tv Meet the Press NBC March 13, 2017 3:01am-4:00am EDT
this sunday, repeal, replace and revolt. the republican health care plan. >> this is the closest we will ever get. >> supported by president trump. >> we must act now to save americans from the imploding obamacare disaster. >> but attacked on one side by conservatives. >> this is just obamacare with a different label. >> on other side, by republican moderates. >> pulling the rug out from these vulnerable populations is not really the direction we want to go. >> and on all sides by democrats. >> robinhood in reverse. >> this morning i'll talk to hhs secretary tom price who oversees the overhaul, kathleen sebelius, the former hhs secretary who oversaw obamacare implementation, and governor john kasich of ohio who says
both parties need to work together. plus the russia connection. democrats threaten to pull out of the investigation if it becomes too partisan. and when we hear statements like this -- >> 17 would be a disaster for obamacare. that's the year it was meant to explode because obama won't be here. >> are we becoming conditioned to dismiss what the president of the united states says? joining me for insight and analysis are -- david brooks, columnist for the new york times. stephanie cutter, former campaign manager for president obama, rick santelli and helene cooper, pentagon correspondent for "the new york times." welcome to sunday, it's "meet the press". >> from nbc news in washington. the longest running show in television history celebrating its 70th year, this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning and congratulations for remembering to set your clocks forward an hour. who knew that health care could be so complicated?
house republicans reveal their replace version of repeal and replace of obamacare to decidedly mixed reviews. president trump offered qualified support allowing that changes could still be made to the bill, but the proposal got hit on all sides by freedom caucus republicans saying the bill didn't go far enough to moderate republicans who say it goes too far and to democrats folding their arms and just saying "no." the brookings institution predicts 15 million people will lose coverage under this republican plan. many powerful health care organizations came out against it this week and the white house is already casting doubt on the expected cost estimates to be made by the congressional budget offices. >> if you're looking to the cbo for accuracy, you're looking in the wrong place. >> those numbers should be coming out tomorrow or the next day. proponents argue that any new plan, even if not perfect would be a vast improvement under the current obamacare system and the time to make any sweeping change
is right now. >> this is the closest we will ever get to repealing and replacing obamacare. >> republicans racing the political clock to push through a health care replacement bill have a message. >> republicans unified. >> we are unified. >> we are really excited about the unified vote. >> but the fight over health care is exposing divisions within the republican party. between small government conservatives, swing state moderates and a president who ran as a populist and is governing as a nationalist. this week, two key house committees approved a plan to overhaul the affordable care act, but not before conservatives rushed out to pan the bill both in the house -- >> this is just obamacare with a different label. >> it appears to be the largest welfare program ever proposed by republicans in the history of our country. >> and in the senate. >> the bill as written is not going to pass the senate. >> simply would not pass the senate.
>> it's dead on arrival. >> tax credits are a government giftaway and they want obamacare's expansion phased out quickly and then there are republican moderates meaning fierce opposition at town hall. they are pushing back on the plan to phase out the medicaid expansion by 2020 and to cap federal funding by medicaid enrollees. >> in ohio we have the expanded medicare. >> pulling the rug out from the vulnerable populations is not really the direction we want to go. >> during the campaign the president was open to further expanding medicaid. >> we will get -- >> will you expand medicaid. >> you can through it through medicaid. you can do it through some other way, but i am very -- this has to do with humanity. this has to do with having a heart. >> and in january, mr. trump promised insurance for everybody, telling it "the washington post," there was a philosophy in some circles that if you can't pay for it you don't get it. that's not going to happen with us. conservatives want to scrap
obamacare completely and they call the current house republican care obamacare-lite. will the president use his own political capital to insist that the president put aside ideological differences and support the bill? on the campaign trail mr. trump -- >> we'll call it donald care. >> schmoozing lawmakers and so far not twisting arms. it was vice president mike pence in kentucky on saturday selling health care, not the president. >> for us to seize this opportunity to repeal and replace obamacare once and for all, we need every republican in congress and we're counting on kentucky. >> yesterday afternoon i spoke with the secretary of health and human services tom price whose job it will be to implement the obamacare replacement. i started by asking him whether the republican plan which leaves much of the obamacare architecture in place is an acknowledgement that the health care system can't be run by the free market alone? >> no, not at all. obviously, this is a transition that we're going through, but the important thing is to
appreciate that the market as it is right now is failing. obamacare, the aca, has failed. you have premiums going up, you have deductibles where people have an insurance card, but they don't have any coverage. we have a third of the counties that only have one insurer offering coverage. five states offering only one insurance and that is not responsible to the individuals selecting the coverage. we need to fix this and move in a direction that puts patients, and doctors in charge not washington d.c.. >> i know you say obamacare is failing, if you have a system that premiums go up and enrollment went up, too, that's not the definition of a failing system. >> well, in fact, the number of individuals who actually got coverage through the exchange who didn't have coverage before weren'telicible for medicaid before is turned things upside down completely for 3 million or 4 or
