tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News March 18, 2017 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
care and the economy. we're going to sign off now. the journal editorial report is coming up next. laura and i will join you again at four. be sure you join us again on "america's news headquarters." laura: thanks for being with us today, we'll see you soon. ♪ ♪ we are proposing a budget that would strengthen a bloated bureaucracy. and i mean bloated. while protecting our national security. we see what we are doing with their military. bigger, better, stronger than ever before. >> welcome to "the journal editorial report" i am paul gigot. the trump administration blueprint on thursday reigniting a political uprising on capitol hill. $1.1 trillion budget allows the policy priorities with the homeland security and veterans
affairs all getting increases. the epa and state department taking the biggest hits. with double-digit spending cuts. despite a proposed $54 billion increase in defense spending, osman -- to house minority leader says -- >> education and innovation, clean energy and lifesaving medical research. >> paul: the pound this week wall street journal columnist and deputy editors dan henninger, kim stossel, mary kissel and assistant editorial page editor james freeman. kim, what does this budget tell you about president trump's budget priorities? >> debts with budgets are. their blueprints. there are visions. it will go through a lot of
modifications before they actually end up in an appropriations bill on the president's death. what he is essentially saying is that the money is going to go for core american projects like defense. for instance national security and a lot of other items which have become bloated over the years for that to be better handled by the state will get big cuts. he is limited a little bit and how much he can do because he is not touching entitlement but this is when he ran on and i think a lot of americans would agree with. >> as he did. more money for a lot of things and he is fulfilling a campaign promise. this is not medicaid, not social security, medicaid, the other growing entitlement is in the healthcare bill so it is not part of it. there is a big percentage cutting for epa. 20 percent for labor and the aid department. that is unheard of. >> it is unheard of but donald
trump also did not run on reforming social security and dealing with the national debt. you also see that reflected in this budget blueprint. i think about 70 percent of the budget spending is on mandatory spending. entitlement spending and yes you are right the healthcare bill does up in some respects trump is also playing on the edges because he's only really looking at this budget blueprint and the other 30 percent. >> paul: i think that is the essential point here. i mean what is he doing in terms of actually, he is proposing a cut. a lot out of these programs. congress almost never goes along with that. is this a pro forma policy that will not be passed by congress? >> let's see. i think it is again him fulfilling a promise. he talked about how he said he would give more to veterans defense and he also said how the regulatory state needs to
be scaled back. and part of that is substantial cuts at the epa, other agencies but i am hoping and i think he is beginning a useful conversation about what is the appropriate role in the federal government. and you see the administration seemingly getting beat up in the media about meals on wheels. >> paul: not seemingly, actually. >> i would hope that this would for some, discussion of if a program cannot gain support in the communities where it operates, may be that is telling us something. maybe church food pantries, local food banks, people, other groups that take care of shut-ins do the job better. and i think this could be, maybe this gets reduced by congress. but i think he is going after some sacred cows in terms of federal funding in a healthy way. >> paul: we have seen these debates before dan. the sacred cow is almost always there. >> it doesn't mean you can't
keep fighting. i'm going to get a little bit excited about this budget. i think it is a big start of something big or so is a smaller. will say entitlement and that is the big part of the federal spending. if that means a legal department agricultural department and they do not mean anything, this is this leisure has built up over decades. they have the great commission. it was a great report. they did do some of that. and i'm kind of hoping that maybe donald trump, who is issued an executive order on monday, porting the agency to look at redundancies and things to be sent back to the state, it sounds to me like he and mick mulvaney his director is going to stay on this case. >> i think is great and mick mulvaney said taxpayers are giving up this money and we have to show them what they're getting for it. that was refreshing to hear but we also did not hear very much
about -- there's a lot of talk about cutbacks and the tenant conversation you see in europe. but there was not a lot of focus or explanation on why this budget would get america growing again. what it would get companies to invest and -- >> paul: what about this complaint from some republicans are saying this is not enough? with the baseline that congress had installed. it is only three percent more than barack obama requested in his last budget. and john mccain and others are saying is just not enough. >> that is a fair criticism. and again, this is one of the problems that we are only going to look at domestic discretionary spending. because they wanted to offset this. they are taking money out of other programs to send over to the defense department. it is not a big pool of money you have to work with. even with these deep cuts. this is going to be one of donald trump's big struggles
with this budget. the republicans who push back on the amount of defense spending. there is also going to be a big moment for republicans. as he said, the sacred cows usually when when it comes these fights over some of the domestic cuts that he has proposed. republicans stand up and start protecting all of their hometown pet projects here and there it will not be a big message they're sending us the country. >> paul: still ahead, the congressional budget office are gives us our analysis of the republican health care bill shaking up the fight to repeal and replace obamacare. so what should we make of the numbers? we will ask next.
