tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC March 8, 2017 12:00am-1:01am PST
♪ evony: the king's return. download now and play free. tonight on "all in." this will be a plan where you can choose your plan. you know what the plan is, this is the plan. >> trump care has landed. >> look at the size. this is the democrats, this is us. >> widespread backlash grows as republicans revolt against a republican bill. >> why are conservatives so opposed. >> and trump care supporters make their case. >> rather than getting that new iphone, maybe they should invest in their own health care. >> can the republican plan work? as we get our first estimates for how many americans may lose their health care. plus -- >> this is the obama care replacement plan that everyone has been asking for, the plan
that the president ran on. >> can trump care live up to candidate trump's promises. >> everybody's got to be covered. this is an unrepublican thing for me to say. >> and more incoming from the white house on the president's wiretap claims. >> no, the president has not asked him. >> the senate presses sessions for answers. >> i think senator sessions should come back. it's been 24 hours and the votes are out. everyone hates trump care. don't take my word for it, just listen to the conservative republicans who view the bill and the words of senator rand
paul as dead on arrival and an attempt at obamacare light. >> it's not the obama care replacement plan. not the obamacare repeal plan we've been hoping for. this is instead a step in the wrong direction. do we need to lower the bar in what we believe is conservatives simply because a republican is now in the white house. >> i think what's been put forward currently divides us, there is a way forward. but the current way forward, i don't think is going to work. >> it's not just them, a near united front of influential conservative groups, including heritage action, and the koch brothers for american prosperity have come out for the bill. four relatively moderate republican senators have warned they can't support a bill that would leave millions of medicaid recipients uninsured. the objects to the bill's provision defunded planned parenthood.
and while the gop is fractured, congressional democrats appeared fully united in their opposition. >> well, trumpcare is here and you are going to hate it. this is a dumpster fire of of a bill that was written on the back of a napkin behind closed doors. >> the american hospital association says it can not support the bill in its current form. the very powerful aarp is complaining the bill includes an age tax that will cost older fr that's the ad they're running and even steve bannon's old haunt breitbart is attacking what it calls obamacare 2.0 for -- and i'm quoting here -- "giving illegal aliens health care through identity fraud." go figure. the response is unsurprising, not just because remaking one-fifth of the american economy is, as democrats can tell you, no easy task, the bill the republicans have cobbled together announced to a set of half measures that grew out of a series of political calculations as an attempt to solve a health care problem which resulted in a
bill that satisfies almost no one. >> we actually ran on a repeal and replace plan that's what this is, the repeal and replace plan. now i'm intent on making sure we fulfill our promises. >> representative jason chaffetz admitted it could lead to less coverage and suggested americans will have to choose between health care and a smartphone. >> americans have choices. and they have to make a choice. so rather than getting that new iphone they love and they want to spend hundreds of dollars, maybe they should invest in their own health care. they have to make those decisions themselves. >> at the white house briefing sean spicer brought out stacks of paper showing the gop bill was smaller than obamacare and thought that proved its superiority. >> look at the size. this is the democrats, this is us. there is -- i mean, you can't get any clearer in terms of this is government, this is not.
>> big stacks and little stacks. spicer also brought out health and human services secretary tom price who pointedly ignored a question about whether the bill will cause millions to lose health insurance. >> reporter: can you guarantee this plan will not have a markedly negative impact on the deficit or result in millions of americans losing health insurance? >> what i can say that the goal and desire of the individuals on the hill is to make certain this does not increase the cost to the federal government? president trump. >> president trump for his part's response was utterly disconnected. >> i think we're going to have something that's going to be much more understood and much more popular than people can imagine. >> because the bill has yet to be scored by the congressional budget office, we don't know how many people would lose coverage. we know it's bad news for elderly, working poor and sick people. it does add up to the big tax cut for the rich. one preliminary analysis finds
obamacare enrollees would be charged $1500 more per year with older americans particularly hard hit. according to the analysis, americans ages 55 to 64 would see their yearly costs ince by more than $5,000. joining me now, republican representative buddy carter of georgia, a member of the house energy and commerce committee which released the bill. sir, thank you. i'd like you to respond to process critiques coming from your colleagues on the republican side. this is mike lee. "this is exactly the type of back room dealing and rushed process we criticized democrats for. it is not what we promised the american people." your response? >> well, first of all, i have a lot of respect for senator lee and i think he's on the right track. however, i have to disagree and respectfully disagree. this is what we've been talking about. what we have rolled out, this plan, is simply going to bring about more accessible, more
affordable, more patient-centered health care. >> i know that's the line that you guys have, but i want to talk about the timeline here. you have paul ryan talking about marking this up in a matter of weeks and passing out of committee into the floor of the house. you have mitch mcconnell saying it will get a floor vote in the senate by april recess. that's five weeks. do you remember when the affordable care act got its floor vote in the house back in 2009? >> well, i wasn't here, so no i don't remember that. >> it was in november of that year. it was nine months of legislative process, including over 100 amendments and you guys thought that that was too fast to process. >> well, unfortunately we don't have that luxury that the democrats had because health care is imploding right now because obamacare is imploding. we have to do something. if we don't do something and rescue health care now and do it quickly, then we're going to have a mess in this country. >> congressman, i know you've said this before, you said it earlier today that obamacare is in a death spiral, this is a line i've heard from paul ryan and others. >> and you've heard that from the ceo of aetna as well. >> that's right, the ceo of aetna is one individual who used that phrase.
