tv This Week With George Stephanopoulos ABC July 1, 2012 10:00am-11:00am EDT
good morning and welcome to "this week." supreme court's history on health care. >> today is a tragic day for this republic. >> a defining moment for the court. >> today's decision was a victory for people all over this country. >> a huge win for president obama. >> i didn't do this because it was good politics, i did it because i believed it was good for the country. >> and a new rallying cry for mitt romney. >> if we want to get rid of obama care, we'll have to replace president obama. >> the big question -- why did chief justice roberts cast that surprising vote? how will it shape the presidential race? what does it mean for your health care? we'll ask our headliners. white house chief of staff jack lew and paul ryan.
plus, our special exclusive guests. >> i'm signing this bill for all of the leaders who took up this cause through the generations and it's fitting that ted's widow vicki is here. >> vicki kennedy. health care was the cause of her late husband's career. her reaction here first. and debate and analysis on our powerhouse roundtable with george will, donna brazile, terry moran, artur davis and keith olbermann. hello again. chief justice roberts has escaped what he called the impregnable forest of malta after delivering the decision that blindsided many. it will also shape america's health care system and the constitutional law for years to come. but we begin with something special. the first reaction on the ruling
from vicki kennedy. the widow of senator ted kennedy who fought for universal health care. throughout a senate career that spanned a half a decade. a commitment captured in his final convention speech. >> this is the cause of my life. new hope. that we will break the old grid lock and guarantee that every american -- north, south, east, west, young, old -- will have decent, quality health care. as a fundamental right and not a privilege. >> and vicki kennedy joins us now. thank you so much for coming in this morning. >> thank you, george. >> i can only imagine what it must have been like for you, at the moment you heard that the supreme court decided. >> you know, george, as you just heard in that wonderful clip, this health care reform was the cause of my husband's life. he believed that it was a moral issue, that it defined the character of who we were as a
society, who we were as a country, and that decent quality, affordable health care should be a fundamental right. and not a privilege. and now, all three branches of our federal government have a affirmed that right and i think if teddy were here, get fully implement the law. and move on with the business of our country. >> i want to get to that. i imagine that senator kennedy would have been surprised by the fact that the deciding vote was cast by chief justice roberts. >> i don't think he would have. i think he felt strongly in health care reform. he had studied this issue for more than 40 years. he believed in it. he believed in its constitutionality. he had looked at it every way. i think he would have been pleased, not surprised. >> right after the decision, you received a call from speaker pelosi saying that teddy can rest.
>> yes, yes, it was a lovely, lovely call. she fought value yabt -- valiantly for health care. she championed health care for all americans. she's really was a real, real heroine in this battle. >> you mentioned how the senators would have been looking to the struggles ahead. i want to read a letter he wrote to president obama shortly before he died. he was quite optimistic. he wrote, i came to believe that soon, very soon, affordable health coverage will be available to all, and while i will not see the victory, i was able to look forward and know that we will fulfill the promise of health care in america. as a right. and not a privilege. he referred to the continuing struggles as well. what do you see as the biggest struggle going forward? >> well, i think that we're seeing it right now, really, and it's just continuing to go and implement the law for all of us to come together.
