white house correspondent and political director and host of "the daily rundown" chuck todd. tom, i'll let you take it from here. >> do you think that nothing else needs to be done to the american health care çsystem, as you say people are happy with the health care they have, although they think it's expensive and isn't it incumbent upon the republican party to provide the american people with a choice here, a real alternative to address what everyone knows is a broken financial system in the health care system? >> i'm certainly not endorsing the status quo and i don't think any of us have. but what most people want is the ability to choose their own health care. they don't want government coming in and washington saying what kind of health care they should have and what they
shouldn't. that's what the obama care bill does. the president promised in the beginning of this discussion if people had health care they liked they could keep it. we know that's not the case. the president also said throughout the discussion, as did nancy pelosi, the democrats, this was not a tax, that this mandate was not a tax on individuals. well, we now know what the court said that it is a tax. so really, it's time for -- time to stop all the promises that are now broken and get back to the health care that people want. we know that families want choices for themselves. they don't want washington coming in and telling them what kind of health care to have. >> congressman, everything i've read about the health care bill, it is 2700 pages after all, but you have a health care plan that works for you, you can keep that health care plan. the government is not saying you have to give up what you have and go to only the plan that we want. what they're saying is you've got government exchange -- i mean exchanges organized now so you can buy into a program and it has provisions within it that
if you have a preexisting condition you can still get health care. >> here's how itç works, tom. the problem is there's no control on costs here. what will happen and is already beginning to happen is health care has become too costly for many people and businesses to afford. so they'll have no other option but to then pay this tax under the law and then people will go into government controlled health care. the kind of health care that washington says you should have, versus the kind of health care that people opt for themselves. that's what will happen. and so that's why we're saying we've got to work to bring down costs so health care can be more affordable and accessible for more people. that's where this entire process went awry. is when the conversation switched from trying to control costs, and it went totally to coverage and now we have a system that we're not going to be able to afford and, in fact, patients will not be able to determine the kind of health care they want anymore. moms won't be able to determine
the kind of pediatricians they have. i know that the people i represent down in richmond, they may not be able to choose the kind of specialists that they want to take their parents too. that's what will happen. >> chuck todd, first of all, and i don't want to bury the lead here. i've long been a believer in politics a win is a win is a win. this is a huge win for the president politically. >> yeah. >> that said, if i'm an individual congressman running, and i'm a republican and i've got mitt romney at the top of the ticket, somebody that doesn't excite my base. >> yeah. >> i'm kind of excited politically this morning for a couple reasons. one, i'm going to talk about the obama health care tax and two, i can start talking again about what eric is talking about and that is, the fact that this doesn't curb costs over the lonç run, the cbo estimates that followed over the past six months show this bill is a cohassle mess and nobody knows what's in it. >> we don't know on the cost front. that's the line. some of these are based on depending on how many people get
into the system, how many don't. set that aside and take your point on the politics which is, is mitt romney want to talk about health care? i don't think so. on house and senate races it is a different story. i think you're going to see the health care argument in house and senate but on the presidential level you won't. >> but -- >> let me ask you this, claire mccaskill -- >> the red state democrats. >> absolutely not. >> and we've seen it. claire mccaskill, the democratic nominee for senate, they're being very careful here. but the question i wonder and let me ask a question of congressman cantor, two things, one is, on the tax front quickly, is a speeding ticket a tax? by that same definition? you can avoid paying this tax if you get insurance. the second thing is, do you want to spend the first six months of 2013 relitigating health care? >> first of all, let me -- i can't respond to whether the speeding ticket would be considered a tax or not under
the states' authority any states' authority. what i can tell you is the court came down on this issue decided that it was a tax to coerce some type of behavior. i mean i disagree with the court's opinion here. but, you know, if you look at it, this is a victory for the president. he got his health care law upheld by the court. the american people don't like this bill. they don't want to be forced into the kind of health care that washington dictates. they want to be ableç to choos themselves. and so you're right, we don't want to be talking about trying to clean up the mess that the president's created. what we want to be talking about is the kind of health care people want and get on about growing this economy again so people can regain their sense of competence and optimism about the future for their kids. but the fact is, we've got this mess on our hands and this really underscores the importance of this election. it determines the direction that we're going to head in this country as far as health care is concerned and as you know for the last year and a half we've