however, the american academy of actuaries, the folks that actually do the calculations for the technical term that is a death spiral, an actuarial phenomenon, explicitly disputes the claim. you have mario molina of molina health care which runs bunch of aca plans, he sd that taking away the mandate, as your plan proposes, could push premiums up 30% in a year and inaugurate a death spiral. >> well, one things is for sure, that wouldn't take getting used to because premiums on average have gone up over 25% this year alone and in seven states they've gone up over 50%. >> right, but -- >> obamacare has been a total failure. and 16 counties in tennessee -- >> i understand that, congressman. >> -- a health care plan. >> so if the solution to obamacare, if you say the bad old days of obamacare premium hike 25%, this new plan will push premiums up 30% next year, that's not the solution. >> that's not if solution and that's not what i said.
what i've said is our plan is going to increase competition. it's going to increase choices, it's going to increase patient-centered care. by increasing competition and choices, we'll bring health care costs down. we've been working on this plan for many months now and we've come up with it, it's a better way. it's a way to get better choices and better opportunities for people. >> choices and competition are the watch words i've heard and i want to circle back to that. you said patient-centered care. secretary price talked about that today and i think everyone agreed patients are at the center of health care. how does it help patients to repeal a tax break for health ceos making over $500,000 a year. >> this plan does not discriminate against any group or industry. we're making sure everyone is treated fairly. and that's very important in our plan. >> how does that help -- i'm asking how that helps patients. that's a provision of the bill. it's not a very long bill. you made sure to include a tax break for health ceos making
over $500,000 a year, how does that help patients? >> this is not a tax break. it's not punitive like obamacare is. >> but it's changing existing law. >> that's what we did not want to do. what we wanted to do was to be as fair as we could to everyone invoed, discriminate -- o health care ceos? >> not to discriminate against any group. >> do you think that has a connection to whether patients get good care? >> i think it's very -- look, obamacare has built up obstacles. we're trying to take down obstacles, to cut the red tape between patients and health care professionals so that individuals can have control. they can be empowered and have -- empower -- and have control over their own health care. and make health care decisions between the pharmacist, between the doctor and between the patient and not have all those obstacles in between. >> i hear that and i hear that that's what secretary price said. i want to ask you this question,
which secretary price didn't answer today. the president has said in the campaign trail everybody is going to have insurance and i want you to just say for the record, can you guarantee that millions of people won't lose health insurance under this plan? >> what i can guarantee is that this plan will create more competition and more choices for people. it will empower them. it will rescue health care in our society. >> but -- i have to know crucially, that's not an answer. can you guarantee millions of people won't lose health insurance under this plan? >> i cannot guarantee anything. but i can guarantee that our plan will increase competition and will increase choices and it will increase patient care. and that -- and it will make patient care and it will empower patients so that they'll have the ability to make health care decisions along with their health care professional and it won't be mandated from washington, d.c. it won't be some cookie cutter program that we say, oh, in washington we know what you need and we know what your health care needs are and here's what you need to do. no. we want to pass it along and empower patients and health care professionals to be making health care decisions. >> final questions. the aarp says you have an age