5 million individuals and the premiums didn't go down as the previous president promised. they lost the coverage they have, and the lost the ability to see the providers they wanted to see. we need to move in the direction that respects the principles ab and choices for patients making certain that we, again, have the patient-centered system. >> let's go to the affordability aspect. first of all, can you say for certain that once this bill is passed, nobody, nobody will be worse off financially when it comes to paying for health care? >> i'll tell you right now there are a lot of people that are worse off right now paying for health care and they aren't getting the care that they need. the premiums are up and deductibles are up. if you're an individual making $50,000 $60,000 and your deductible is $8,000, $12,000, you may not have coverage, and i hear from former colleagues all of the time about patients who come into their office and they recommend something for them and they're not able to get it
because the deductible is so high. >> i noticed you ducked the aspect of whether you can guarantee that nobody will be worse off financially? >> i firmly believe that nobody will be worse off financially in the process that we're going through understanding that they'll have choices that they can select the kind of coverage that they want for themselves and for their family, not the government forces them to buy. so there's costs that needs to come down and we believe we're going to be able to do that through the system. there's coverage that will go up. remember, chuck, there are 20 million folks right now in this nation who said to the federal government, i'll pay a penalty or take a waiver. i'm not each going to get coverage in the system that we currently have. that may be a system that works for government or insurance, but it doesn't work for people. we need one that works for people. >> you think it will work for the 20 million. you believe that? >> we believe -- i believe and the president believes firmly that if you create a system that's accessible for everybody
and provide the financial feasibility that we have a great opportunity to increase coverage over where we are right noi as opposed to where the line is going right now where people are losing coverage and we'll have fewer individuals covered than we do currently. >> let's go to the financial feasibility here. in fayette county, west virginia, kaiser family foundation estimates the $4,000 tax credit that a 60-year-old making $30,000 a year will get under the american healthcare act is almost $8,000 less than they would get under obamacare. this is a county, by the way, that voted overwhelmingly for president trump. the point is this, you say that this will make it more affordable and access to coverage, under this plan in this county in this state, less money and more expensive for these folks. >> that's looking at it in a silo. if you look at it in the way that the market will allow them for individuals to have choices, who knows what that 60-year-old
wants. i know the federal government doesn't know what the 60-year-old wants. i know that he or she knows what he or she wants and they'll provide decreasing costs and choices for folks you make it so the system can be responsive to that individual. that's the way you drive down costs. >> why not means test the tax credits? why do it by age where you may essentially have it where you're incentivizing folks not to buy health insurance until they actually need it? >> it's a great question. in fact, i've been working on this for so long i've gone through the phase where i've had it completely related to income and became convinced by the folks who do this on a day-to-day basis, day in and day out basis, that the most predictive element of an individual's life in terms of what health coverage will cost is not income and it makes sense, it's age. as your age increases your health care costs increase and the cost of the coverage increases. so they've pegged it to age. there's an opportunity to put some means testing in there, but
that's not the most -- that's not the correlation factor to what it actually costs. age is the thing that correlates best to what health coverage costs. >> age is also -- and this is a part of obamacare that didn't work which was to try to get as many young people on the system. they needed 40% of folks under 35 in the system to keep premiums down. it hasn't gotten to that. how do you do it? how does it do it here? because this system seems to essentially say to folks under 35, don't worry about it. if you don't want to get health care we're not going to make you do it and that only increases premiums for older folk, does it not? >> no. what we say to that 30, 35-year-old individual, you know that you need health coverage. what we'll do is provide a system that allows you an array of choices so that you can respond and choose the coverage plan that works best for you and your family and not be dictated to by the federal government and have to purchase something that you most likely do not need. >> we have two pieces of
information we do wanot have ye and there is voting on in congress. the estimate of this bill and how many would be covered and the second is what's to hit to the deficit? on the coverage issue, we don't know the financial issue yet, on the coverage issue a couple of estimates out there. one as high as 15 million fewer people covered according to one estimate by brookings that that's what they believe the congressional budget office will show when they're able to come out with an estimate. 15 million. is that an acceptable number to you? is that what it really is? do you go back and say we have to tweak this? >> i'll tell you the plan that we leave out here will not leave that number of individuals covered. i believe we'll have more individuals covered and we'll have folks evaluating this and modeling this is aing yes, indeed, this plan will cover more individuals than are currently covered. remembering right now that the trend line is down on the number of individuals being covered. it's not increasing, and the cbo estimate five, six, seven years