been doing nothing but talking about the economy and why the policies of the obama administration has hampered the ability for small business men and women to get back into the game and create jobs. >> jon meacham. >> tom, one of the things that we know from the past 60 or 70 years is once a federal program is in place, as ronald reagan whom you covered on early on used to say, the closest thing to eternal life on earth is a government program. >> amen. >> once you have had -- it's passed however narrowly and now the supreme court affirm it, or uphold it, do you think there's -- there mai@÷i be political talk in repeal but what do you think the real chances of undoing this are? >> i think the chances of undoing it in totality are pretty slim and i think even congressman cantor would probably agree to that unless they have a massive shift to an even larger republican filibuster-proof senate in the fall. i do think we'll see fine tuning
along the way. i think what happened with the obama administration is that they put out this very complex plan, health care is always difficult for everyone to understand, and then immediately the republican party and understandably began to define it to the american people on their terms. that's what we have in place now. now that the supreme court has upheld the law, the president has a very small window as chuck and i were talk about earlier, to go back and fine tune it and redefine it for the american people and it seems to me that the republican party then has to have some kind of a framework of an alternative to what they're talking about because whatever else we think about health care, everybody knows that financially, the system is broken. you can still get cured here in ways you can't in other places and get treatment, but the cost system is a kind of a ponzi scheme. my question again to you, congressman, is when will we see a republican plan that would
replace more meritoriously the obama care plan that you're so unhappy with? >> tom, you knew back in 2009 when the obamacare bill was being considered on house floor we put forward our alternative. so to sit here and say we don't have a replacement is not correct. what we have now, though, is the challenge of repealing this law. and it is about this election because i disagree with you that we won't be able to overturn this law. most of this law and as you recall, the law itself was -- ended up signed into law by the president because the senate underwent the reconciliation process because we didn't -- they didn't any longer have the 60 vote filibuster-proof majority. if áq can see a republican victory in the senate, the congress, i am convinced will overturn the obama care law through the reconciliation process with the 51 vote margin. and that's when we can get about
the business of going back to that plan that you are asking for which is patient based, not washington based, giving folks a choice to choose for themselves what kind of coverage that they want, the kind of insurance company they want to deal with, open up the market, let people decide. and there's a lot of talk about well where is the republican plan? we have spelled out the kinds of things that we see to put patients back in charge. >> and as we talked -- >> i just want to make clear what i did say, maybe the congressman misheard me, is that they can repeal it but they have to get more votes in the senate, become filibuster-proof there. i don't doubt you can repeal it at some point. >> that's where i have a little difference with you because as you recall the bill was passed without a filibuster proof senate majority because they had lost the scott brown seat and scott brown won, robbed the senate of the 60 votes and the democratic side and so if we can win a majority of the senators, i believe we'll be able to
repeal the law in the senate. >> and that is, of course, mika, how -- that is how the democrats were able to pass it because they couldn't get to the 60, couldn't get closer, and the congressman brought up a very interesting name and it's a name that a lot of democratic operatives who were taking victory laps, yesterday you were running around in your front yard singing. remember -- >> i had a flag. >>ç democrats this morning tha are popping your champagne, remember the name scott brown because it was health care reform that allowed scott brown to take teddy kennedy's seat and it was health care reform in large part that helped republicans on the state level and on the national level when the largest legislative landslide in 2010 in u.s. history. if -- forget mitt romney because you're right he's fatally flawed on this issue, if legislative candidates across america start focusing on this issue, may not -- >> listen -- >> may not be good news for
democrats. >> let me respond to that. you talk about mitt romney, you know, he's always maintained that his job as governor of massachusetts is different than what he will be as president. he has come out squarely opposed to the obamacare bill and has said he will support repeal of the bill. and that's what's important here because that's what's at stake now that the court has decided on this law. >> right, eric. but you know that intellectually conservatives go back to the heritage foundation in 1992, 1993, newt gingrich in '93, '94 republicans for a long time have supported the individual mandate. people like you and i have not. mitt romney has talked about the individual mandate. a lot of people have. i think, though, legislative candidates and i think you would agree with me, were actually given a gift, a bit -- i think a bigger gift politically yesterday than mitt romney. >> well, there's no question that they've -- the court's decision underscores now and delineates what's at stake in
november. frankly we've been saying all along not just inç health care but in economic policy, foreign policy, the kind of leadership this country needs, is very much now in focus and i believe we're going to have a massive turnout of americans at the polls because things are so serious. >> congressman eric cantor, thank you very much. we will see you again soon. >> thank you m majority leader. >> tom brokaw and chuck todd stay with us if you can. coming up, judging the judges. we'll speak to former acting solicitor of the united states and also attorney general under the bush administration, alberto gonzales. "morning joe" is back in a moment. [ valeda ] since the very beginning, there's been this commitment to low prices. ♪ we might have had new ways to say it.