tax in there, that there's going to be more expensive to older americans. it specifically lifts the cap on how much health insurance companies can charge in terms of the ratio from 3-1 to 5-1 based solely on age. that will hurt older americans, won't it? >> certainly that is something that we have to workn. age is a factor and it would be wrong for us to discriminate against any particular group. let's remember this is the beginning of the process. we have a long ways to go. this is the first bucket in what will surely be three buckets. and let's also remember we can't let perfect get in the way of good. >> representative buddy carter, i remember that phrase from covering the first round of health care fights in 2009. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> joining me now, jeff merkley. i guess first response that it represents empowerment and competition. >> well, if empowerment means as a working family you'll pay more
it's empowerment. as a senior you're going to pay more, than that's empowerment. if it means as a rich person you'll get an incredible deduction in your taxes, an average of about $200,000 for those who earn more than $250,000. i guess you have empowerment for the very wealthy. this is the worst possible plan for working america, for seniors and then for struggling families who are on medicaid expansion. this is a terrible plan, it's going to destroy the expansion of medicaid. >> i see where you are on this. what can you as a democratic member of the united states senate do to stop it? >> we're going to team up with the republicans from the far right who hate this and the moderate republicans who hate it and that gives us a majority and we can stop this bill. >> do you think, though -- they're saying they hit it now. but i heard -- i remember reading lots of -- i remember seeing interviews with republican legislators saying they were so aghast at trump they couldn't bring themselves to vote for them and look their daughter in the eyes and lo and behold they voted for him. so let me just say, i'm not
going to bank on a lot of republican no votes. it seems you have to convince three republican senators to vote no on this if you want to kill it. >> i think we'll get three votes and i'll tell you why. because grass-roots america is turning out and saying that they hate this strategy. in oregon, one out of three individuals is on medicaid, or the oregon health plan. they are worried if they get sick after this republican plan is implemented that they won't be able to access health care, they loved one won't be able to access health care. and they don't want to pay a lot more for there to be a big massive tax break for multimillionaires and billionaires and there's nothing in this for them. there's no positive for the vast bulk of americans in this bill. >> there is something remarkable about the geographic impact of this bill as i read it,
particularly on the medicaid front. a lot of health care policy wonks i respect seem to think will hit rural areas the hardest. >> it will hit them very hard. for one thing obamacare has resulted in a huge reduction in uncompensated care for rural hospitals and a big expansion in funding for rural health clinics so on both measures rural health has done very well under obamacare and it's at risk now. >> what if they do something where they basically -- they take the rand paul strategy. the idea was to repeal the thing and basically march you, democratic members of the senate and the house, particularly the senate, towards a cliff where you would have to implement replace. what if they go back to that strategy? >> i just don't think that strategy is going to work. i think the whole idea of repealing without replacement has been dismissed by a lot of my republican colleagues. it's irresponsible. it's going to scare the begeners
out of everybody across the country. i mean, people are turning out at town halls like we have never seen. i do a town hall every county every year, a lot of them are republican counties, most of them are republican counties and it's a whole change in tone right now. they're not coming out to attack me. they're coming out and saying please save us from the republican congress. >> do you think that's having an affect? i had mark sanford on, congressman for south carolina, former governor, who said he thought the protesters and pressure of town halls had moved the ball before the bill is released. do you agree with him? >> absolutely. absolutely. it's sent shock waves and tremors through the republican caucus. >> senator jeff merkley, thanks for being with us.
