tv The War Room With Jennifer Granholm Current June 28, 2012 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT
room with governor jennifer granholm. this is "viewpoint." this is current tv. we will see you online. museum >> i am jennifer granholm. tonight in the war room a tale of two kinds of leadership. >> history is written on an epic day in the nation's capitol where the best and worst of our democracy was put the on sglailt. chief justice john roberts sal vandals the integrity of the supreme court with a 5 to 4 vote in favor of upholding the affordable care act. it's a reminder to millions of americans, we take care of our own. just hours later: >> what we are doing today is simply al partisan abuse of the contempt power. >> partisanship and special interests re-emerge. for the first time in history,
congress votes to hold a sitting attorney general in contempt simply because they could. it's lights and shadows tonight in the war room. >> it should be pretty clear by now i didn't do this because it was good politics. i did it because i believed it was good for the country. i did it because i believed it was good for the american people. >> that's president obama reacting to the supreme court's decision to uphold his signature piece of legislation, the affordable care act. conservative chief justice john roberts stunned court watchers when he sided with his progressive colleagues in the 5 to 4 decision. of course, the 2010 law requires all americans to have insurance. it prevents insurers from denying coverage for
pre-existing conditions and allows young adults to stay on their parents' health plan until they are 26. the congressional budget office expects 33 million uninsured americans will now be covered. most republicans, including mitt romney, say it's bad law and they will work to repeal it. >> let's make clear that we understand what the court did and did not do. what the court did today was say that obama care does not violate the con statedtution. what they did not do was say that obama care is good law or that it's good policy. >> so let me start tonight's show with my point: here is an amazing coincidence. when f.d.r. was trying to pass his historic new deal legislation, a conservative supreme court was aligned against him, and it was prepared to strike down its key laws, so he crafted ambulance f.d.r. did, to pack the supreme court with more liberal justices.
but in 1937, one of those justices eye ron clip named justice roberts, owen roberts he switched his vote to join the lib rams in the minimum wage case and gave the president a victory. his volt change was known as the switch in time that saved 9 because it lessened the need for roosevelt to remake the court. here we are 75 years later and another justice roberts saved the supreme court or at least its reputation. the supreme court has plummeted until public esteem from an 80% a approval rating in the 1990s to 44% now. but our justice roberts rebooted the switch in time that saves nine. i have been quick to criticize the politization of the u.s. supreme court. too quick, it turns out. justice roberts, i had you pegged for just another bush v.
gore justice. you seem to me as partisan as any member of congress. but today, you gave us faith that a bedrock institution of government can actually work can rise above partisanship that the court is simply do its job for the good of the nation. rare washington move this was. you actually did what was promised. you called balls and strikes as an objective umpire. politically, it would have been easy for you to side with justice kennedy and team sk. calia. but instead, you humbly called it as you saw it. courage is so breathtaking. be clear: today's opinion was not a victory for president obama. it was a victory for the american people. it was a victory for those who need cancer treatment, for children born with disabilities men needing prostate exams for
seniors who can't afford prescription drugs. it was a victory for young people just starting out, a victory for everyone who doesn't want to be denied coverage or have their rates skyrocket. and it was a victory for the institution and the legacy of the supreme court. really, a sigh of relief. ah. for our constitutional system. the contrast between justice roberts' action and the baseless, crassly partisan congressional contempt vote which we will talk about later on in the show could not be sharper. we saw two kinds of leadership today. justice roberts, you didn't make a political decision. you made a legal ruling. so i toast you. i raise my glass to the man who has given us all a lesson in non-partisanship, in doing the right thing despite the
political costs. so to justice roberts thank you for your example on behalf of a grateful nation. now, if you could just vote to overturn citizens united that would be great. now, joining us tonight to share symbolically in the champagne and to discuss the ramifications of today's ruling and what it may mean for the court's future is ambassador do you go kenyick from malibu, california and from washington, we are also joined by mike sachs the supreme court correspondent for huffington post. thank you both for coming in to the war room. >> governor, good to be with you. >> happy to be here. >> thank you. so michael, you were in the court today. what was the mood like in the supreme court as the decision was being read? >> well, it was solemn at first and as we know from the cnn and
fox snafus. it didn't seem at first the mandate was going wrong. chief justice roberts said one was based on the commerce clause and one-on the tax. that was a hint, perhaps he was going to give one to some give another to others. when he advanced the commerce summary, he sided with the four dissenters saying the mandate would fall under the commerce clause but the penalty for not obtaining it could stittuted a tax in roberts' eyes he was able to keep the law upheld and move forward with obamacare really almost as written. >> well, and obviously, this was a surprise to many. in fact, doug many were surprised it was upheld but certainly surprised at who was the deciding vote. you were not surprised it was upheld. tell us why. >> i was not surprised because i noticed during the questioning that chief justice roberts was