ago when this started they estimated that over 20 million people would have coverage at the end of the ten-year window. in fact, it's about half of that right now. so cbo has been very adept in not providing appropriate coverage statistics. >> all right. this plan has some medicaid expansion in it to form, although you cap it in certain respects. this plan has tax credits, another name for a subsidy. it's made some on the right say, you know what? this is obamacare-lite. you're essentially accepting the architecture, but just trying to remodel the building. what say you? >> no. absolutely not. in fact, this is a little puzzling because independents and conservatives for decades have said haven't we equalize the tax treatment of the purchase of health care coverage for folks who get it through their employer and folks who aren't able to get it through their employer and that's what
the tax credits do. we don't dictate to people what they must buy. what we say is here is an opportunity for you to get a tax credit that the 175 million individuals getting their coverage from their employer those folks have a tax credit and it's the moms and the pops -- >> should those folks have a tax credit or should people like you and may have to pay taxes on their health insurance benefits? on. >> if part of our society have a tax benefit for a tax coverage, then i'm of the belief and the president is of the belief that it needs to be fair for everybody. we -- that's why you have to have a tax credit. >> that's why you want to have a tax credit, but you're not going to of get the revenue from upper income folks who get generous tax benefits from their company? >> that's another system that's been in place, as i say, 175 million folks are getting their coverage through their employer right now and that's a debate that we ought to have, but the fact of the matter is the vast
malm orit of the american people support individuals getting it from their employer and not getting from their employer and they're in the small group markets which has been literally destroyed by the aca and it will reinvigorate the insurance market and it will drive down costs because you'll have competition and transparency in the system. >> you accept this bill. you own this bill. president trump accepts this bill and owns this bill. fair? >> we strongly support this plan. the bill and the regulatory opportunity to modify the system in a way that works for patients and the other piece of legislation that is required that can't go through on the first part. >> my thanks to hhs secretary tom price who i spoke to yesterday. last month president trump said nobody knew health care could be so complicated. one person did, kathleen sebelius, who was secretary of health and human services and is a strong advocate for obamacare. she joins me now.
nice to see you. >> nice to see you. >> let me start with a question about the republican plan and whether you accept the idea that this is obamacare-lite. do you believe they've kept the architecture of obamacare? >> we were pretty clear in the obama administration what the point was, insure everybody. we know we had to fix insurance rules. people who were buying insurance on their own needed some financial help in the marketplace because they didn't have an employer contribution. you could keep kids on their parents' plan and make medicaid equal across the country, whether you lived in georgia or california you qualified as a low-income adult at the same level. i'm not sure what the goal is here. so they have kept some pieces. the pre-existing condition, they have kept some subsidies in sort of the wrong place to the wrong
folks -- >> i understand that, but if there were the plan in place and you and president obama were back in office in four years and you could re-implement obamacare, could this architect thaur the republicans are put pg together be used to re-implement obamacare? >> i don't think so because this does serious damage to the whole marketplace theory and companies will flee given the uncertainty and the likelihood, this quickly becomes a high-risk pool. >> they make the argument, by the way, that companies are fleeing now because they feel as if it's too expensive to try to insure everybody and we do have this issue in rural america. it's truly the rural counties that have been hit the hardest on the obamacare when it comes to the word choice. >> i think that's true, chuck. there's no question this is a young and fragile market. it's been made that way sort of intentionally by congress who blocked the risk sharing. i was interested in the piece in this bill that has a state stability pool, recognizing that
you really do need to get a stable market. this also was a monopolistic market for decades before the affordable care act. so the notion that somehow it blossoms overnight. there are new insurers in. i was in florida last week. pat garrity who is the head of the bluecross blueshield of florida. florida has not been a welcoming state to this law. >> right. >> pat garrity ended up 2016 open enrollment with 1 million members in the florida marketplace and the company in the black. he said, of course, this works. we can make it work and go forward. >> i want to play something that former president bill clinton said on the campaign trail and get your reaction. take a listen. >> people are getting killed in this deal are small business people and individuals who make just a little too much to get into these subsidies. so you have this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care and then the people are out there
busting it at sometimes 60 hours a week wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half. it's the craziest thing in the world. >> obviously, republicans took those comments and had a field day with them. >> you bet. >> did he have a point? >> he did have a point. there was a bill with 400% of poverty and you no longer have a subsidy in the marketplace and about 85% of the folks have a subsidy and any talk about premium increases, that isn't what consumers are paying because their subsidies rise where the premiums rise. >> again, this is fixable. you could have a much more graduated subsidy system. you could have a higher income point that could easily be done to stabilize the marketplace, but that wasn't what the republican congress wanted to do. they wanted to actually dismantle this bill from the outset. >> one of the pledgees that secretary price made to me in that interview was there will be more people covered under his