what standards we use to judge the gop's health care proposal? today, white house press secretary sean spicer said the plan revealed was the one the president ran on. >> this is the obamacare replacement plan everyone has been asking for. the plan the president ran on and the plan that will save the system. >> what were the promises made by donald trump as a candidates as president-elect and as president? >> we're going to terminate obamacare. we're going to replace it with something that's going to be great and a lot less expensive for you and a lot less expensive, frankly, for the government. you're going to have people competing all over but we have to get rid of the lines. >> i understand the lines around the state, whatever that means. this is not a game where you draw -- >> you don't know what it means trchlts biggest thing we've got and the reason we have no competition is because we have lines around the state. when you get rid of the lines it
brings in competition. there will be a certain number of people that will be on the street dying and as a republican i don't want that to happen. we're going to take care of people that are dying on the street. repeal and replace was something terrific. it will be repealed and replaced and we'll know and it will be great health care for much less money. and we're going to have a plan that's going to be great for people and it's going to be much less expensive and nobody's going to be dying on the streets with a president trump. we want to take care of everybody. we're going to repeal and replace and i think you're going to see something very, very special. >> today the promises just kept coming. >> the plan that will lower costs, expand choices, increase competition and ensure health care access for all americans. this will be a plan where you can choose your doctor, this will be a plan where you can choose your plan. and you know what the plan is? this is the plan. and we're going to have a tremendous -- i think we're
going to have a tremendous success. >> joining me now to talk about whether or not trumpcare fulfills any of the president's promises, the former administrator for the center for medicare and medicaid services, co-founder, president emeritus of the institute for health care improvement. don, if you look at the promises, it was one of the big ones was lower cost. you are going to pay less for health care. is this going to deliver on that. >> no, absolutely not. the proposal destabilizes insurance markets, it will. you'll see premiums will go up. partly because under the proposals here people aren't going to have much none to buy insurance. and the only ones that will will be the sicker people because they have to, leaving the -- people who are well outside the system. that unravels insurance premiums, premiums will soar and costs will soar because the safety net will get weakened over the trajectory of this proposal. medicaid gets severely weakened. a lot of vulnerable people will be back in emergency rooms and getting sicker instead of getting the care they need.
this will go the opposite direction and it's not just the poor that will pay. the middle-class will find they have a lot less support for buying their insurance. >> the support meaning the sort of subsidy structure has been altered in ways that folks are going to be out of pocket paying more, do you think? >> yeah, the affordable care act expanded medicaid for the poorest people but for those in the lower middle-class, $40,000, $50,000, these people got help buying their policies with subs subsidies, tax rebates, those were progressive so that the less money you had, the more help you got. under this proposal, the amount of subsidization is the same across income categories up to $75,000 a year for an individual, $150,000 for couples. so that people at lower levels of income don't get more help and the amountf help that everyone's getting isn't enough to buy insurance. people will find themselves really out in the cold. this is going to be really painful and more painful for older people because this is a -- it's a transfer of assistance from older people back to the young healthy people.
>> so this is a key point. it was interesting to me, the aarp comes out right away and says it's gotten a age tax in it. i asked congressman buddy carter and he wouldn't defend it, he said this is just a starting point. you've got a provision that allows insurance companies to charge more based strictly on age. do you think you're going to see an older cohort paying more out of pocket out of this. >> oh, definitely. the amount of subsidy doesn't rise enough with age. mobile, alabama, a 60-year-old who makes $40,000 a under the affordable care act is getting about $10,000 in subsidy to buy their insurance. under the proposal it would be $4,000. >> so you're talking about a 60-year-old in mobile, alabama, whose business plan is losing $6,000 in purchasing power? >> right, exactly. the government is going to hand them a check for $4,000 and say "go buy your insurance" instead of the subsidy they're getting of $10,000. this is a big take away for people in the upper age brackets
before they're eligible for medicare. >> i want to ask this. final question. one of the things donald trump said throughout the campaign was we have to take care of everybody, i don't want anyone on the street, we have to take care of everybody. it's been the refrain. i'm compassionate unlike other republicans. is this compassionate. will this take care of everybody. particularly the most vulnerable folks? >> no, this man came into office with a law in place that increased coverage by over 20 million people. that's expanding coverage. if you want to make things better, build on that. this is a take away, it's going to go backward. i think we'll have a lot of people, as the president put it, onhe street without the kind of care they need. it's bad. it's bad for america. it's bad for the poor, and it's bad for the middle-class. >> don berwick, thank you, appreciate it. still to come, sean spicer
immediately become one of the most important figures in american government. federal prosecutor ron rosen stein a man with a strong reputation on both sides of the aisle, a george w. bush appointee who through barack obama's administration has been nominated to be the deputy attorney general of the united states. now that jeff sessions has recused himself from investigation into the 2016 campaign, including any russian interference in the electoral process.
rosenstein would be in charge, if confirmed, which means it would be him who would be deciding whether or not to appoint a special prosecutor. at no time did rosen stein pledge he would appoint a special prosecutor. >> you view it as a principle that i need to commit a special prosecutor in a manner that i don't know if it's being investigated and i view it as principle that as a nominee for deputy attorney general i should not be promising to take action on a particular case. >> now, less than 24 hours before today's hearing sessions sent a letter to the judiciary committee attempting to clarify his confirmation hearings when he somewhat famously told senator al franken he did not have communications with the russian which is we know is not true. today franken addressed sessions letter. >> i asked him what he would do as attorney general if it was
true that members of the campaign with the russian. so he said i do not mention communications with the russian ambassador over the years because the question did not ask about them. he answered a question i didn't ask. his response is insulting and he should come back and explain himself, mr. chairman, i think he owes that to us. because this appears to me like he was -- and i have been -- i bent over backward not to say that he lied. he needs to come back. i've bent over backward. i've given him benefit of the doubt. but he has to come back.