very concerned about the political argument that was being made to him by the most conservative advocates in the case. he kept pulling them back. he kept correcting them. he kept saying that they were overstating their positions. t. and that waswas a signal to me they had started to rub john roberts the wrong way. he very much appreciates the significance of his role as chief justice as you very well nicely put it at the top of the show, to maintain the integrity of the court, to keep the court from making the second mistake that it made, you know, by involving itself in another presidential election as it did in bush versus gore to have the court resolve a legal case on the basis of legal principles the most important of which is deference to the congress of the united states, did he haveeference to democracy. this is a wonderful
reaffirmation of that principle. >> wonderful. you affirmed that as well. you were treatweeting the aca decision -- this was your tweet total coup for roberts, got everything he wouldn't constitutionally while heading off clash with obama. is that what you meant? >> yeah. the house could probably use chief justice roberts to not auto canabalize itself. he was able to put spending clause with the medicaid expansion. he got those things. what he was able to hand to alabama and his institution was a win on the law, itself. so he was able to head off a clash with the executive branch while still advancing constitutional law. it was very, very, very good threading of the needle. >> it was interestingly done. but there was some discussion
about a late switch on the part of justice roberts, you, i assume have read the dissenting opinions. what was your reaction to them? >> it's interesting that the dissent had a number of harsh passages in it. but far fewer than you might expect given the intensity of the debate. what that tended to signal to me, governor, was that the dissent was trying to work very hard to keep roberts in their camp, that the scalia alito, kennedy, thomas group was working very hard to keep roberts on board, but they ultimately lost him. so what you see in the dissent is an attempt to play down their argumentation to avoid some of the homonym that goes on. every now and then it peeks out.
racial tiebreakers and the issue of the meaning of brown versus the board of education. this was a case where i think justice roberts was being exactly what we expect a chief justice to be: namely someone who was reading the law and was not going to be kowed into an outcome on the basis of friendship, partisanship or ideology. he was going to decide in terms of the constitution and its structure, and as mike said, he managed to do what john marshal did at the very beginning of our history: namely, he increased the reputation and integrity of the court and at the same time pres earned some of the limits on government power even as he vindiciated this particular exercise of government power. >> well, it was very deftly done but i am curious, mike if you were in the courtroom. a lot of people have described justice scalia's post your as
being like the father who is son just told him that he crashed the car. i am wondering if you could tell from justice scalia or the other conservatives that they felt like the rug had been pulled out from under them, that it was really a late switch. >> they were pretty stone-faced. when kennedy got around to reading the joint dissent, he had some passion behind his words. he emphasized certain things. he said structure is liberty, describing why they should stick to what he saw as a limited -- limited government and limited powers of congress as outlined in article 1 section 8 of the constitution. there was some fire there. but you also saw, behind the care curtain, from my vantage point before the justices came out, i saw clarence thomas smiling with steven briar. as soon as the gavel came up thomas's face went stone, they came out briar was smiling. sodamayor was smiling. you never know. when it started going, you
started to see some of the justices feeling a little bit better about things, some a little worse. >> i am not sure how much better they are going to feel. doug, let me ask you quickly, the next term is going to be very significant. the court's going to take up two center pieces of the civil rights movement in public education. do you think today's ruling tells us anything about how justice roberts would act in those cases? do you think it gives him freedom to go back to the conservative side? >> i think what it does is give him the confidence of the whole court because he treated everyone fairly. if doesn't tell us about his views on those cases. it would be wrong for him to signal what those are before the briefing and the argument. it does tell us that he is going to give everyone involved in that case a fair hearing. i think it builds the confidence within the court that everyone of the justices have, whether they were applauding him today
or disappointed with the outcome. >> very interesting day. fascinating historical day. doug of pepper dine university, mike scabbings of the huffington post. next, the flip side of today's political coin eleanor holmes norton walks out of the vote to hold attorney general eric holder in contempt. she will join us next to explain why. plus, how will the right spill -- spin -- spill? spin the healthcare front. we will tell you that as soon as they stop holding their breath and stomping their feet >> our freedom of choice just met its death penalty, the supreme court.