♪ high schools in six states enrolled in the national math and science initiative... ...which helped students and teachers get better results in ap courses. together, they raised ap test scores 138%. just imagine our potential... ...if the other states joined them. let's raise our scores. let's invest in our teachers and inspire our students. let's solve this. sven's home security gets the most rewards of any small business credit card! how does this thing work? oh, i like it! [ garth ] sven's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! woo-hoo!!!
so that's ten security gators, right? put them on my spark card! why settle for less? testing hot tar... great businesses deserve the most rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? here's your invoice.
wouldn't it be nice if there was an easier, less-expensive option than using a traditional lawyer? well, legalzoom came up with a better way. we took the best of the old and combined it with modern technology. together you get quality services on your terms, with total customer support. legalzoom documents have been accepted in all 50 states, and they're backed by a 100% satisfaction guarantee.
senator from wisconsin, senator ron johnson. gentlemen, thanks to you both for joining us this morning. senator johnson, i understand you see this as a body blow to freedom to read your words. >> well, i think what the supreme court basically did, justice roberts, he rmwsote the health care law. i guess it's not my definition of judicial restraint, but you know really, so what the supreme court has done is basically turned it back over to the political process to congress and so it's our job now to paint a picture of what our health care system is going to look like and our budget is going to look like under this health care law. i think the best way to describe it is what the health care law will do, increase the demand for health care and reduce the supply. that's a disaster in terms of what our health care system is going to look like. you know, again, the other thing -- >> go ahead. >> i was going to say before zeke you jump in, let me jump in. i've heard a lot of conservatives say this was a hidden tax all along. it seems that john roberts has just -- some conservatives would
think -- has outed the white house for being -- being tax -- people that increase taxes on american people. >> yeah. >> isn't that what conservatives have been saying? >> sure. let's face it, the president promised he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class by a penny with this health care law. that's been proven false now. i heard an earlier guest say it's very difficult to figure out what the cost of this is going to be. it's pretty easy to find out the minimum cost. take a look at the real budget window when they kicks in 2016 to 2025, will cost $2.4 trillion and we only have about a half tri trillion dollars, $500 billion of fees, tabses that will pay for that. about a $1.6 trillion budget deficit that will come out of reduced funding for medicaid and medicare. >> zekeç, a where do you want start? >> a lot of hyperbole, we're going to get rid of freedom in america and all of this.
let's be clear all that john roberts did was to change the labels. the fundamental underlying fact of the bill is not being rewritten. i think the other important point here is that this bill, curn temporariry to what the senator says -- contrary to what the senator says, gives american freedom. freedom if they have a preexisting condition they still get health insurance. freedom to allow them to choose which insurance company, doctor, hospital they want. they get more freedom because they can get preventative tests without any copayment. it eliminates people who are basically not pulling their own weight by not having health insurance and yet using the system. i would have thought that individual responsibility would appeal to you, joe, that's really what we should have. everyone needs to take responsibility and all the individuals mandate -- >> hey, zeke -- >> he's not arguing. >> i don't know, zeke, if you were so caught up in the excitement of the moment, but you're having a debate here with
the senator. don't drag me -- don't shoot me. >> oh joe, i heard you say you weren't for the individual mandate. >> i'm not. >> you're a conservative, you want people to assume responsibility. this enforces that assuming responsibility. >> enforces that -- >> you >> and it forces that. i don't want to get into a constitutional argument, but i am a conservative with a large c and a small c. like justice roberts and the others, i don't want the federal government to mandate what peopleç have to do proactivelyn buying health care insurance. that frightens me. zeke, i have a senator here. don't debate me. senator johnson, respond and zeke, jump in. you are worse than re and rom combined. go ahead, senator. >> i agree with you. the american people don't like being told what to do and they don't like the irs being in charge of collecting that
penalty. i would like to think there is a pot of gold at the end of the obama care rainbow and the doctor will be talking about the wonderful things in the future. the promises made have not come true. he said he would reduce the plan by $2500 by the end of his first term. the cost is up by over $2,000. he said if you like your health care plan, you can keep it no matter what. period. that's not going to be true. i tried to point out in the real budgetary window and when the costs kick in, that's $1.6 trillion. i provided a graph. that is a serious threat to the budget. you have medicaid providers dropping out that refuse to seek patients. we will dump another 20 to 30 people in the medicaid and where we will turn our system into. i don't think the american people will like it. >> senator, help me out. as i look at the budget office
numbers up to this point and without this health care plan it will add more than $200 billion to the deficit.ç with the health care plan, it will be additional. the savings and medicare and other health care expenditures will pull that number down. not all the way to zero, but make it more imbalanced. >> it's easy to take the numbers and the minimum cost to this thing and move it forward and the total cost will be $2.4 trillion. in the first 10-year window was a half trillion dollars in taxes, fees, and penalties. all taxes now and reductions in reimbursement to providers in medicare and medicaid. as you move it forward, you only have about a half trillion in taxes.
that leaves a deficit gap. that's a huge budget gap. i would like to think this would reduce the budget, but i don't think where the results are accurate. when they passed medicare they said it would cost $12 billion and it ended up costing almost ten times the original estimate. >> i don't want the senator as my accountant. we will have a half trillion dollars in the first decade and in the expenses, they are this large. you have to look at expenses and cost and revenue in the same window and not switch your window. here's the important thing that i thinkç tom emphasized. this bill actually reduces the deficit by $100 billion. we provided revenue and savings.