weeds. nature's boomerang. at roundup®, we know they keep coming back. you never invited this stubborn little rascal to your patio. so, draw the line. one spray of roundup® max control 365 kills to the root and keeps weeds away for up to 12 months. because patios should be for cooking out and kicking back. roundup® max control 365. draw the line. prevent weeds from coming back for up to one year. it's about moving forward not back. it's looking up not down. it's feeling up thinking up living up. it's being in motion... in body in spirit in the now. boost. it's not just nutrition. it's intelligent nutrition. with 26 vitamins and minerals and 10 grams of protein. all in 3 delicious flavors. it's choosing to go in one direction... up. boost. be up for it. >> paul: republicans and
bill that would reduce the federal deficit by $337 billion over the next 10 years. the democrats pouncing on the fact that 23 million people will be uninsured under the republican plan. what should we make of the numbers? douglas was the director of the congressional budget office under president george w. bush. he is now the president of the american action form. welcome it is good to see you. >> thank you. >> paul: let's step back before we get into details. for a lot of viewers who do not understand what the role is, i think they wonder, why should they determine policy and why they so important in this debate because actually nothing ever ran for election. >> the cbo was created to do two things for congress. number one issues occasional reports of the request of congress on policy issues. and what our options were defense and things like that. and then the core function is to score or calculate the impact on the federal budget of
any piece of legislation there doing. so what happens coming and going out. congress can ignore those numbers if they want. and set their own policy because after all they are the people who did put their ideas before the voters. >> absolutely. and i was try to remind people that the cbo -- >> paul: let's start with the two big numbers to pay the 24 million and loss coverage. what do you make of that prediction? seems to be looking at the report that it is basically most of it on the fact that the mandate to buy insurance would go away. do you agree with that? >> yes and the easiest way to see that is to look at next year, 2018. when most of obamacare would be in place. it would be the same subsidies in insurance regulations.
they have not done all that yet but the mandate is off so it is no longer illegally to be an insured. cbo says 5 million people choose not to buy individual insurance policies.and since many people will choose not to participate in every medicaid program. so there will be 11 million people quote - uninsured because of the law but that tells you two things. number one, the mandates really important to cbo. that is a very big change. >> paul: they put a lot of into that. >> but then they chose to do this. are they really worse off? >> paul: it is a matter of personal choice for them. here's the issue that i have on the cbo in the mandate. it has not been working all that wealth so far. they have overestimated a number of people who are insured under the affordable care act.