himself? what do you think the penalty should be? do you think he should resign? >> i think he should come before the committee and explain this. >> senatorial franken is the only democrat on the judiciary committee calling for attorney general jeff sessions to return and explain why he did not disclose his contact with russian officials. connecticut senator richard blumenthal says sessions needs to give a credible explanation or resign and senator blumenthal joins me now. do you agree with your colleague? have you reached the conclusion that attorney general sessions has perjured himself? >> i agree he has to be brought back before the committee to explain these apparent false statements. what was said in this meeting, why he failed to disclose it and what the ties were, in fact, to the russian meddling, the massive attack on our democratic institution which is could lead to a coverup that these false statements indicate i think it's going to bring back the inescapable conclusion that he made these false statements in an attempt to mislead the
committee and that's the conclusion my colleague senator franken is drawing. this is what a special prosecutor has to investigate and it's the very reason that an independent special prosecutor is necessary. because the deputy attorney general, rod rosen stein can't investigate his own boss for perjury, he can't investigate the president for possible collusion with the russians in their meddling with our election? and the events of these past few days have redoubled my determination to fight this nominee with every tool at our disposal unless and until he agrees to appoint a special prosecutor. >> i want to get to that but first very quickly, do you think attorney general sessions should resign or are you still waiting
for him to come back to the committee? >> if he has no credible explanation and he's offered none so far he must resign. the letter he spent us, which, by the way, is unsworn, as you know, was equivocal and evasive. senator franken called it insulting and i believe that it only deepens the need for him to be brought back to the committee if he fails to do so and offer a credible explanation i believe he must resign. >> you've been vocal in saying you will not support his confirmation unless he pledges in advance to appoint some kind of special prosecutor respond to the argument he made that it would be improper of him before taking the job and examining the evidence to make that commitment ahead of time to the committee? >> there is no question, chris, that he is a career prosecutor with an impressive pedigree and great poise. but he should know having spent 26 years in the department of justice that the trust and confidence of the public in the impartiality and objectiveness
of this institution depends on its independence from political influence. now he is an appointee of a president and attorney general who could be subjects and targets of the investigation. common sense and professional knowledge certainly should inform him as to the absolute need for him to commit to an independent prosecutor. elliot richardson did in the the midst of watergate when he was designated attorney general. he committed that he would appoint one and he did. archibald cox. so this kind of commitment is hardly unprecedented or novel and a career prosecutor should know more than anyone else how necessary it is now that the attorney general has recused himself and taken himself out of people getting recused for this event. >> are you confident in the department of justice at this
moment? >> i am very confident that there are professionals, career prosecutors, investigators in the fbi and other agencies within the department who are more than capable with integrity and the act of pursuing the evidence wherever it leads under the direction and leadership of a special prosecutor. >> senator richard blumenthal, thanks for joining us. >> thank you. coming up, why so much of the health care bill focuses on lottery winners that are on medicaid. we'll talk about governing by right wing talking points ahead. plus, some great news for people who still want to see president trump's tax returns. that is tonight's thing 1 thing 2 and it starts right after this break. you get used to food odors in your car. you think it...
>> my current returns will be released as soon as -- at the appropriate time i will release them but right now i'm under rue teen audit. i'm not releasing the tax returns because as you know, they're under audit. >> let's be clear the irs said publicly a year ago that there's nothing that prevents trump from releasing them whether or not he is under audit but that has been and remains the company line. today press secretary sean spicer said he believes those tax returns are still under audit. but, i can say with 100% certainty which tax return from donald trump is not under audit -- it's the one he's going to file this april 15. and that's thing 2 in 60 seconds.