when they did part d on medicare, they didn't pay at all and it all went into deficit. we are the fiscally responsible group. >> a window into the next few months. thank you. >> quite a window. love you guys. thank you for coming. take it on the road. >> love you too, joe. >> whatever, zeke. i'm talking about you. >> you are watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. we'll be right back. ovider is dt but centurylink is committed to being a different kind of communications company by continuing to help you do more and focus on the things that matter to you.
olaf's pizza palace gets the most rewards of any small business credit card! pizza!!!!! [ garth ] olaf's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! put it on my spark card! [ high-pitched ] nice doin' business with you! [ garth ] why settle for less? great businesses deserve the most rewards! awesome!!! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet?
one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com. if you made a list of countries from around the world... ...with the best math scores. ...the united states would be on that list. in 25th place. let's raise academic standards across the nation. let's get back to the head of the class. let's solve this.
renaissance. i hope that i'm wrong. i hope that this on my part proves unjustify and judge roberts will show himself to not only be an outstanding legal thinker, but someone who upholds the historic role as a check on the ma jor it of the executive voice. >> whatever the politics, today was a victory for those whose lives will be more secure for the supreme court decision to uphold it. because of this law, there other americans, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, fathers and mother who is will not have their fortunes on chance. these are the americans of whom we pass this law. >> top of the hour, welcome back to "morning joe."
senior adviser to the obama campaign, david axelrod. good to have you. >> do you see it over here? >> if you win the supreme court ruling. >> i was watching the tape and the thing that strikes me, seems like the president's hair has gotten grayer. >> yes. that tens to happen.?h@&h(lc% you dying yours? >> trying to hang on to the ones i have. >> let's look quickly at headlines. regardless of your ideology, a historic day in the "new york times" and "the washington post." talking about the health care law being upheld. the boston globe, one word. upheld. what does it mean? >> you get a lot of newspapers in here for once. >> i think that it's your job and perhaps my job to chew over the politics of this.
i city as a victory for obama and people all over the country that are more secure because of this law. i have a personal perspective on this because i have a child who had a chronic illness from a very early age. when i was a young reporter i almost went bankrupt because we couldn't afford the treatments even though we had insurance. that will be a thing of the past. there kids up to 26 getting insurance all over the country. people won't hit the lifetime caps. seniors won't need help with prescription drugs and there is a range of things happening. 17 million kids with preexisting conditions. i'm saying is we view this, we score it as a political event. it's a meaningful event in the lives of people across this country. >>ç i couldn't agree more. >> that are shocks me. >> i was surprised by the
ruling. i was truly surprised. >> john roberts of all people. >> i would love to know the inside story of the reaction within the white house and the campaign as well. were people surprised? >> i tell you, i was sitting in a room in our campaign manager's office during this health care debate. all the kids in the campaign were out in the bull pen watching on tv. it was projected on the wall and so on. we are looking at our devices. we are watching twitter and the first thing that comes across is the cnn piece that said mandate struck down and there is a big cheer outside. what the heck is this? >> we hired the wrong people. >> they are moles! >> that wasn't the reason. >> clearly they were watching the proper news channel and got
it right the first time instead of you guys getting it wrong. i had to get that in there. pete williams has done this time and again. he deserves a lot. he read past the first sentence. >> i gather the same happened in the white house. then the fact of what happened became clear to us. we both kind of got overcome and it was an emotional moment. we went outside and the kids were cheering andç crying and hugging. it was a reminder of why you do the work. >> the political reality is that in any poll you look at, sometimes by 2-1, the american people don't like the idea of the mandate that they have to buy insurance as a record by the government. that was the not changed yesterday and justice roberts in his startling decision to like the majority opinion said this is no reflection of the wisdom of the law. that is the political reality
you have to deal with. you are pushing a rock up the hill when it comes to a mandate. >> that's true, although we should point out it will apply tofu people. most people have insurance and most people who don't will get help to get insurance. there is a hardship exemption. this is only for people who can afford it and end up in emergency rooms and get free care and drive up the premiums. don't ask me about it. ask mitt romney. he was the defender of this concept. >> this happens to be true, joe. >> i grew out of that six months ago. it's fine. >> this is the issue, then he needs to explain why he thought it was good public policy. >> i am when it comes to federal powers, i am a conservative and i said it with a small and a large c, but i always said and newt gingrich said let the
states be the legislative laboratories and experiment with health care and welfare reform.ç let's get the best idea state by state. mitt romney has not articulated that well, but that is what a lot of conservatives believe. >> that is over because the supreme court passed and it's not a matter of public policy or not. i'm talking about it as well. he made a powerful case for why we shouldn't have free riders in the system. he thought it was good public policy. does he not think it is now? he ought to answer that question. >> you talked about the benefits people get. this is one of the reasons why you lose the economic argument with the public on the politics side of this. the common sense part of this says more people will get benefits and more people will get insurance. no preexisting conditions and bringing costs down?