plan. what do you make of that proclamation? >> what i know right now and this is a real fact is that we are at the lowest point of uninsured americans that has ever been recorded. under 10% of americans lack coverage. that's still too many, but that's where we are. there is no estimate in looking at this bill that with less money going to subsidies, with older americans being able to be charged five times what younger americans are being charged, and with no variation based on income that more people will have coverage. there's everest nation that anywhere from 2 million to 15 million people will lose coverage in this bill and there are going after medicaid expansion which is a lot of lower income, working adults who will also lose that coverage. >> what do you say to conservatives who worry that the medicaid expansion that's in obamacare will only make it a
permanent entitlement program that people will never get off medicaid. what do you say to that criticism? >> that's a good point, and i think they have gone and doubled down on medicaid. republicans for a while in the congress have been really fundamentally opposed to the 50-year-old partnership about medicaid. a health safety net. they not only in this bill go after the expanded population which is actually much cheaper to insure in medicaid than it is in the private market and lower premiums and lower out of market costs and they have gone after the traditional medicaid program, disabled individuals, poor kids, pregnant moms, have the bursts in the country, the largest payer for nursing home care and they'll cap what the feds pay. those populations don't go away. i used to run a medicaid program. we have 11,000 people a day turning 65. there will be more people in
nursing homes and that cost shifts to the state. it shifts to the local government and more it shifts to taxpayers. >> kathleen sebelius, i have to leave it there. former hhs secretary. i have a feeling you'll be back as this debate isn't ending any time soon. >> you bet. >> the winners and losers under the republican plan. there is a lot of irony in the answer. the russia their experience is coveted. their leadership is instinctive. they're experts in things you haven't heard of - researchers of technologies that one day, you will. some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team.
you may be muddling through allergies.oned with... try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin®. because it starts working faster on the first day you take it. try zyrtec®. muddle no more®. we cuthe and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. fidelity, where smarter investors will always be. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. this is not a screensaver.game. this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪
welcome back. panelists here, rick santelli from cnbc. helene cooper, pentagon correspondent for the new york times and auth are on of this book "madam president." stephanie cutter and columnist for the new york times. let's dive into politics. rick santelli, you're a free market guy, where are you on this and where are you on the plan? too much obamacare? too little obamacare? >> it's a mess. you can't have that discussion unless you know what the service costs. gi to the doctor, and i have a daughter that for a while didn't have insurance. she gets a different price than people who have insurance. i think we need more market spirits in competition. i certainly don't see it in this bill, but i do understand that repeal and replace would have been easier if there was a mandate. president trump won. we can argue about the mandate.
>> right. >> there's a problem here. if you deal with the reality of politics, i understand phase one and phase two. if we want to fix it the correct way, i just think the politics are impossible to accomplish that. here we sit. >> yeah. what do you think of that, david? i think he's right. we may be a position that we can't fix this if one party isn't going to participate in the other party's bill. >> here's what i don't understand what's going on this week. we have the election where we learned that a lot of people are out of the job market, the social fabric is frayed and the lessons is less and pay attention and help these people and the republican party can help the people with market-based mechanisms which i support. do they do that? no. they have huge tax cuts for the rich and it only goes to people above 250 and that's been stable in all of the plans that they've come up with and thrown around and they're throwing 8, 10, 15 million people off the rails. it's declaring war on their own
voters and then there is a wing of the party saying that's too much. we need to totally decimate them. the republican party needs to figure out are we going to help our voters or are we still going to be the party of the rich? >> stephanie, they're united on the politics of health care, but they're not united on the policy that they want. >> well, that's because they aren't actually, i hate to, you know, shed truth on this, but they're not looking to actually fix the policy. they're looking to fulfill a campaign promise, and i agree with david that trump was on the campaign trail making promises to his voters about lowering costs and increasing coingn eitr one of those accounts. and the fact that they're pushing it through t4:30 a.m. t comes out without cbo coring which you know, it's a very inside washington thing and that's a very independent thing to tell you exactly how many people are going to be covered and how many people are going to
lose their coverage and what it will cost to impact the deficit and we don't know any of that. they're voting on this with no information and what their bill actually does. >> what i find interesting is they're already trashing what the cbo is about to come up with. tom price just sat there and said they've made mistakes hear >> they expect aumber. >> and theywhich i find very fun. >> what's interesting and you point this out, rick. ross said ihe fairness to design health care policy the epublican party is an organism believes in anymore. do you think that's right? >> think it's partially correct. i think that when it comes to this particular issue, first of all, we're watching the sausage get made and we're watching it with a lot of eyes broadcasting it to the entire country. we don't actually know. i believe trump's a compromises.