i mean i think it is something like 12 million more 16 million more that they anticipated in this year. back when the bill was passed. so i they think that this going to work so well and it would work so well in the future? >> they really do have a lot of faith in it.i cannot fully explain it. another thing to point out, go to the end of this in 2026. we are 2 million fewer in the market. that is essentially rounding over a ten-year period. >> paul: right. >> and you have more in the employer market. so that is a really big number in my view. and i do not fully understand that. and lastly something crucial is 14 million fewer people in medicaid in 2026. .tacular and assumes that the current medicaid program can go on for 10 more years. i think that is completely unrealistic. in 10 years we will have deficit well over $1 trillion. it will be driven by medicare, medicaid and social security
and those type of programs. the idea that medicare will go on reforms that theory i think is an illusion. you want to look at the comparison between this medicaid reform and another one because it is going to happen. and it gives you a different view of the world. >> paul: that is relative focus on now. you're been a deficit hawk about in time is my long time. and that these in terms of crowding out the federal fair skin everything else. you look at this bill. cbo's production analysis, spending would fall. by 1.2 over 10 years. and you are repelling almost 900 billion in taxes peers and attended deficit reduction, i don't know about you but i have not seen that in a very long time. much less the magnitude of spending cuts. is this in your view an important entitlement reform? >> this is the single biggest entitlement reform efforts contemplated. it is very important. i am thrilled that someone would actually take on one of these big entitlement programs and think about a different way
to run it. just to cut the cost, i mean i am a big budget hawk it's true. but it is not a very good program. think about heart about getting better healthcare for americans. that is what the bill is designed to do. >> paul: so if you get back to the states the idea is that the states knowing their populations better, nor the incentive structures within their states would be a better -- be able to do a better job of managing the program, reducing cost and naming working patients of medicaid. after all, we do not want everyone on medicaid all of their lives. we want the markets that we want them off of welfare. >> i think that is exactly right. there are a couple of things in the a lot of hope. it means there is a budget. you put something on a budget people manager. we do not put it on a budget people just spend it. so managing it is important here fixing states that have made these initiatives like indiana under mike pence as governor. a tremendous amount of success and controlling costs.
that is the number one objective in healthcare in america. i think that is the place to go. if there was one thing that would be in here that i have not seen so far, it would be nice if they had the option for states to have a work requirement with medicare. you can replicate the welfare reform success in this context as well. >> paul: and some republicans are pushing for that. thank you douglas holtz-eakin. i appreciate you being here. i thank you. >> paul: will come back split over obamacare. ken president trump broker a deal? >> the field i will ultimately sign will be a bill where everyone will get into the room and we are going to get it done. uh, excuse me, waiter. i ordered the soup... of course, ma'am. my apologies. c'mon, caesar. let's go. caesar on a caesar salad?
surprising. excuse me, pardon me. what's not surprising? how much money matt saved by switching to geico. could i get my parking validated? fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. afoot and light-hearted i take to the open road. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. the east and the west are mine. the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me. to take advantage of this offer on a volvo s90, visit your local dealer. essential for him, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and joint damage, even without methotrexate.
xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. fine for some. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™". >> based on the principle i
outlined in my address. we are going to get something done. >> paul: president trump nashville has been promising to broker a deal to advance the house plan to repeal and replace obamacare. despite the fact within the gop bill narrowly cleared another key hurdle this week with the house budget committee improving the package over the objections of three republican members. we are back with dan henninger, -- mary, third committee past this. it will narrow than the other two. where does this debate stand? where does the bill stand? >> this is something we have not seen in this country for a very long time. where does the bill stand? it is moving through committees, going next to a