people can't compute that. that is i think the issue. they don't believe you are offering more and it costs less. that doesn't happen in everyday life. >> what much of this has to do with people's relationship with their insurance companies. a lot of those economies are affected by people being in the system. >> you are assuming that insurance companies are taking less profit. >> but the law requires that they spend 80% of their premiums on health care which is why in three months, 13 million americans are going to get rebates. >> you are goingç to control ts and that's how costs come down? >> the best practices that you encourage whether it's reducing hospital infection rates or health care it or zeke emmanuel was on here earlier. you can speak on the things that we are doing now and can do to
reduce the cost of health care that is absolutely essential. >> let's bring in john meachem. >> go for it. >> unquestionably in the next couple of months, you will hear tax, tax, tax and you would agree there is not a wide appreciation of the virtues of the bill as you and the president see them. how do you fix that? >> again, whether you call it a mandate or a tax, it is a penalty of what i described of the sort that mitt romney defended. if you can afford health care and choose not to have it, you can't go to emergency rooms and hospitals and get free care and drive everybody else's premiums up. it's a matter of responsibility which is why i assume that the governor would support it and others support it. i think the american people will
understand. he doesn't really articulate the cause every day. there is a difference between the governor of a state supporting a public policy and thinking it could be constitutional in that state and not believing it could beç constitutional nationwide under the constitution. >> you know what, you and i are really smart guys, but i leave it to the supreme court. you were the one who was disappointed we voted against roberts. >> we live in a constitutional system. >> if i'm not mistaken, i remember both the story goes that both clinton and obama wanted to support roberts and the two thought the other would vote against him and use it in the primary. every roberts decision, don't you lie to me, david, everyone
would be hung around his neck throughout iowa and new hampshire and beyond. >> i remember the conversations and what the period said privately and publicly, i think he is every time the powerful come up against the powerless that the powerful will win. i don't think that's what the court system should be. >> will there be any fine tuning between now and the election or the:içmk foreseeable future? what have you learned since it was installed and not just given the public reaction, but how it operates in the workplace and within the health care system and for individuals? >> we made changes and adjustments and when you take thisç on, it has to be a work progress. we need to move forward and deal with deficiencies in the plan
and problems as they arise. we shouldn't go back to square one. everyone understands they are important in their lives and the life of the country. there is no doubt that nothing is perfect and we will have to adjust along the way. >> there will be no alteration of a mandate. >> we need everywhere in the system and people driving up premiums by getting free care. they won't buy insurance. you can't have a system where people apply for insurance when they get sick. that doesn't make sense. >> congressman kantor was on and said one of the things that happened was because of the economy and american businesses are drawing down on the health care plans that they provide and more people are being thrown into that never, neverland of not having coverage and they will be forced to buy under your plan and it becomes much more of
a government-run health care system. >> this system, we adopted which was a free market model and there is going to be a health exchange in which private insurers compete for your business. we create scales so that if you don't have insurance, you can get insurance at a competitive rate. this is a free market system and as i said, theç authors of it were not democrats, but republicans. it's the republican party moved so far to the right, they disavow the ideas they once championed. >> conservatives champion parts of this. let's bring john back in. go ahead. >> david described what must be incredibly frustrating. i hate you and the left thinks you went out. you have to think how this is going to look in history because
of the way everybody is wired. at this point how does the president view the health care and the decision compared to other things he has done and confronted? >> the president believes our fundamental challenge is to bring and restore a measure of economic security in the middle class and a chance for people to work. this pressure of health care costs is one of the great pressures on middle class families. he believe what is we have done together will make a huge difference now and in the future for the economic security of those families. he feels very, very good about this. obviously yesterday was a big day. >> let's talk implications. i think david and i were talking about this offset. i think it's a wash on the presidential level because of mitt romney's past in massachusetts. i do think that legislatively in the races, it was such a huge
issue in 2010 and the"li landslide if you take the state and national elections. i think in modern history. >> talk about the moderate democrats that winced when the decision came down and the impact it will have. >> some of them, what would life have been like? >> the political directors. there is no democrat. both tough races. they would have been in a harder situation having to explain how they voted for something unconstitutional. that still would have been worse. less popular in the red states in particular. i think the energy that the republicans think they have benefits them. and the presidential level.
messaging-wise, is it smart for romney to go on this. do you tempt fate? we never litigate health care. he never got it litigated. does he tempt this man to put together the best of video on mitt romney and health care? those ads never ran. rick perry would have done it had perry been there. that team had they been a serious player. >> let me correct you. rick perry would have done it if they had not thought the election was in 2015. i am stunned that we never saw two thingsç in the primary. one is the picture of mitt romney smiling and two, the editorial that was a 2009 race that specifically argued that the president should put this in a mandate during the debate. >> it is one of the things that litigated, but i want to ask about one thing that the president always says that i
don't understand how you guys can claim. if you like the insurance that you are in, you can keep it. i like my insurance. comcast can change it tomorrow. there is not much i can do. that's true today. >> as a consequence of this law, there were fear tactics that suggested we would take your comcast insurance away from you and you know that's not true. i want to respond to one thing you said, things have changed since 2010. legislators may be tempted, but what they will confront are young people who are insured who were not before. senior citizens who are getting help who were not before. senior citizens who were getting insurance before. these are real human stories. they will confront those and i wouldn't be glib well b this. >> i am not being glib.