but when people look at each individual provision, it's wildly popular. these are rights and benefits that the american people embrace and are excited about. families can go to sleep, relax, and and happy knowing that their children who have asthma or diabetes or allergies are covered by insurance and aren't barred because they have a pre-existing conditions. and seniors. that so-called doughnut hole where they didn't have coverage for prescription drugs is now being filled. we now have preventive care coverage. there is no out of pocket payment to get mammograms or colonoscopies. these are important benefits. and as people know more and more about these, as they reap these benefits, they embrace them, it's a very exciting day in america. >> this week will mark your 20th anniversary of your wedding, how
will you mark the day? >> privately. privately. >> congratulations again. >> thanks, george. let's get a little bit more on the policy and the politics, with white house chief of staff jack lew, congratulations to you as well. as you know the president's opponents have seized on the ruling by chief justice roberts, that the health care survives as a tax not a penalty. they're putting millions behind that message. i want to show it right here. >> president obama promised us his health care law. >> it's not a tax increase. >> now, we know that's not true. how can we afford this tax? we're already struggling >> as you know, president obama denied along that this was a tax, is he prepared to defend it? >> we have to step back. what's in the law of penalties
it starts by saying all americans have a right to health insurance. it covers 99% of the american people, in massachusetts where they had a plan like this under governor romney, 1% didn't take insurance and they paid the penalty. let's be clear who that 1% is. 1% are the ones who can afford health insurance. choose not to buy it. when they get sick, they go to the hospital and the cost gets spread. the court found it constitutional. frankly what you call it isn't the issue. >> they found it constitutional because it's a tax not a penalty. here's the chief justice, he said, shared responsibility made for constitutional purposes be considered a tax, not a penalty. >> the supreme court looked at what the structure of the law was and they saw that 1% would be paying this.
more middle class people will get a tax cut in this. a tax cut of $4,000. very, very few who choose to go uninsured, who can afford it and who are saying that if i need health care, it's going to be somebody else's burden. it says they're going to have to pay a charge. since president obama's been in office, middle class have been getting a tax cut. in the law, that 1% who have chosen not to buy health insurance and to pass the burden on to others, there's this penalty. >> but you do concede that the law survived only because justice roberts found this to be a tax? >> you know, i think, if you look at the decision, which is a very complicated one, their arguments support different theories. >> the argument of chief justice roberts is that it's a tax.
>> he went through the different powers that congress had. there's a power whatever you call it to assess a penalty like this. >> he called it a tax? so you're conceding that? >> i'm saying it was set up as a penalty for those who don't buy insurance. even though they can afford it. for that 1% he called it fair. >> and he calls it a tax. the federal government can't take away the state's medicaid funding. that could affect up 17 million people that would be covered by the expansion. lot of governors are already signalling that they're going to down the expansion because of that. which means millions fewer covered. how much does that worry you? >> the expansion of medicaid coverage, for those who can't afford it, was upheld and states are now in a position where the federal government is saying, we'll pay 100% of the cost of covering those people. in 1960s when it was enacted with a much smaller federal share, where the states had to pay a share, the states
ultimately came in. in 1997 when the child health program was expanded, it required the states to match something, the states came in. >> it goes down to 90%. >> after several years. and i think the governors will have to answer to their own people. the vast majority of states will come in. for those few who are slow to come in, they'll have to answer to people why they're turning this down. >> louisiana governor bobby jindal, said that if they made those a bloc grant. he will accept it, is is that something you can go along with? >> we think it's important to protect medicaid. something that people have a right to, whatever state they're in. some requirements that states have to meet in terms of who's covered and what's covered. this law expands coverage. it's a good thing. >> you know, let's turn to politics. individual parts of the plan are still popular.
but overall, the plan isn't. that seemed to energized romney. i want to show you something he said on friday. >> the american people didn't want it in 2010, that's one of the reasons we picked up so many seats in the house and senate. and i think in this election this november, people who don't want obama care will have to vote out president obama and that's a plus for me. >> you see that. he says that it's a plus for him. can president obama do what he hasn't done yet and turn it into a political plot? >> the american people are starting to experience the benefits of this law. for students who came out of college and didn't have a job, they can stay on their parents' health plans. for seens yors who were paying $600 in medicare, that's something they don't have to pay for. for families with children, with pre-existing conditions, they don't have to worry about lifetime limits or whether those pre-existing conditions mean they won't have insurance. this will provide security and
protection for american families and they're beginning to see it and they're beginning to experience it. american people don't want to go back to a decisive debate about health care. the congress passed the law. the supreme court ruled it constitutional. the arguments that are being made now are the wrong arguments. we need to focus on growing the economy and growing jobs for the middle class. >> you don't think this election is a referendum on the health care? >> i think this election will be about the economy. the american people are focused on the economy. they're asking the question, what are we doing to get it going? president obama have proposed things that the congress should enact. it would help people under water to refinance their homes. congress should get to work on those things. frankly, when you look at the choices right now, the debate is going to be about the different visions of the country.