i've said from day one. when donald trump gets in there he will make equal number of republicans unhappy as democrats unhappy sxrgs i don't think we've gone through the process for is i like everybody to have different ideas and i think this bill will get marked up and i think that what the president allows what the markings will do to get it passed will be surprising to most parties. >> wegument that government ver the state or the market versus the state and it was pro-governmentsm and now we're the social fabric is decaying and capitalism isn't working for a lot of people and you want to be pro-market you have security so they can compete in the market and you have to use the state to give them that security. if you want to be pro-market and you have to be pro-government at least in some form and republicans are caught in that historical pivot. >> i think for health care it's sort of an impure test on the politics because you're dealing with life and death both partie.
it's not -- you can't have purity. there needs to be a mix of free market as well as government intervention and government stability, and so we went through this how many years ago? eight years ago? and without republican -- even thourepe lican ideas republican refused to participate and it caused factions in our own party. >> poisoned the well. >> ultimately it poisoned the well because republicans wouldn't participate. >> what's the likelihood of this town doing that this year? >> i'd be curious to see whether the white house actually gets behind this in a real way. >> there is a reason why they're not saying it's trump care. >> but by the way, to pick up on rick's point, if you're a negotiator and it is smart to have some distance, but we'll be curious how much distances we have. >> when we come back, governor >> when we come back, governor john kasich on why our
say carl, we have a question about your brokerage fees. fees? what did you have in mind? i don't know. $4.95 per trade? uhhh. and i was wondering if your brokerage offers some sort of guarantee? guarantee? where we can get our fees and commissions back if we're not happy. so can you offer me what schwab is offering? what's with all the questions? ask your broker if they're offering $4.95 online equity trades and a satisfaction guarantee. if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. as after a dvt blood clot,ital i sure had a lot to think about. what about the people i care about? ...including this little girl. and what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i asked my doctor. and he recommended eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. yes, eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment.
both made me turn around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily ...and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis the right treatment for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you. for great skin, you don't have ...just go to bed. new aveeno®... ...positively radiant® overnight facial. get the benefits of a spa facial... ...overnight. aveeno® naturally beautiful results®
fun in art class. come close, come close. i like that. [ all sounds come to a crashing halt ] ah. when your pain reliever stops working, your whole day stops. awww. try this. for minor arthritis pain, only aleve is fda approved to work for up to 12 straight hours with just one pill. thank you. come on everybody. aleve. live whole. not part. welcome back. even though governor john kasich of ohio won only one primary, ohio, he developed a reputation
as a republican willing to work with democrats and aing what's on his mind. he had a com you will arguing they had support, and they were trying to repeal and rewrite without democrats and they were wrong then and they're wrong now. not surprising to hear that if. >> if you don't get both together it's not sustainable. >> in three years when democrats take over or whatever. >> the other thing is i was there when we created the chip program, the health program for children and it was done on a bipartisan basis and it was aus sin tabl. i was one of the architects. it was sustainable, but when you jam something through just one party over another it's not sustainable and it becomes a point of attack. >> i want to get to some of the substance of this new bill. here's what vice president pence said to an ohio tv station lobbying you and mr. portman. take a listen. >> i am very confident that this legislation will give ohio both
the resources and the flexibility that your governor, and your legislature will need to meet those needs going forward and literally offer our most vulnerable citizens even better coverage. >> is he right? >> no, he's not right. first of all, medicaid expansion which has covered 700,000 people in my state, a big chunk of whom are ill and drug addicted and have chronic a diseases. the bill needs fixed. the current system doesn't work and that's why it's possible to get democrats involved, but you don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. let me ask you this, chuck. if i put you an exchange for your family and i give you a $4,000 tax credit or $3,000, what kind of insurance are you going to buy for $3,000? will you be offer any in the state of ohio? >> that will be up to the private market, but what i would tell you is the exchange needs to be fixed because in some
places there's only one insurance company. that can be fiblgsed. i've said it all along. it's not that we love obamacare. don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. don't kill medicaid expansion and you have to fix the exchange and you have to have the ability to subsidize at lower income levels. chuck, let's forget all of this. here's what we're talking about. if you're drug addicted and mentally ill you have to consistently see the doctor. from what i see the resources are not there. if you're chronically ill you'll have to have consistent coverage, under this bill you don't have it. my hope is it will probably pass the house. it's going to get to the senate and that's where i hope that they will make improvements and that's where i hope 'em did democrats will come in and work with republicans to bring about the improvements so we can reform the system and still not cut off the people who need the help. >> let me ask you about president trump here because candidate trump made it seem as