more dirt than vacuuming alone while neutralizing odors for a clean you can see, smell and really enjoy. don't just vacuum clean. resolve clean. gaeme inc. thank gaemezilinsky, thank you for joining >> the white house has chosen to invoke executive privilege. that leaves us know other options. the only recourse left for the houses is to continue seeking the truth and to hold attorney
general in contempt of congress. >> today was a historic day for several reasons, not all good. congress voted to hold a sitting attorney general in contempt for the first time in american history. 17 democrats joined 238 republicans in holding eric holder in contempt, far more than the 162 needed to pass. 110 members didn't vote at all, % including 108 democrats who walked out in protest. house minority leader nancy pelosi was among them. here she is afterward. >> it is no accident. it is no coincidence that the attorney general of the united states is the person responsible for making sure that voter suppression does not happen in our currentountry. these same people are holding in contempt are part of a nationwide scheme to suppress the vote. >> she just might be onto
something. my next guess, eleanor holmes norton was in the group of representatives who walked off of the floor. she is a member of the house oversight committee. representative holmes norton joins us from washington. thank you for returning to the war room, ma'am. >> of course governor. >> well, so do you agree with leaderpep leader pelosi that the republicans were targeting attorney general holder because of his efforts on voter suppression? >> it's hard to lay what the most pol arrestized house in our country since the civil war to lay to them what their motives were. they certainly were gunning, if you will forgive me, for the attorney general for some time and refused even when he indicated that he would keep negotiating to do so. they seemed to be driven toward
contempt. if you ask yourself why, you will get the fact that it's fair to draw the implication that they didn't like what he was doing, perhaps here, but en more so in other parts of his jurisdiction and hoped to distract him. of course, there has been no sign of that. what there is every sign though, of, governor is that they were without any respect for the separation of powers. they were -- this is the first time that any cabinet official has been held in contempt. they were at great pains to conduct a sham investigation. fast and furious didn't begin with this attorney general. he shut it down. this committee on which i sit, refused to, to call any of the witnesses we asked for. the former attorney general who was personally briefed, the
alcohol and tobacco and firearms officials who were directly involved and were fired, who also indicated that the attorney general and his top aides were never informed. they were out to get this attorney general. governor, i don't think they will. >> yeah. >> i don't think they will. i think they will fail with this because i don't think any court would join in such a partisan contempt proceeding. >> you spoke about the nra's role in this hearing, at a hearing before about fast and furious. let's take a license to what you said. >> a congress where the gun lobby controls the congress of the united states. on the republican side of the aisle, they totally control it. on my side of the aisle, they virtually control it. >> i am just wondering from your perspective: how big a role did the nra play in this vote today?