if we were tempted to be glib, i wouldn't. >> i am not going to answer, honestly. >> is the election going to be more about the economy or the health çcare? >> i think that it is absolutely going to be about the economy and what we have to do to rebuild the middle class. it's not enough to get people back to work. we have to make sure work pays and if you can get ahead. this is something the governor doesn't understand. if we go become to where we were before the prices, everything is fine and he did well, but most americans didn't. >> david axelrod, thank you so much. say i had to susie. >> thank you. >> chuck todd and tom brocaw. thank you as well. we will talk to alberto gonzalez who helped john roberts for the supreme court. also, we have to vet him.
also neal katyal, but first bill with a look at the weather. >> the worst heat waves come in july and august, but the fact that we are in the midst of this heat wave in june doesn't make a good picture for the rest of summer. four cities hit the hottest ever recorded in the month of june. 107 in little rock and 108 in st. louis. you are not far behind. heat advisories from kansas to the mid-atlantic. we are getting ready for a hot period from charlotte to new york city. here's how hot it will be today. we will be just as hot in st. louis. we will watch the heat increasing from raleigh northward up to about d.c. we should be at about 100ç degrees. d.c. in the upper to mid 90s and as we go through saturday, a lot doesn't change and the humidity levels will increase especially in the southeast. we will have dangerous heat index from atlanta through north
and south carolina and as hot as 115 to 120. the peak of the afternoon saturday and sunday. we cool off a couple of degrees in st. louis on sunday, but when you are 108 to 102, does it really make a difference? what a stretch of weather in st. louis. have a great weekend, everyone. brewed by starbucks. with the capital one cash rewards card you get a 50% annual bonus. and everyone likes 50% more cash -- well, except her. no!
but, i'm about to change that. ♪ every little baby wants 50% more cash... ♪ phhht! fine, you try. [ strings breaking, wood splintering ] ha ha. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. ♪ what's in your wallet? ♪ what's in your...your... ♪ what's in your wallet? focus lolo, focust sanya let's do this i am from baltimore south carolina... bloomington, california... austin, texas... we are all here to represent the country we love this is for everyone back home it's go time. across america, we're all committed to team usa. wouldn't it be nice if there was an easier, less-expensive option than using a traditional lawyer? well, legalzoom came up with a better way.
we took the best of the old and combined it with modern technology. together you get quality services on your terms, with total customer support. legalzoom documents have been accepted in all 50 states, and they're backed by a 100% satisfaction guarantee. so go to legalzoom.com today and see for yourself. it's law that just makes sense.
chief justice roberts for the court. former u.s. attorney general under george w. bush, alberto gonzales. thanks very much. >> let's begin with attorney general gonzales. i want to get your reaction to the decision and what are you saying to conservatives who are accusing you of helping to vet him? >> i think most of the angst in the conservative circles about the decision is really unhappiness about the policy. quite frankly, they wouldn't care about the reasoning or the route to file the decision if they come out in the way they wanted to have the health care law struck down. i have a great deal of confidence and faith and that hasn't been shaken one bit by
the decision yesterday. i was surprised about how we reached the result that was announced yesterday, but i stand by theç recommendation that i made with president bush regarding john roberts. >> i was shocked as well. everybody was shocked. it wouldn't have been shocking with john roberts being the decider. it was shocking, but after you read the opinion, but it's an extraordinarily narrowly written opinion. he did not allow the white house to expand the commerce clause. that was what most conservatives were concerned about in the first place. >> one of the hall marks and the things that was impressive to me was his discipline. deciding cases on the most narrow ground possible to not reach constitutional issues that
did not need to be reached to resolve the dispute before the court. in many ways that is consistent with that principal. >> neal katyal, does the out come make sense to you and what parts might you not agree with? >> it does make a lot of sense and i was here in march and i thought the supreme court would uphold this as constitutional and some including joe gave me a lot of criticism and thought it wouldn't. >> for the record, you said it was going to be an 8-1 vote, my man. do not even come this way. >> i don't think it was 8-1. my point is thatç i did think the time and i still do that there is a presumption that the chief justice reflected that and a careful opinion. i think that general gonzalez is right. at the time that john roberts was being confirmed at the
supreme court, those of us who worked with him said this is a fair-minded person who really approaches things regardless of who is on what side. we took a lot of criticism from the folks on the left. i thought yesterday's decision, president obama is the ultimate victor in the decision and the american people with that upheld, but so too is the court and the roberts court. you see something that should be a hall mark of our society. reason and approaching the issues a politically. i did think there was a lot of confusion between policy and the law leading up to the case. >> good to have you on this morning. i wonder what you think the implication was this decision are beyond the affordable care act to say that justice roberts did in a matter of speaking, uphold the commerce clause aspect saying it did not apply,