>> did you catch that? sean spicer saying he'll follow up with regards to whether the president release this is year's tax filing. it shouldn't be a tough question. while president trump and his surrogates maintained last year's tax filing is under a never-ending audit, we know for sure his upcoming tax return, which hasn't been filed yet, is not and wouldn't be until the irs reviews it and decides to audit, which would happen down the road. so there should be no reason, according to president trump's own logic, why he can't make that return public at the time he files it. so mark your calendar, six weeks until tax day which falls on april 18 this year since the 15th is on a weekend. oh, many i gosh, i've got to get on that. when the public should get a peek into donald trump's finances here and abroad. of course, maybe it was never about the audit anyway. >> the white house response is that he's not going to release his tax returns. we litigated this all through the election. look at the size. this is the democrats, this is us. there is -- i mean, you can't get clearer in terms of this is government, this is not. >> this was not the first time
there is -- i mean, you can't get clearer in terms of this is government, this is not. >> this was not the first time republicans used a giant stack of paper to make a point about big government and the affordable care act. witness mitch mcconnell with what he said was a copy of the law at cpac at 2013. but today with the rollout of the gop's health care bill was what was once just a conservative stunt is being used to make and sell policy which could impact the lives of millions of americans. this is the latest example of the trump administration turning obscure tropes popularized by right wing media into real-world government policy. that appears to be where the president of the united states gets his information. among the 60 odd pages of the new health care bill, for example, six of them -- about 10% -- are dedicated to letting states kick lottery winners off medicaid. now, you might not think lottery winners collecting federal benefits was such a massive problem deserving of so much attention in this long-awaited
bill -- unless you watch fox news. >> the station in harrisburg, pennsylvania, has been investigating how tax money is being looted in shocking ways. this woman, 39-year-old jamie frankford has collected $444,000 in lottery winnings since 2009 yet she still collected child care subsidies, medical insurance and food stamps. >> there's an en darker side to the administration's use of far-right narratives to drive policy. one theme of donald trump's campaign was the totally false idea that immigrants are inherently criminal or dangerous or more criminal than the native-born population. something he seems to have borrowed from conservative talk radio among other sources. >> over the years we've brought you a lot of stories about crime committed by people who've violated our immigration law, but duis, violent crime, rape against children and so forth. >> now that idea has become
policy. a federal office established by the president's executive order on immigration to spread propaganda about crime committed by immigrants even though immigrants commit crime at a lower rate than citizens. there's now a similar propaganda for muslims, directing the department of homeland security to talk about honor killings committed in the u.s. honor killings are not known to be a pervasive problem in this country but you'd get a different impression from reading breitbart which published a story on the so-called growing silent epidemic. the biggest right wing trope of all, following a direct path of talk radio to the president's twitter need the claim that president obama personally ordered the wiretapping of then-candidate trump. today sean spicer was forced to defend that claim in public and we'll play you that tape next. today white house press
my hygienist said to think of my teeth like an apple. they have to be great on the inside and outside. to strengthen both, she said to go pro. my hygienist said to think of my teeth like an apple. go pro with crest pro-health advanced. it strengthens... ...teeth inside, and is better at strengthening the... ...outside than colgate total. best check-up ever.
today white house press secretary sean spicer held his first on-camera press briefing in more than a week. he was forced to defend the president's baseless wiretap claim before the american people. >> the president, we put out a statement on sunday saying that we would have no further comment weand were asking t house and senate intelligence committee to look into this concern. >> reporter: do you believe that president obama -- >> i get that's a cute question to ask. my job is to represent the president and to talk about what he's doing and what he wants and he has made very clear what his goal is, what he would like to have happen. and so i just -- i'll leave it
at that. >> i'm joined by jennifer rubin and catherine rampell. before we get to this idea of the ways in which these kind of talking points have made their way into policy, i thought this exchange with sean spicer, there was a moment where you wanted someone to name the elephant in the room which was to be like obviously this isn't true, you know it's not true, i know it's not true but the president just read a breitbart article. there's a tension that hangs over the room where no one can say the obvious thing. the president said something either to distract or because he believes in the loony conspiracy theories but that's a real world implication. he smear it had fbi which operates under a cloud. president obama doesn't run around with electric equipment plugging it in to tap people's phones. you have to go through the fbi and probably a fisa or regular article 3 court. the president of the united states has defamed all of them. so he should either fire comey because he's the head of the fbi and let this go on or he should retract it and clear the name of the fbi.