>> the 17 democratic votes were -- are entirely attributable to the nra, the greatest bullying lobby in the history of the united states. what they did was to say that they are going to, quote, score this vote. >> that's to say they are really going after you. if if you don't vote for contempt. now, these are fairly vulnerable democrats. they are in a congress that has been doing rejected of districting and in other ways spending money and all they can do to get at the democrats that remain. but remember what the nra was really about. the nra is as responsible as any single entity for the only issue really that motivated or should have motivated this investigation, and that was the death of a boarder agent, and he died -- >> talk about that. >> because -- >> how were they responsible for
that? talk about what their role in this was. >> they stand in the way of closing the loophole. it's a huge one. it's a gaping hole, that makes it impossible for a u.s. attorney to go after straw purchases where you purchase sometimes hundreds of guns without inpresumety and you can sell them or do anything else you want to. and what they did in this case of course, was to sell them to thugs in mexico. these straw purchases are legal, mandated by the gun lobby. the atf and the alcohol, tobacco and firearms folks in arizona did a sting. they said let us follow these guns, wiretap them and it may be we can get these thugs this way. they were virtually forced into some way to intercept the guns since the nra stands in the way of our getting the guns at the source when the straw purchases
are done. and yet, this was virtually never discussed during the entire investigation it was all about the attorney general. let's just get the attorney general. >> the irony about this, the hypocracy in this, especially in light of the story yesterday from fortunatee magazine that said the atf had no plan to walk drugs into mexico to drug cartels and they were prohibited from doing the investigation for the very reason you say, that the nra and other proceed second amendment people have prevented additional laws that would protect and en ail the atf to have enforcement opportunity. it is unbelievable. representative eleanor holmes norton, thank you for coming and telling it like it is like you always do. up next -- >> my pleasure. >> you bet. weed in media are prone to hyper boley. there is no doubt about that. to say today's separate property ruling was a matter of life and death is an all-to-honest
>> before we get into the politics of healthcare reform, let's take a moment to appreciate exactly what the law will do: all right? under the affordable care act, 33 million uninsured americans are going to get insurance. people who are under 26, young adults, can stay on their parents' plans. hallelujah. women cannot be charged more for the same coverage. pregnancy and sexual assault will no longer be considered pre-existing conditions. it will be illegal for insurers to deny coverage to people because of real pre-existing conditions or to cut off coverage because of lifetime
caps. and preventative care will be covered under private plans. all of that sounds great. right? so why do more than half of all americans oppose the law? it's because of this the right-wing has gone to great lengths tovillefy it. look at this t ads attacking the law, $235 million. compared to the since $9 million that supporters have spent 700,000 of that from the obama campaign. huge dispropportionat attack ads going after the healthcare act. it's not over yet. today, the koch brothers announced their americans for prosperity group is going to launch a $9 million ad campaign against this now supreme court-certified healthcare law. here to talk about the law and healthcare messageing is dr. do not burwick. he experienced the republican spin machine when the president tapped him to head the centers
for medicare and medicaid services of the he was never confirmed because congressional republicans painted him as an advocate of healthcare rationing. he is now a 7senior fellow for the centre for american progress. he comes to us from newton massachusetts. thank you so much, dr. burwick for joining us inside the war room. >> it's a privilege to be with you governor. thank you. >> all right. so i want you to explain this all. cot healthcare messaging have been handled better? and what should have been done on the messaging? >> well retro speculation is always edesier. i think the fact is, this is a great law. it helps tens of millions of americans. the insurance system for everyone is much better as a result of this law, plus we are moving our country toward healthcare as a human right. who could really oppose that? and then the other side of the law is little understoods the quality improvement side. in order to afford healthcare we need the system to be better. it means to be more seamless more responsive to patients, safer. a lot all of that happens
largely by the resources that you brought by this law. it's a great law. it's important for us to tell it. >> it's important for us to tell it. >> that's why the message going forward has to be simple and people have to feel comfortable with what it is, is. we are seeing pushback from the republicans, the next phase of rhetoric. take a license to what mitt romney said today, calling it a tax. >> obama care raises taxes on the american people by approximately $500,000,000,000. >> so how should the democrats push back on that tax message? especially in light of the fact that the court found that it was a use of the congress's taxing power today in the supreme court decision? >> i don't care what you call it. it's about fair placey that free riders need to be part of the system. we need to contribute.