but this is a tax. do you see this having a broader implication? >> i think it's possible. i wrote a piece in the "new york times" saying that -- and i think general gonzales is right. the roberts court is marked by judicial restraint, but there is language this this opinion that could beç used in a much more activist sense to strike down federal power in a number of areas. it will defend on the future direction of the court. there is language in here that is broader and reigning in the spending power, for example. we will have to see what happens. >> john meachem had a result in the house of representatives where the current attorney general will be held in contempt. >> if you are an attorney general and held in contempt, that was a good day to do it. it's unusual when that was a small story. >> it's never a good day for
that. what is your sense of the fast and furious story and the standoff between general holder and congress? >> i'm not going to comment other than to say it normally doesn't get this far and there is a combination that can be reached between the executive and legislative branch. beyond that i'm not going to comment on what's going on with respect to general holder. >> why not? >> we want you to. it's extraordinary, is it not, that an attorney general is held in contempt by the house. >> this didn't happen to john mitchell. >> it is extraordinark. no question about that and you are doing a good job covering it. as i said, it's extraordinary because normally these things
can find there is a combination on the switch between both branches of government and part may be the fact that we are in the political season and part is that we did have a reason and there were bases to find out what happened. i am sure the executive branch is anxious to know what happened. beyond that, i just don't think it's appropriate for me to comment on it. >> alberto gonzales, thank you. neal katyal, thank you as well. >> thank you, guys. john meachem, it is historic what happened yesterday. i'm just looking and this contempt vote gets very little play. >> it was on the major -- >> is it really? >> you know, i just think regardless of how you feel about holding the attorney general in contempt, yesterday was horrific day to do it.
for a thousand different reasons. if you are a republican interested in the winning swing voters in the fall. >> it just makes -- i'm talking again the timing. it makes them look partisan. >> it makes look partisan. >> they are doing the people's business as they see it. >> do it on monday.ç >> i agree. i think every summer, you talked about this. every summer it seems there is a season of scandal. i don't know what it is about warm weather and subpoenas, but there is a section in washington. i think everybody and you said this. i think there is some of that going on in the fast and furious. >> willing to do it three hours
after one of the most historic decisions in the supreme court in the past couple of decades. i saw this during the clinton impeachment. so many times we were so, so interested in getting here. we overreached. i was at the front of the pack overreaching and after you charge up pickets, after you do pickets charge, the tenth time and get shot down, there may be a better way to do this. >> i wondered to what end. the president invoked executive privilege and they are not going to get the documents out of the white house. i don't know what they are going to do but sides a political statement. >> wall street's reaction to the supreme court ruling. brian sullivan joins us next.
where your brother is ambassador. >> he said cajun can't come. just me, jim, and the girls. >> it's july. can you people what i do in july? >> you promised yourself you wouldn't cry. >> i promised myself i wouldn't cry. i am a trailblazer because of what i do in nantucket. >> you do a lot of work around murray's shop. >> the joke is five years old. >> the kids! >> some of them driving range rovers as old as 2008. >> you see the khakis and the polo shirts. the oxford cloth. one of theç buttons. it's going to be a tough week. i will hold it together. >> the ambassador with the
dragon tattoo. >> no tattoos in nantucket. seriously. >> i need more before i go on vacation with my family. cnbc's brian sullivan joins us now. what's the impact of the health care ruling on wall street. >> i will answer that question, but i have to point something out listening to you guys chat. i come on this fine program and i work for a business network and they are flaming on the mouth of the 1%. you goys are going to barcelona and i am going to the upper peninsula of michigan. you guys are going to barcelona and your range rover broke down. they won't let me on nantucket. >> the upper peninsula, man. you are acting like that's -- >> i go up there and i grow a beard and i'm a tree hater. i hunt and fish. >> remember that story?
chop down every tree in lake forest. >> a shout out to my homeys. let's talk about health care. >> seriously, that is one place i have always wanted to go. >> you should go. >> i heard it is gorgeous. >> stunning. there is dunes that you think you are in an exotic location and if you like burgers, go to collide's drive in. i drive there inç august and i have two dogs. i don't want to leave them. >> you love dogs. mika, it's like the president. here dog never knows if this is the day it's going to get eaten. have you been to the upper peninsula? >> no. >> i never have been, but i am worried about the self loathing vacation. >> that's a great place.