house for vote and then mitch mcconnell and the senate wants to get this thing done by the first or second week of april. so i say it is moving along normal political process the sec some grumbling. there were three republicans in the house who voted against this. but they knew it was going to get there and go through here. is it going to be -- exhibit same name sent, same figures. mark meadows, rand paul, ted cruz. i think overall behind closed doors republicans know that they have to get this deal done.there is no other option. >> paul: james, next week because the house rules company when it will be a package of some introduce and the following to the floor. what do the critics want? what do your friends say that they want? >> i'm surprised you called them my friends. i think what they want is a move towards freedom and people being responsible for themselves. >> paul: what they want from
this bill? >> i think they should be appreciating have to get something done, that it is not everyday you get a $900 billion tax cut paired with 1.2 billion in 4 trillion. >> 1.2 trillion. >> 1.2 trillion excuse me. >> paul: he cannot even believe it is a trillion. at the margin euros the word about the structure because what you do is even if you get more freedom and you get less cost and a lot of reform in here, you still, every time you widen federal safety net you discourage people from working. so you want to reduce some of those incentives do not work as benefits are broadly given. i think that is what they should focus on. whether it is work requirements, tainting the eligibility for aid i think is where they ought to go. >> paul: but that is what the conservatives want.for some of the moderates particularly
in the senate worry that if you put too many restrictions on medicaid it will hurt their states. see if some of them say no, we want a little more money for medicaid. we do not want to move up the date or the expansion where it ends. so it is a needle here. pardon my metaphor.it is a narrow path they have to walk. >> yes and that is politics. indeed some of the governors have expanded their medicaid. as -- that might be why tom cotton -- and they had said the medicaid money had been helping with in vermont is real there's no question about that. since the decision has to be made about whether you go down that road and make it medicaid for everybody. or do a reform like this. and i think we've seen with the conservatives want. congressman mark meadows wrote a piece for the website this week. which they laid out what they wanted. expanded healthcare savings and compared nonrefundable tax credit. they want a freeze on medicaid
expansion right now. and they want a work requirement. look, this is all the sort of things that will be negotiated over the next two weeks. >> paul: kim, suddenly there is a discussion has some people saying well look, the dental time to be bipartisan with this. he should reach out to democrats. they should, don't try to do this with republican votes alone. is that realistic? >> time is giving a lot of advice he also has allies telling him he should ditch the whole process. and blame it on paul ryan. fortunately he has not taken that advice so far. but loved, he had done as much outreach as possibly could be done to democrats. he went into this thing let's work together for the democratic response has been, we will not help you. we will not aid in this process in any form or fashion. so the idea of him making any concessions when he is not likely to give any democrat a vote in the end i think is a waste of time. >> paul: it is uninformed i
think to think any democrat is going to vote for repeal to help him. i just do not see that happening. but what about donald trump the arbitrator? he says he is the arbitrator. this is like the closer.he is i mean, what does he mean? >> edge you know i was hoping for the live event where the various politicians make their pigeon he would decide between them. but i think behind closed doors that is what the president needs to do. eventually a deal will have to be cut. some pressure probably applied to the senate to accept that this has to be a reasonable reform and that spending and taxes due have to come down. but that is what a president is supposed to do. >> paul: are you as optimistic mary? >> yes. >> paul: and kim are you? >> i am all in with james. >> paul: another showdown is brewing on capitol hill.
interests agenda. >> paul: senate minority leader chuck schumer wednesday and in preview of the case that the democrats plan to make against donald trump's supreme court nominee. hearings are supposed to start monday amid leopards by the left portray him as an enemy of the little guy. to keep them from getting the 60 votes needed for confirmation under current senate rules. ed wakeman is president of the ethics and public policy center and former law clerk to supreme court justice antonin scalia. good to see you, thank you for coming in. >> thank you paul. >> paul: where does this nomination stand not going into the hearing? is in a strong position? >> he is in a strong position. the judge has an outstanding record.everyone across the spectrum has examined that record with care and passion and praised him.