>> personable responsibility? right? >> i think so. governor romney, the governor of my state, massachusetts, when our universal coverage was passed in 2006 was taking quite a different song. we are in this together. we need to help each other. today, you may be a contributor to the pool but tomorrow, you may be sick and you will benefit from the participation of your neighbors. that was his argument. we now have over 99% coverage of kids in massachusetts and over 98% coverage of adults. costs haven't gone up. we have the same problems all other states do and we are going to work on that now. but this is about fairness. and whether you call it a tax or whatever, i think, is much less relevant than the fact we are in this together. >> that's what this law is about. >> something tells me because he has said all of these complimentary things in the past about the law that he pushed forward in massachusetts, we are not going to see a whole lot about this healthcare issue, at least in the presidential race going forward. the koch brothers are targeting state ex changes. their americans for prosperity
group is going to send mailers asking if lawmakers are obamacare collaborators who approve spending money to set up a healthcare exchange. what impact do you think that is going to have? >> the ex changes are the places that the can be delegated to the federal to find every dayable insurance. people who opposing the exchanges are saying we are not going to help you find affordable coverage. i don't think that's a sound position. i think the republicans or anyone that's opposing the law from now on is going to have an increasingly steep slope because the public will see the benefits. millions of people who's kids are going to be followed people will find pressure intervention benefits, people are not going to find their insurance companies taking their insurance away because they got sick or be unable to find insurance because they have a pre-existing condition. i think they will be more and more evident over time. i think the public is going to
see quickly the benefits of this law for them. >> i think if you wouldn't mind talking because i know you helped craft this. the insentative that states have to actually opt in. i mean it goes to what you were just talking about. the court today said that if the states opt out, the federal government cannot take away their medicaid money just the increase as a result of the expanded population. are states going to opt out in light of the fact that the federal government is willing to fund their expanded populations? >> they can but i don't actually think they are going to. for one thing, this exactly the deal in medicateid itself in 1965. states didn't have to join medicaid. they all did. that was with the federal share of costs of 50, 60, sent %. now for the expanded coverage, we are talking about 100% federal money for the first three years and tailing off to 90%, overall about 90% of the money is federal. are the states going to say, we
are not going to play? these people for whom we could get federal money to support their care are going to show up in an emergency room? they are going to be in our state anyway. someone is going to pay. wouldn't it be better, i would say, if the federal government is the contributor and if the states choose not to play, i imagine the hospitals and the doctors in most states will say what are you doing? here is funding for us to give the care we want to give. why would you turn it down? it's federal dollars. it doesn't seem like a longsuit to me. >> governor, if there is expansion of medicaid, these are going to lap it up. i don't care what the tea party says. are you heartened? do you think this could be on the path to providing care to everyone? what would be the next step? >> so hard. it's so hard. it's a wonderful country. we are really taking a step toward healthcare as a human right. >> that's where we need to go. all other western democracies do that. we are in a smart way using the private sector and public sector. this isn't a government takeover, normal medicine,
doctors, nurses, hospitals giving the care they want to give. it's a wonderful step our country is taking. i think we will realized that and make care better. the next step is to make it better. >> that's the hard part. it's not actually government. it's the private -- it's the delivery of care hospitals learning to provide continuous care, safer care doctors and hospitals working together in different ways with a better payment system. that's the a lot of change. we can do it. i have seen it happen all the over the country. there is a journey ahead. we need a better healthcare system and we will get there. but it's not going to be immediate. it will be an evolution. >> sure. >> it's a wondwe ever been day. >> it's a great day. it's a great day in merkel. we will have continuous improvement. >> that's dr. donald berwick. thank you for coming inside the war room. up next, the republican spin machine nearly blew a gasket in the wake of today's ruling. we will get into that and what this all means on the campaign front and later, brett erlich gives us the couch potato's view
of today's ruling. >> cnn and fox finally agreed on something. unfortunately, they were both just really wrong. don't go away. see, airline credit cards promise flights for 25,000 miles, but... [ man ] there's never any seats for 25,000 miles. frustrating, isn't it? but that won't happen with the capital one venture card. you can book any airline, anytime. hey, i just said that. after all, isn't traveling hard enough? ow! [ male announcer ] to get the flights you want, sign up for a venture card at capitalone.com. what's in your wallet? uh, it's ok. i've played a pilot before. what makes hershey's s'mores special? pure chocolate goodness that brings people together. hershey's makes it a s'more... you make it special. pure hershey's. with lysol kitchen soap hands are healthy.