if he was open to a lot of ideas includi including maybe expanding medicaid in one interview with me and saying there would be insurance for everyone and there weren't going to be people priced out of the market. he is supporting this bill. i know he's been lobbying you and you've been lobbying him back and forth. you guys have spent a lot of time talking about this. do you think he's firm on this bill or is he negotiable? >> how can i speak for him? but if i were to guess, no. i think he's very open to compromise. he's told me that. for example, he and i talked about the increase in pharmaceutical costs. >> do you think the right is pushing this bill too far? >> look, what's happening -- look, this bill right now. i'm the governor of the state. i have to take with my people, we have to treat people who have these illnesses, and the fact of the matter is it will put us in a bind. now, that doesn't mean that we can't fix this along the way, but we need to have democrats involved so that what we do is
going to be not only significant, but will last and then we get to the real problem which is the rising cost of health care and that's where santelli hit the nail on the head. we need to get to more of a market-driven system where we pay for quality and not for quantity in health care. >> you know, you said -- you were talking about incentivizing democrats. >> i think the president, by the way, would be flexible. i have no doubt that he would be flexible. he just wants to get something through. >> the idea of getting democrats involved here. the other day president trump kind of expressed what sounded like a conspiracy theory about obamacare and implosion in 2017. take a listen. >> '17 would be a disaster for obamacare. that's the year it was meant to explode because obama won't be here. that is what it was supposed to be. as bad as it is now, it will get worse. is this a way to incentivize
democrats. if you go down this road saying oh, it was a conspiracy and saying it was going to implode. >> we're all big boys and girls, if you really want to be a leader -- look, i believe the political parties are disintegrating before our very eyes. i think more and more people across this country see no purpose for political parties -- >> do you? >> i'll tell you something, you talk to people and they're more and more independents because of the squabbling. what's at risk here to 'dech des is you can't turn your backs on these people and you need to invite republicans in, because we're talking about lives. all of this consumption about who gains politically. life is short and if all you focus in life is what's in it for me you're a loser. you are a big-time loser. this country better be careful we're not losing the soul of our country because we play politics and we forget people who are in need. >> if you were a citizen and not an elected official would you be a member of the republican party
right now? >> well, i'm not going to be a democrat because the problem is they're top-down people and the republicans should be bottom up and right now they're trying to fulfill campaign promises, and you have to put people first. >> you sound like a guy ready to move to the independent wing. >> no, i'm a republican because i'm a conservative and we have to examine our beliefs and philosophy, and i would say in this bill you have to be in a position where you reform the system, but you don't leave people behind. you just can't do it because these are people that could be in your family, live right next door to you. we have to care about people, and we can get this done. we can reform it. we can change it and save money and have a better system. i don't have any doubt about it, we can do it, and i can prove it to you in my state where we have controlled medicaid and yet been able to reach out and help so many people in the shadows. >> nothing more contagious than
your enthusiasm for policy. governor john kasich, thanks for being on and sharing your views. when we come back, the latest when we come back, the latest political lesson an various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to create over 45,000 jobs. and each job created by the energy industry supports two others in the community. altogether, the industry supports over 9 million jobs nationwide. these are jobs that natural gas is helping make happen, all while reducing america's emissions. energy lives here. for lower back the search for relief often leads here.s,ns. today there's drug-free aleve direct therapy. a high intensity tens device that uses technology once only in doctors' offices. for deep penetrating relief at the source. aleve direct therapy. does your makeup remover every kiss-proof,ff? cry-proof, stay-proof look?
neutrogena® makeup remover does. it erases 99% of your most stubborn makeup with one towelette. need any more proof than that? neutrogena. you may know what it's like to deal with high... and low blood sugar. januvia (sitagliptin) is a once-daily pill that, along with diet and exercise, helps lower blood sugar. januvia works when your blood sugar is high and works less when your blood sugar is low, because it works by enhancing your body's own ability to lower blood sugar. plus januvia, by itself, is not likely to cause weight gain or low blood sugar (hypoglycemia). januvia should not be used in patients with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. tell your doctor if you have a history of pancreatitis. serious side effects can happen, including pancreatitis which may be severe and lead to death. stop taking januvia and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area which may be pancreatitis. tell your doctor right away and stop taking januvia if you have an allergic reaction that causes swelling of the face, lips,
tongue, or throat, or affects your breathing or causes rash or hives. kidney problems sometimes requiring dialysis have been reported. some people may develop severe joint pain. call your doctor if this happens. using januvia with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. to reduce the risk, your doctor may prescribe a lower dose of the sulfonylurea or insulin. your doctor may do blood tests before and during treatment to check your kidneys. if you have kidney problems a lower dose may be prescribed. side effects may include upper respiratory tract infection, stuffy or runny nose, sore throat, and headache. for help lowering your blood sugar talk to your doctor about januvia.