the american bar association judicial evaluations committee gave him the highest unanimous well-qualified rating the strongest affirmative endorsement. -- has endorsed the judge from the beginning. a whole host of folks including a member of the board of the american constitution society. an alternative to the federal society. this is a man who over more than 10 years has shown himself to be a superb judge. and some folks are coming in to try and smear him. >> paul: it is interesting because the left, a lot of stories this last week saying that there is some pressure on democrats. from their base to say that the democrats have not stepped up and criticized him enough and put enough pressure on him. therefore i think it helps to explain some of what we heard from chuck schumer. what about this attack that judge gorsuch, is there
anything that would support this in his background? >> not at all. the attack is a baseless one. chuck schumer himself years ago praised -- for ruling against sympathetic litigants when their claims were weak. that is exactly what judge gorsuch has done. he has ruled based on the lot. sometimes a little guy wins any consent plenty of cases. sometimes the little guy loses. that is called the rule of law. something that chuck schumer and others on the left unfortunately are seeing fit to attack. >> paul: where else in the hearings do think that democrats will try to undermine judge gorsuch's support? where will they attack him? >> i think they're going to try and say he is no different from donald trump and try to fault him for whatever they see to be president trump spoke. i do not think that gets you anywhere. in the same with previous
presidents. >> paul: they're going to go after him on abortion rights aren't they? attracted person to say something about overturning roe versus wade. >> there is nothing specific on his record about the abortion question. he is a committed man of courage and i think that goes well for those of us who believe roe versus wade is an abomination that has distorted american politics more than three decades now. and needs to be reversed. when we look at his record, they are not going to see anything that clearly signals anything specific on that matter. >> paul: you are clerk for the late justice leah. tell us where judge gorsuch is replacing him, tell us what you think one or two places where he neil gorsuch would differ. from justice scalia. >> one area that judge gorsuch has highlighted his his
skepticism. >> paul: 30. >> chevron's deference means when a statute is he you can have an agency and one administration say that a statute means x and another administration it means y and another administration says it means not x. and the judge has called into the soundness of that approach. justice scalia was a defender of chevron deference. i think in his later years he may have had some second thoughts about how things apply. >> paul: think about the irony of that. donald trump who everyone is saying they are afraid he will run rampant with executive power. and he has nominated a justice
who is skeptical of executive branch discretion when it comes to interpreting statutes. i think democrats should look at that and say, this is great, this is exactly the kind of justice that we want. who will be there and be against any abuses by the executive branch. >> that's right. and more broadly, judge gorsuch is exactly the type of nominee that democrats would want from a republican president. and they should be praising donald trump for this peck. not attacking him for it. >> paul: okay thank you edward whelan appreciate you coming in. >> thank you. >> paul: north korea's nuclear threat looms as rex tillerson makes his first visit to asia. will a call for a new approach against that regime have nervous allies? >> let me be clear, this strategy of patience has ended. we are exploring a new range of diplomatic security and economic measures. north korea must understand that the only path to a secure
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. pcountries thatk mewe traveled,t what is your nationality and i would always answer hispanic. so when i got my ancestry dna results it was a shocker. i'm everything. i'm from all nations. i would look at forms now and wonder what do i mark? because i'm everything. and i marked other. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com.
when you have digestive sensitivities, life can feel like a never ending search for food that won't cause bloating, gas, or inner turmoil. try pronourish. a delicious nutritional drink that makes a great mini meal or snack that has protein and fiber. and pronourish has no gluten or high fructose corn syrup. and is low in fodmap ingredients that can trigger digestive sensitivities. the search is over. pronourish. nutrition you can feel good about. >> the united states one them
to abandon and missile programs and refrain from any further provocations. the us commitment to the defense of japan and its other treaty allies have a full range of our military capabilities and it is unwavering. >> paul: secretary of state rex tillerson in tokyo this week warning north korea that the us will respond to it nuclear aggression.and say nothing has been taken off the table when it comes to defending our allies in the region. the warning comes as tillerson and broken his first official trip to asia where he is calling for a new approach to dealing with 20 years of quote failed diplomacy. we are back with daniel henninger, kim strassel, mary kissel and james freeman.
this, we are seeing the trump administration in his first real problem area, north korea, coming out and saying we are going to think differently about this. how do you read that? >> i think is a very big deal. the secretary was actually having the possibility of nuclear rising our allies there i assume as he talked about japan. i don't think there's any other word for this other than a new form of brinksmanship. after having given up diplomacy he says diplomacy hasn't worked in the last 20 years. the chinese themselves i said recently that north korea should be nuclear rising for instance and the south korean united states should stand down on the military exercise. even as china is projecting into the south china sea, rex tillerson said that is a nonstarter. we're not doing that.
if he is pushing this to the brain. he is trying to tell everybody over there love, north korea is getting to the point where they may be able to fashion a nuclear warhead onto a missile. that is very difficult to do. it is always been the breaking point for these issues. if they're getting to the point united states is saying we are done with diplomacy. >> you think mary, that this was as much aimed at china as they were at north korea? because china, for all of its talk that new career must be nuclear as they have done nothing to stop them. >> as he said they are continually afraid.not just on the nuclear side, they have done five nuclear tests. but also on that ballistic missile side. there alusing weapons of mass destruction in the middle of kuala lumpur airport recently. and kim jun-un is not a leader that has had like a lot of contact with china. they may have the type of control that they had over north korea in the past.