with lysol kitchen soap, washing dishes is easy. with lysol kitchen soap surfaces are clean. hands. dishes. surfaces. the lysol no-touch kitchen system: the only all-in-one kitchen soap. try it for yourself. lysol. mission for health. desk top, lab top, ipad. iphone. >> pleasant your hearts. >> the big one. >> stephanie: all i know, the little flower is there and it means go to meeting. i love go to meeting.
>> what americans want is a commonsence, step by step approach to healthcare reform that will protect american's access for the care they need for a doctor they choose. >> call it what you will. it is a step forward for america's families. take yes for an answer. this is a very good thing for the american people. >> well that was republican house speaker john boehner and democratic house leader nancy pelosi, two different takes on today's supreme court ruling. they are giving us a glimpses of how well hear candidates discuss healthcare. we have to look at the politics. joining me inside the war room for how that's going to play t $ic strategist donnie fowler who it has worked on the democratic presidential campaigns and here is polster, david merman. healthcare polling is one of his specialties at lake research
partners. welcome to you both back in the war room. let us hit this because, of course, a huge day. right? >> huge day. >> i want to start with something that you have worked on and are well aware of is this issue about who healthcare plays better with. and so david, i mean if i see this, man, democrats are doing really well in terms of healthcare as an issue. >> that's been consistently true for the last couple of years 10 to 15 points voters approve more than republicans on healthcare. they have their concerns. they have their concerns about this law. some of those are going to be resolved after this decision. but bottom line is they know democrats are trying to do something to deal with healthcare costs. republicans are really not. for all that boehner said today, people get the fact that republicans, all they are trying to do is cut this down rather than replace it with anything. >> the american people know who is on their side and who is on the side of the insurance companies. >> donnie given what happened today, how big of an issue do
you think healthcare is going to be in the presidential race going forward. >> god bless me, i spent all day talking to radio talk radio. >> yeah. >> what i learned from rush limbaugh and sean hannity is that they are going to use this to rile up their base. they said this is the end of freedom, the end of america and this is big government and everybody is going to get taxed. so they have reverted to their base and it's probably a wash. >> the question is: how can mitt romney do this when he was the guy who modeled this? take a license to what he said today. take a license to the sound bytes from mitt romney about the affordable care act? >> if we want good jobs and a bright comic future for ourselves and our kids we must replace obama care. >> so he is tying it to the economy. >> that's right. >> the republicans are making two major blunders if they try to run on this issue. one is even though it's a major
very important issue, it's actually not the issue that voters are most focused on. >> hang on. we are going to get to that? >> the economy doesn't want it. he is a deeply flawed messenger because the one place where there is an individual mandate that's working is massachusetts. >> here is what the headline today should be: supreme court upholds romneycare 5 to 4 with a majority opinion written by g.o.p. chief justice roberts. >> how do you get out of that. >> thank you, republican party for delivering this for delivering healthcare. >> let's look at this issue, because i think this is fascinating. this is what you were just referring to, david, the most important issue for congress to focus on. healthcare costs is at 8%, obviously people care about the economy. >> if all republicans do for the rest of this year, which thisey are threatening to do is we are going to repeal. we are going to repeal. discipline >> bring it on. >> voters are going stosay are you are not focused on the issues i care about.