♪ ♪ ♪ welcome back. data down load time and we're looking at the winners and loses of the house republican plan to repeal and replace obamacare. we'll take a closer look at this with the county level analysis from the kaiser family foundation and overlay it with politics. starting with clark county, nevada, clinton carried the count we 52% of the vote. under obamacare, aca, a 60-year-old making $60,000 a year qualifies for $4,380 a year. under the proposed house republican plan they would get a flat credit of $4,000 which means they would have to find another $380 more per year out of their own pockets. let's move over to rural pennsylvania. donald trump won this county with 69% of the vote. with obamacare, the same 60-year-old qualifies for a subsidy of ready for this
$11,150. with the new house republican plan, he or she would get just $4,000. it's that same $4,000 tax credit which means they would have to dig out more than $7,000 out of their own pocket to pay for additional coverage. let's look at 81% of the counties that voted for hillary clinton overall. in fact, a 60-year-old making $40,000 a year would see their subsidy decline overall. the same would be true in 93% of the counties carried by president trump. in fact, trump counties would also see bigger subsidy cuts. this is a point that many democrats have been making. in fact, here's another way to look at it, with just two examples of the new york times upshot, those who stand to gain $2500 in subsidies were split in november, 47-46 clinton over trump. those set to lose $5,000 to $7500 in federal assistance for health care, they voted 60-35, trump over clinton. so in other words, financially,
in this plan, it's trump folks that get hurt more than clinton voters. look, president trump was elected largely on to repeal and replace the affordable care act. trump supporters may get the repeal, but higher costs could come as part of that deal. coming up, why the trump administration suddenly thinks administration suddenly thinks the jobs report that was on hello, my name is watson. i am helping 8 million taxpayers get the largest refund they deserve. one million people can benefit from precision cancer care. 197 million passengers can fly with less turbulence. i am on my way to working with one billion people. i look forward to working with you. i have the worst coldking with one billion people. i better take something. . dayquil liquid gels don't treat your runny nose.
seriously? alka-seltzer plus cold and cough liquid gels fights your worst cold symptoms plus your runny nose. oh, what a relief it is. but so we don't have tormin wad to get clean. charmin ultra soft gets you clean without the wasteful wadding. it has comfort cushions you can see that are softer... ...and more absorbent, and you can use up to 4 times less. enjoy the go with charmin. we cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. fidelity, where smarter investors will always be. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. this is not a screensaver.game.
this is the destruction of a cancer cell by the body's own immune system, thanks to medicine that didn't exist until now. and today can save your life. ♪ ♪ (baby crying♪ minutes old. ♪ a baby's skin is never more delicate. ♪ what do hospitals use to wash and protect it? ♪ johnson's® the number 1 choices in hospitals.
welcome back. let's turn our attention to just the economy as a whole. there was a pretty decent jobs report this week, but what was amazing was the reaction to the jobs report from the republican side of the aisle. take a listen. >> and you take a look at that jobs report, the jobs report is fiction because all of the people that -- >> you think it's total fiction? there's been improvements from the crash? >> i would say 90%. we all have improvements from crashes. >> i talked to the president prior to this and he said to
quote him very clearly. they may have been phony in the past, but it's very real now. >> sean spicer trying to use humor there. jobs numbers, 235,000 this last february, it was 237,000 in '16 and in 2015 it was 238. rick santelli, thousands of jobs have been lost. we lost 2,000 jobs. is it a mistake sometimes that the president when he was a candidate said too many crazy things like that? >> i think it's a mistake for candidates or once they get elected in office to be dwelling too much in the topic of markets. markets are unforgiving and sometimes they move for reasons we can't possibly foresee, but when it comes to job, jobs, job, and i might have been the first person to yell it that way. >> sure. >> what i would say is this, why are jobs important? because it needs to translate into growth. >> right. >> there's a step that's been missing there. i think that the president is wrong. i think we have a consistent, low variance monthly report on
jobs. what we need to work on is the notion of why we cover it so closely. we need enhanced productivity and maybe that's on the regulatory side to be addressed in the future and we need to get more americans to be better consumers and the best way to do that is to put more money in their pockets. >> it struk me in the jobs report, he shouldn't have said this is a jobs report if you want to get an infrastructure plan and you need to create a sense of urgency that you need to do this, don't you say this is enough? don't you make rick's argument? >> first of all, who can explain what donald trump says about anything? i kind of find it that sean spicer was laughing. >> it was funny the way it was phrased. >> as someone who lived through those jobs reports, they were very important when they were shedding jobs a month. i agree with rick that we have to look at other things if we
want to increase productivity and we need to make investments in things like infrastructure. so i'm not sure that president trump thinks that far ahead. he was looking for the easy victory and easy score. >> this gets to the issue of president trump and it goes to this comment he made that obamacare was to implode in 2017. he so easily grabs on to a myth to make a quick point and it backfires on him. >> one of the reasons this country is great and pretty successful is we have institutions that are basically pretty honest and of course, they make mistakes and we have the bureau of labor statistics and they make us smarter and a lot of people out there in the world are saying they're all corrupt. >> you heard the deep state phrase i. sclp anoia. >> it's all corruption and it's dishonest and all rigged.