>> paul: that is a fair point. but if they stop buying their coal, if they open the border and let north koreans come up and then go to south korea, that would put enormous pressure on south korea. >> and that is something that both the bush and obama administration went to china and said they should do. i think rex tillerson is going to asia and sank to china, if you're not going to do something, we will. and i think you should go to the table and say look, it is time for a new approach.it is called a change of regime in north korea. it can be a change of regime that you like, that you have some sort of influence over. or it can be a change of regime that the united states, which is a democratic and unified areas. but it is also a method by the way to send to china that there will be consequences for bad actions. because beijing is the other big problem. >> paul: kim, the question of nuclear rising in the peninsula. it has always sort of hung out there. south korea and japan. i personally do not agree that
we should seek that. but it may be that to be the outcome if you get a situation where north korea can be seen as having a first right nuclear capacity. healthy is that the democratic countries from saying we want a deterrent ourselves? >> you can't. what you're saying here is an entire change of strategy. we have had 20 years of what tillerson calls quiet diplomacy. patient diplomacy. it yielded absolutely nothing. and what the administration is saying plan here is that they're going to roll out the full roster of other possibilities. that has to include the potential nuclear rising of the other countries in the region. it is not a place that we necessarily want to go but north korea needs to understand that that could be one out and china needs to understand that to be one outcome. >> paul: james, there is more on the table than just north korea. this meeting is set for sometime in the coming weeks. and what about the economic
agenda? if you make a priority of north korea and of stopping their movement into the south china sea, it is a lot to ask to say we also want you to do the following things on the economy. >> i think this episode also underlines how difficult it is. we think of china having made so much progress on economics. but when their bullying and criticizing south korea for trying to defend itself with a missile system it tells you that the same old communists are still in control there. as you can see the economic sphere, i think a clear message from tillerson to the chinese government saying stop stealing our intellectual property, stop forcing our companies to share their trade secrets and to take on local partners backed by your government, i think that would be a good start in terms of changing the trade relations. >> paul: thank you all.
when we come back, president trump putting obama era fuel standards under the microscope as he vows to make detroit the car capital of the world once again. a complete multi-vitamin with 100% daily value of more than 15 key nutrients. one a day 50+. for over 100 years like kraft has,natural cheese you learn a lot about what people want. honey, do we have like a super creamy cheese with taco spice already in it? oh, thanks. bon appe-cheese! okay... >> we're going to ensure that
any regulations we have protect and defend your jobs, your factories. we are going to be fairbe fair. >> paul: promising to make detroit the car capital of the world again. president trump on wednesday said he will reassess fuel economy standards, pushed through by the obama administration that require automakers to achieve an average of 54.5 miles a gallon by 2025. a mandate that has caused the
us carmakers to shift some of their production to mexico. we are fact with mary kissel, james freeman, daniel henninger, kim strassel's and alisha -- a good mood by chance or not? >> these were regular relations at the obama ministration pushed through, finalized in his final days in office. it was first proposed in 2012. they were, there was no way that they could actually be enforced. without the cars increasing in price dramatically and more jobs shipped to mexico. >> paul: does the technology even exist now for carmakers to reach this standard by 2025? >> no, it is not. so it would be a large investment in electric cars. >> paul: electric cars would be the way to have to go. >> yes likely because they are just not as efficient, less than one percent of cars even
make the 2022 standards. none the 2025 standards.>> paul: did president obama put these in place to take credit from his supporters for the anti-climate change, meaning of that rule knowing that his successor would almost certainly have to redo them? >> right, exactly. do not underestimate the cynicism of the obama administration. you can never go wrong there. but yes. because the political and economic damage would be too great for any successors. either hillary would have had to redo them or -- hillary would have had to be done two. >> paul: really? how did this redirect this to mexico? >> because they would be able to do that here. >> paul: profit margins are too