if i were the fbi, i would be upset about this. >> there was an amazing moment when the bill came out and people are thumbing through it saying -- what's with the medicaid lottery numbers? i had the same response, i get this is the subsidy structure then it's like six pages of people on medicaid. it didn't take us long to track down that this was a trope on the right. it's amazing the soundbites have made this way into the government is legislating. >> the actual expression is people like to campaign in poetry and govern in prose. i think trump likes to govern in limericks or something. i don't know that metaphor goes. he likes things that are catchy and kitschy and appeal to his base that are not well thought through. hey, why would you need expert advisers when you have pepe the
frog telling you what to do. >> and that's part of it. jennifer, there is a contempt for expertise that we've seen. this contempt for the establishment. and you see it in this -- and also sort of a desire to use the power of the state as a propaganda outlet. i find this voice idea that the government is going to publish the official reports of crimes committed by unauthorized immigrants or honor killing. this is really using the power of the state in some pretty alarming ways. >> the voice thing is worse, he just says "aliens" not even illegal aliens. you could be a visa holder, or a green card holder. they are creating a mob mentality where they are trying to vilify immigrants. i would argue that's unconstitutional.
we're not allowed to publish information based on national identity but they don't care much about the constitution, either. i think it's very troubling and i think that's why they hate the press so. they don't want independent verifiable facts to get out there. they want to be the sole source of knowledge so they can put out their nonsense that they pick up from fox or wherever they pick it up from. >> and this point about the constitution, we should note, we just got news i think the state of hawaii is going to sue on the new executive order, the one that replaced the last one. oh, the former solicitor general of the united states will be on that suit. the muslim ban talks about a conservative talking point that got made into policy and it was because of that the court said you can't do this, we saw what you were trying to do when you
announced. >> it this was throwing red meat to his base. it served him well during the campaign. he lad a much more memorable message. but also the points of his agenda were more memorable, too. they may be unconstitutional but they did -- >> he remembered muslim ban, for instance. >> exactly. that sticks in your brain in a certain way. that has been held against him because you can't make policy with slogans. you have to have the messy guts of actual policy. hopefully informed by expert advice although, again, as you said, this administration has a lot of disdain for that but this is what trump is good at. he's good at the market, he's not good at creating actual policies that are either good or will stand up in court. >> jennifer, i thought of this today because i remember covering the aca fight in 2009/2010. i was the washington editor of "the nation," i was there day after day covering this thing. and it was very often the case that president barack obama would at a press conference, at a speech, in any -- had to give
-- had long back and forths about the granular details of health policy. now in -- and health policy is complicated. whatever your ideological commitments are, it's genuinely complicated. this president at some point is going to have to do that. he's going to have to talk about why they had the subsidy rates they do and why it's age and not other things. i can't imagine he has the wherewithal to do that. >> i think he's going to fake his way through it and i think this has come back to haunt him. i think he embraced this bill not knowing how awful it was. not knowing that it is going to hurt his constituency. not realizing that conservatives on the right hate it, moderates in the middle hate it and now he's stuck because he's embraced something he's never read. and he doesn't read anything, which is part of the problem. so in terms of the details he'll duck and he has run-on sentences and this word association game he plays and he'll avoid answering specific conversation
-- questions or he'll bring mr. price around as his answer man. >> slight correction, we do know the president does read a stack of clippings of press coverage of him. >> and maybe some chyrons on the t. >> robert costa reported that yesterday. but to me this is where the rubber hits the road on health care. health care cannot be legislated or dealt with in bumper stickers and soundbites. >> i don't think trump cares. he's going to steam roll over them and say no, i promise you, this is going to reduce --s in going to ensure more people. >> that will be one of the most interesting fights when the cbo and other independent experts say no and whether they steam roll over that. i mentioned i'll be on the road for my new book "a colony in a nation." the book comes out two weeks from today.
until then you can now read an excerpt, first one published, in "vanity fair." head over and check it out. the rachel maddow show starts right now, good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris, thank you my friend. >> you bet. happy tuesday. big, big, big busy news day today. one of those days when it pays to not zone out. sort of pays to pay attention. one of the things we'll talk about in tonight's show is the rollout today of the republican plan to get rid of the affordable care act. fairly disastrous rollout, i would say today. we knew democrats would hate it but who knew republicans could craft a plan that would give so many different kinds of republicans so many different reasons to hate it. if you are worried about losing your health insurance, if you are worried about 20 million of your fellow americans losing their health insurance, today was very scary in tes ofhat republicans said they want to do but today is heartening in terms of how it looks that they'll be able to pull off what they have