if you go visit there in washington, they're not making much money and they're pretty good people and they're trying to do their job and serve the country and intellectual pollution to say that it's all corrupt and rigged. >> but this is what you get, i think, with a president who has made it almost his mission for the last two months now that he's been in office to turn into an opposition party just about everything that doesn't necessarily conform to his view of the world or agrees with him. it's including the intelligence community and including what we just heard about the cbo and what he said in the past about the bureau of labor statistics. if they're giving him something that he doesn't agree with, he'll say -- >> the state talk feels disruptive, rick. >> think deep state topic in general is destructive. consider this, we have the technology to pretty much hear everything. can you imagine how our holiday dinners would be if every relative's entire conversations
from birth to that moment in time was shown to every other relative? we're really playing with dynamite here, and i think that really transcends some of the stories of the day and when it comes to the bureau of labor statistics or the cbo, what i find is inaccuracy is nonpartisan, okay? because we can have a conversation about accuracy. i think it's the intention behind it that really is the issue. >> all right. i'm going to take a quick pause here. we'll be back in 45 seconds and endgame. what if we hear the obamacare language to repeal and replace another very important part of our american culture. stick around. coming up, "meet the press" coming up, "meet the press" endgame and post - "once upon a time a little girl learned how to read." her mighty parents kept the adventure going by reading her books that were beyond her skill level. her mind and her imagination grew happily ever after.
"meet the press" endgame is brought to you by boeing, always working to build something better. back now with endgame. we've heard so much talk this week about replacing obamacare and with the ncaa tournament, nfl draft and baseball's opening day we wondered if we applied repeal and replace language to improving sports in america? >> first it's time to empower players, to choose their own strategy.
you can't have a one size fits all system designed by bure crafts in washington, d.c., that may work for the red skirngs the nationals and the wizards and not the teams beyond the beltway. next, we need to give athletes greater access to home runs, touchdowns and slam dunks. these things shouldn't be out of reach for any player. let players choose the success that's best for them. another key element, teams need the ability to cross state lines. states are the lavatories of democracy. don't limit the colts to indiana or the dodgers to california. give teams the freedom they need, after all the new york giants play in new jersey and they've won four super bowls. the congressional budget office is skeptical, and they also predicted the new england patriots would win the last super bowl and yes, using cbo scoring they did win, but if we apply dynamic scoring or by our own estimates, the atlanta falcons won 59 of the games in 64 minutes. who is the real winner here? if we do nothing, sports will collapse on its own.
half of the teams that play lose. think of that, 50% of the teams are already losing, #sad and it's only going to get worse. sports is in a death spiral. we have to do something. it really comes down to a binary choice and this is the best and only chance that we'll get ask one final point, if we don't build a wall in the sports culture it will be flooded with soccer with all of its 0-0 tie. sports is for winners, not losers, right, helene? >> i take great umbrage with that, i completely disagree with your last sentence. >> i do sort of want to wrap up. we've had a big health care show in general. what is this going to look like in a year in do you think this bill is actually going to pass the united states senate? >> i do not. it's hard to pass a healthcare bill. everybody seems to be against it. the senators are freaking out, and so i think we'll get without trump care we'll be stuck with obamacare which is in deterioration. >> i think we'll slow down this week when the cbo number comes out.
>> i think the bill's going to pass. >> both the house and senate? >> absolutely, but we have no idea what the bill looks like yet. >> you think what we see now is -- >> it will go through changes, in my opinion. >> helene, does it happen this year? >> i don't think it's going to pass, and i also think that we are going to be stuck with obamacare except we're not going to fix what's wrong with it which puts us in a worse position. >> the reason i agree with rick is the difference within the republican party are structural and it's not like there is a magic solution that will please them. >> i was just going to say, there seems to be an ideological divide that can't be fiblgsed. >> i think the freedom caucus as they call themselves now is a nice pull and i think they'll get some of their values and ideas embedded in some changes in this policy. >> do you think democrats will go for this? >> you know what? let's go back to sports, how far would the green bay packers get if the team playing take the
ball and the referee and go home? i certainly would like to think that we can work together to some extent, and i think 2018 elections and some of these -- we're not living in the same -- >> and the districts in contention will get some of these senators to work together. >> it will have to move a long way. >> all i know, another election that will be all about health care. a quick note before we go in this week's podcast, helene and i spent time talking one-on-one about her new book and her other passion those 0-0 ties in soccer and this book "madam president" about liberia's first woman president, the continent of africa's first woman president and it's an amazing book and an amazing story you tell on the podcast. please listen to it. we'll be back next week. if it's sunday it's "meet the press." you can see more endgame in post game intonsorrsponsored by boei "meet the press "kwot facebook page.