small. >> -- and is squeezing the automakers profit margin. >> paul: do think democrats can get behind this? >> i think you can get democratic support even know it is not necessarily needed.it is just a regulatory process. you can see that yes. >> paul: dan, are you - this is something the donald trump promise. it is not easy though. because they have to put through rulemaking as alisha says. they will take maybe a year or something like that. and then they will get sued in court. and by the environmental groups. >> it will not be easy but understand, the standards were initiated by congress in 1975. a long time ago in the response to the iroquois -- and 73 to 74 the idea that we use less gasoline and become less
dependent on the arabs. that has changed completely. the united states and i have to depend on saudi arabian oil. there is nothing that has anything like this a standard. and you can see donald trump making the argument why we putting ourselves a disadvantage with this sort of thing trying to do at the impossible goal of 54 miles per gallon and putting our workers out of work as alisha has just described. >> paul: the answer to that is climate change right? that is with the environmental groups say. this is a bigger problem, so giving a threat that you have to have the standards to drive the automakers to electric vehicles otherwise they will never do it. >> you just put your finger on everything that was wrong with the obama economy. for the last eight years. maybe not everything, there were more things but if you were going to be driven by this idea of a yet unknown horrible consequence coming down the
road, and a science that people are viewing as a religion, and the economy is going to come second. what i love about this story that donald trump put his finger on why we really do lose jobs. we do it because of the high cost of regulation.he likes to complain about businesses going down to mexico. they do so they can compete, not that they are anti-american. so you want to bring them back, you cut these regulations and if he does more this across government does have get a thriving economy. >> paul: okay we have to take one more break. when we come back. hits and misses of the week.
>> tweeting out that he had been fired and leading to another round of stories critical of donald trump. if we know anything about mr. bharara, it is that he is ambitious. this was probably more about paving the way for a future elected office, but nonetheless, a miss more unrelled politics. paul: yes, we should call him governor bharara from now on. james. >> this is a hit to warren buffett, berkshire hathaway's ceo, who we learned this week is really the world champion, the greatest of all time in tax avoidance in the history of business. last week he released his tax returns, challenged donald trump to do the same. thanks to a leak this week, we learned that donald trump paid more than 20 times in 2005 what mr. buffett, who's much wealthier with, paid in 2015. so you can think of the greats in other fields, michael jordan, joe montana, tax avoidance,
warren buffett's the best there ever was. paul: alicia. california, they've done this on the pretense that there's a teacher shortage, however, thousands of teachers in california are getting warnings that they could be laid off principally because pension obligations are too high. but there is no teacher shortage in california. the real problem is there aren't enough good teachers. paul: all right. dan. >> i'm giving my miss to the great debate over whether the russians did something to the election of 2016. the justice department has just indicted four russians, including two from their intelligence services, for stealing up to a billion accounts from yahoo! users. this means that not only perhaps that the clinton campaign got hacked, the russians are stealing accounts from all of us. paul: and those guys will probably never face a court of law in the united states. >> three of them aren't here. paul: all right.
if you have your own hit or miss, tweet it to us at jer on fnc. that's it for this week, thanks to you for watching. week. ♪ ♪ kelly: hello, i'm kelly wright, welcome inside america's news headquarters. be. laura: and i'm laura ingle. president mike pence visiting jacksonville, florida, as the trump administration and house republican leaders continue to push the gop health care bill ahead of a crucial vote. kelly: the justice department now asking a federal judge this hawaii to reconsider his ruling that blocks president trump's revised travel ban, setting up a fresh legal battle over the president's new executive order. laura: and paris on high alert after atacked a soldier and tried to