they will look ine if we can't annual. i disagree. i think it's roughly a wash of in terms of where the voters are but it was a good day for the president in the sense he looked strong, effective. his major signature accomplishment is going to stay in place. strength is important for a president. >> donnie, on the president, how should he proceed after today? does he focus on healthcare? does he amplify the specifics and do the messaging on this affordable care act? >> every time mitt romney and the republican party say they are going to repeal healthcare the president has to say what you have been saying tonight. that means they are going to repeal the ban on pre-existing conditions, repeal healthcare for kids up until they are 26 years old, repeal preventative care? he shouldn't focus on it primarily. it is the economy. it's much trongstronger. >> i am going to show you one more, the affordable care act 1 and this gets back to the question: 43% favor, 34%
oppose. and 13% oppose because it's not liberal enough. >> right. you add the 43 and 13, you have a majority of the country who are happy with the decision today or wish the law were even stronger. >> this one, those ones are not the ones that. >> right. >> they are not going to the tea party and vote for romney or a republican for congress. the republicans, i think, are misleading themselves in thinking they have a majority. >> smaefrt guys in the business, thanks, you guys for joining me inside the war room as ever donnie fowler and david merman. up next: republicans reacted today's ruling much like a 5-year-old does when he drops his ice cream cone. we will knock down some of their more egregious statements or the ones we have time for. it's next in the war room and it's only on current tv.
our did he have citizen and national debt and pushes those obligations on to coming generations. >> all right. you are back inside the war room. i am jennifer granholm. >> that's mitt romney spreading another fallacy about the affordable care act. we have heard bogous claims from all sorts of republicans. joining united states from washington to knock them down, we hope, is jonathan kohn the great senior editor. you are an expert in all things healthcare. let's begin with a sound byte from everybody's favorite hot air balloon, rush limbaugh. >> a majority of the supreme court found obamacare unconstitutional. they found the mandate unconstitutional. the chief justice, john roberts, kicked into activist mode and found a way around that.
>> what is he talking about? go ahead. yeah. i don't really know what he is talking about. look, i mean from the very beginning, the defenders of the law made, you know three separate arguments, and one of those arguments was, hey you know, this mandate is basically saying if you don't get insurance, you have to pay the government some money. >> that's a tax. this was an argument there from the very beginning. it was argued in court the chief justice obviously doesn't like his law. but his credit he said i am a justice. i have to call it like i see it. rush limbaugh is making stuff up again. >> no surprise there. sarah palin took to her facebook page today and wrote we now see that this is the largest tax increase in history. it will slam every business owner and every one of the 50% of americans who currently pay their taxes. how do you respond to that
jonathan? >> i knew this is going to come as a great shock but sarah palin is lying too. this has been making the rounds the largest tax hike in history. the law has some taxes in it. they are primarily taxes on very wealthy people and taxes on parts of the healthcare industry to help pay, to help people middle class people afford their insurance. but the total size is not anywhere near the largest tax hike in history. the independent fact checking group found that it wasn't even in the top 5. so, no she is wrong. >> again. let me try one more on you. senator marco rubio said this on fox news today. take a license. >> and if you don't buy it, you have an irs problem. if you do not buy health insurance, the irs is going to be on your back and chasing you. they are going to take away your refund. they are going to increase your fees. they are going to come after you. >> all right.