independent studies have shown that the only way to do that without creating a biggest deficit would be to cut tax benefits to middle-class families. >> and i'll ask congressman ryan about that. i want to ask you one more question before we go, i wonder what the president makes of the fact that this legislation was saved by chief justice roberts. he voted against confirming roberts because he wasn't sure that the justice's heart would be in the right place. he went on to say this. >> i hope that i'm wrong. i hope that he'll recognize who the weak and who the strong are in our society. and i hope that his jurisprudence is one that stands up to the bullies of all idea logical stripes. >> does the president believe that he was wrong about the justice? >> i can't speak to the vote
many years ago. i can tell you that this week was a good week for the supreme court. it was a decision by law. a decision where the court didn't make itself a legislature. they ruled the law constitutional. which we believed from the start was constitutional. it was a good day for the american people. >> so the president has to thank chief justice roberts. >> it was good day for american people. >> jack lew, thank you very much. let's turn now to congressman ryan, thanks for coming in this morning as well. you just heard jack lew. on chief justice roberts and the good week for the american people. many of your republican colleagues in the house and conservative allies have been far more critical of the justice. national reviews called it chief justice roberts' folly. said chief justice roberts can not justly take pride in this legacy. jack kingston your colleague in the house, i feel like i just lost two great friends -- america and justice roberts. and then, glenn beck called chief justice roberts "coward."
what do you make of this criticism and do you agree with it? >> yes. i'm very disappointed in the ruling. i think the chief justice had to contort logic and reason to come up with this. he said that the supreme court isn't going to do it. we're going to leave it up to the american people. one man decided against the dissenting opinion, against what i thought were his principles and judicial jurisprudence and he decided to leave this up to the american people. now the stakes of this election couldn't be higher, george. i'm very disappointed. but we're not deter. we still feel that we can repeal this law if we win this election. the american people will be the judge and the jury of this law come november. >> governor romney said that chief justice roberts is the model he would appoint to the court, does that still hold? >> i don't agree with his ruling.
i think they had to basically rewrite the statute in order to call this a tax. he had some good principles. the commerce c ashgcl, ause, there's a limit what congress do to affect people's behavior. that to me is rewriting this law and that means they just punted it to the american people and they'll have the final say so this fall. we'll repeal this law if we win this election. >> and it is in the campaign right now, governor romney continued that campaign for repeal right after the decision. i want to show a little bit of that. >> obama care raises taxes on the american people. by approximately $500 billion. obama care cuts medicare, cuts medicare by approximately $500 billion. >> you know, several independent fact checkers have taken a look at that claim and said that it's misleading. and, in fact, by that accounting, your own budget, which governor romney
has endorsed, would also have $500 billion in medicare cuts. >> but we keep that money for medicare. what obama care, it takes that money from medicare to spend on obama care. i have heard for years how much people don't like the idea that we're raiding social security to pay for other programs. what obama care does for the first time in history, it raids medicare to pay for obama care. in addition, it puts this board of 15 people in charge of putting price controls on medicare. which we think will end up rationing medicare. so not only do we think this law is bad for medicare, it's terrible for the economy. it will move us closer to a debt crisis. >> congressman, correct me if i am wrong, i thought your medicare savings were put toward debt reduction. >> which extends the solvency of medicare. what they do in obama care, they try to count this dollar twice. at the same time, they spend
this must be on creating obama care. the trustee report for medicare, they say the same thing. you can't these dollars twice. in our budget we make sure all of these dollars from medicare savings go toward extending the solvency of medicare. and not spend new money on obama care. so, we don't raid medicare for obama care. we repeal obama care and extend the solvency of the medicare trust fund in our budget. >> so you reject this as hypocrisy? >> no, look at the hypocrisy. the president on your show said that this is not a tax. then he argued it's a tax. in order to get passed the supreme court. the broken promises are becoming breathtaking from the president. who says one thing to get this passed congress and then passed by supreme court. believe me, if this was brought to the public as a tax, there's no way this law would have