>> he is disturbed. >> beer is a dollar and beer is a dollar and you have bald eagles and bears. nice to be out in the new york area. >> brian, why don't you get out early. >> brian, thank you. the one-word answer, do they like what happened yesterday? >> they like it because it's good for business. >> all right. have fun, man. >> enjoy your vacations and bring me back some cashmere. in reference to the song. >> look at you, huey long. good lord. i have something good for you next. herman cain. >> i loved him! >> remember when he addressed america about an alien attack. he has a new address from the oval office on the daily show. you can't miss it.
what happens when classroom teachers get the training... ...and support they need? schools flourish and students blossom. that's why programs like... ...the mickelson exxonmobil teachers academy... ...and astronaut sally ride's science academy are helping our educators improve student success in math and science. let's shoot for the stars. let's invest in our teachers and inspire our students. let's solve this.
>> you remember fondly the daily show invited herman cain on and >> the crisis. >> okay, so reports have come in that nicholas cage has stolen the constitution of the united states. look into that camera and convince nicholas cage to give that constitution back. >> nicholas, bring back our constitution.
i respect you, cage, but get a grip. i have instructed the united states military, the fbi, the cia, to do everything in their power to bring that constitution back. >> okay, sir, i have an update. good news and bad news. which do you want first? >> let's start with the good news. >> good news is you got him. congratulations, sir. >> we've got him. >> do you want the bad news? >> yes. >> he didn't have the constitution, sir. he didn't have it. >> he didn't have the constitution? >> no, he didn't have it. so you now have to address nicholas cage fans all over the world and explain to them why you killed their favorite actor.
three, two, one, go. >> my bad. >> herman cain. he's great. it's time to live wider awake. only the beautyrest recharge sleep system combines the comfort of aircool memory foam layered on top of beautyrest pocketed coils to promote proper sleeping posture all night long. the revolutionary recharge sleep system... from beautyrest. it's you, fully charged.
thor's couture gets the most rewards of any small business credit card. your boa! [ garth ] thor's small business earns double miles on every purchase, every day! ahh, the new fabrics, put it on my spark card. [ garth ] why settle for less? the spiked heels are working. wait! [ garth ] great businesses deserve the most rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? [ cheers and applause ] what's in your wallet? ♪ hello...rings ♪ what the... what the... what the... ♪ are you seein' this? ♪ ♪ uh-huh... uh-huh... uh-huh... ♪ ♪ it kinda makes me miss the days when we ♪ ♪ used to rock the microphone ♪ back when our credit score couldn't get us a micro-loan ♪ ♪ so light it up! ♪ even better than we did before ♪ ♪ yeah prep yourself america we're back for more ♪ ♪ our look is slacker chic and our sound is hardcore ♪ ♪ and we're here to drop a rhyme about free-credit-score ♪ ♪ i'm singing free-credit-score-dot-com ♪ ♪ dot-com narrator: offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com.
>> time for the week in review. >> i want to say thank you for youkilis. >> at number three -- >> i department think i would get any boos. >> president obama stirred up red sox nation at a fund-raiser in boston when he reminded them his sox swiped fenway folk hero% kevin youkilis in a trade. >> i should not have brought up baseball. my mistake. my mistake. you have to know your crowd. >> the white house argued that the audience was not booing, but boston fans were paying tribute to the dearly departed youkilis.
forensics experts agreed that nobody cares. justin bieber and selena gomez. they have overcome their very different national origins and become apparently a happy couple. illinois congressman luis gutierrez argued on the floor against the arizona immigration law. with an assist from the all american-looking, but ultimately canadian biebs. >> justin, when you perform in phoenix, bring your papers. >> the point about ethnic perceptions was under cut by his wild irresponsible claim that c-span has young viewers. >> this is for the young c-span. justin bieber and selena gomez. >> the number one story of the week upheld.
>> one of the most anticipated decisions. they upheld the health care case. >> this is a big victory for the president. >> an unlikely hand. a george w. bush appointee and progressive icon, president obama's signature legislative achievement çsurvived. >> today's decision was a victory for people all over the count rye. >> a jub lailant feeling for executive director of the dnc and tweeted after the ruling that it's constitutional. on the other side, sarah palin called the president a liar and boldly declared the death of freedom. while mitt romney and other republicans vowed to repeal it. >> i will act to repeal obama care. >> millions of americans may have an irs problem. >> a full repeal. >> repealing the harmful law. >> i scheduled a vote for the
repeal. >> republicans scrambled back to the core critique that he is insensitive to the concerns of everyday baseball fans. >> i am just saying you have to change the color of his socks. >> he liked that one. up next, what if anything did we learn today? last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans... in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spot on the gulf... and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home.
time to talk about what we learned. >> chief justice john roberts, you can buy shirts on line with the hope on robert's face. >> that's awesome. isn't that funny how it switched like that? >> incredible. >> exactly. affirmative action case comes out. >> for you are attorney general of the united states and will be held in contempt by the house of representatives, take the day of landmark decisions inside the paper. >> serious. the john mitchell standard has been breached. >> because of eric holder, that wild man. >> he is just one man. he passed health care. incredible week. >>