so are the jack-booted thugs of the irs going to come knock down your door and take your home. >> i will give the senator credit, there is a shred of truth. it says if you don't get healthcare insurance and you decide not to pay the penalty, the irs can withhold future tax income refunds. so pay your taxes and if it turns out you paid too much, you get a get a refund. if you don't pay the penalty they don't have to give you your refund back. but that's it. there is no other financial penalty. no one is going to come to your door. there is no criminal penalty at all. this is a myth. it's a lie and, you know, frankly senator rubio should know better than to be kind of spreading that kind of nonsense. >> well, i am speechless. anyway, and i have to play one more for you to get your reaction to knock this one down as well. this is what senate minority leader mitch mcconnell had to
say: >> americans were promised lower healthcare costs. they are going up. americans were promised lower premiums. they are going up. most americans were promised their taxes wouldn't change. and they are going up. seniors were promised medicare would be protected. it was raided today pay for a new entitlement instead. >> maybe you can describe that a little bit. i know he has made a lot of points there but if you could take that and describe it for us in a wayprehensiblecompprehensible. >> here is the funny part: healthcare comessts are going up. they are always going to go up. it gets more expensive over time but all of the evidence we have suggests that for the first time in many years that increase is actually slowing down and most people think that's because of this new healthcare law.
the other thing, this mandate, the law does say we want everyone to be getting health insurance finally including those who don't buy it because it seems too expensive. what you don't hear about is to make this possible, the government provides these huge tax cents credits for a family of four making $50,000 having to buy insurance on it's own, you know, that insurance policy will probably cost about $14,000 but because of this program, that family pays only three or four,$000. so it's actually a great deal. people are going to save money with this. >> you see never hear it. >> you did just now. >> that's jonathan cohn hitting them out of the park every sing one, knocking down those rumors, inu endo and and lies from the republicans. he is a senior editor of the new republic. next brett erlich is so used to being wrong that he has become an expert when recognizing when
others don't get it right. you are watching the war room and we'll be right back. (vo) every week night, cenk uygur calls out the mainstream media. >> are they worried about the so, you guys grew up together. yes, since third grade... what are you lookin' at? not looking at i anything... we're not good enough for you. must be supermodels? what do you model gloves? brad, eat a snickers. why? 'cause you get a little angry when you're hungry. better? [ male announcer ] you're not you when you're hungry™. better. [ male announcer ] snickers satisfies.
the right went nuts. rand paul and michelle bachmann claim the law is still unconstitutional. glenn beck said the decision proves that george w. bush was a progressive and mike pence compared it to 9-11. but the real crazies are all of those who said they were moving to canada because of obamacare. you know, canada, the country with universal healthcare? to get away from socialism in the united states and they want to move somewhere without universal healthcare. their choices are limited. this map shows the u.s. is pretty much the only developed nation without it. so, have fun moving to mexico crazies. just be careful when you cross the border to i am great back. mmigrate back. >> when the supreme court issued a decision cnn and fox news:
here to show you every cringe-inducing moment of misreporting is brett erlich. shhh! bretts talking now. >> the supreme court decided on healthcare today. the decision: basically the individual mandate was upheld. so that's exactly what fox and cnn reported. right? not so much. >> it appears as if the supreme court justices have struck down the individual mandate. >> the individual mandate cannot be sustained under congress's power to regulate commerce. that means the mandate is gone. >> 0, that's so wrong. how can that be? after all, you did read through page 1. so for a few excruciating minutes, the millions of people watching fox and the dozens of people watching cnn were misinformed. now, for the people watching fox, they are pretty used to it but eventually the reporters figured out they were as wrong, as, say, dressing your pets up
like pilgrims and indians. >> it may be upheld. >> be cautious with this. we are tryingdor to do the best we can as we sort through it. >> theed lori third. it may not be correct. >> it may take several minutes. >> right as opposed to the several seconds it took you to jump to the conclusion you wanted. what a sad day it was for fox and cnn. and to make matters worse, they totally missed out on this secret meeting happening in the white house after the decision was red. now that's a political party. i am done talking now. >> oh, my. someone is always in our war room. check us out online at current.com/thewarroom, also where you can link up to twitter and facebook page and check out our web extras. i want to continue to encourage people to send great stuff to help decorate the war room. this particular one is from recollection oberhelman from fairmont