passed into law in the first place. >> i think you may be right about that. you also heard jack lew and vicki kennedy talk about the provisions already in place. up on the white house website, you can't deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions. you can't charge women more than men. i know that the congress is scheduled to have a repeal vote a later this month. when you do that, will you vote to preserve any of these programs or does everything go? >> we'll vote to repeal the entire law, i believe, on july 11th. and what's frustrating about this is, when obama care was being deliberating we were offering patient-centered solutions. i'll just say this -- we can have a health care system in america where everybody has access to affordable health care without government takeover. and those are the kind of
patient-centered solutions we'll be advancing. we were proposing those solutions then and now. we can address these legitimate concerns without a complete government takeover. of 17% of our economy. >> to be specific, those provisions that are already in place now, like covering young adults under the age of 26, they're going to go in the house vote. you're not going to vote to replace them? >> we're going to repeal the entire law and then we're going to advance patient-centered reforms. which address these kind of issues. the market was already moving on the 26-year-old. insurance companies were already announcing that they were going to keep that in place anyway. what i would say, if you take a look at the comprehensive plans that many of us have authored, address these things. george, we can address these legitimate problems in need without a government takeover. at the end of the day, this is a
big philosophy difference. what mrs. kennedy and others were saying that this is new government-granted right. that the government can now grant and define our rights. those are ours. a huge difference in philosophy. so what we're saying is, there are principles and reforms that we could have passed into law which we still want to that address these legitimate problems. without putting the government in such a central role in our lives and in the economy. which we think is going to hurt our economy and make the american health care system that much worse. >> finally, i asked jack lew this, will this election turn on health care? >> health care and the economy. look, this is the most important election in our lifetimes. this ruling, and i guess this was john roberts' thinking, this election is a choice of two futures, do you want a government-centered society in a government-driven economy and government-rationed health care, or do you want the american opportunity society with a
safety net, a free economy, economic freedom, personal liberty? that's what we want, that's the american idea. we have one more chance as a people to get that back and that chance is going to come on november the 6th. >> big choice ahead. congressman ryan, thank you very much for your time this morning. >> thank you, george. coming up, so much to debate and analyze on our powerhouse roundtable. the court on obama care. >> nancy pelosi wore her lucky purple shoes for the supreme court ruling. while house speaker boehner wore his lucky orange face. and immigration. >> the court voted 5-3 to struck down the law. most people in arizona don't know about it yet because they're still trying to translate the ruling in spanish. got to give mitt romney credit he's a job creator -- in singapore, china, india.
i have evidence that proves my dad's a space alien. he speaks a weird language. [ gargling ] [ gargling ] he drinks green stuff. he says he's from albuquerque. i'm not buying it. i mean, just look at him. and one more thing -- he has a spaceship. [ whirring ] the evidence doesn't lie. my dad's an alien. [ male announcer ] the highly advanced audi a6. named to car and driver's 10 best. ♪ named to car and driver's 10 best. last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans... in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spot on the gulf...
i used to think my job chasing bad guys.ests... now i see my work differently. we analyze crime data, spot patterns, and figure out where to send patrols. it's helped some us cities cut serious crime by up to 30%. by stopping it before it happens. let's build a smarter planet. our powerhouse roundtable coming up, right after this from our abc stations. ouse roundtable coming up, right after this from our abc stations. [ female announcer ] the son of a single mom.
proud father of two daughters. president obama knows that women being pai 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men isn't just unfair... it hurts families. so the first law he signed was the lilly ledbetter fair pay act to help ensure that women are paid the same as men for doing the exact same work. because president obama knows that fairness for women means a stronger middle class for america. [ obama ] i'm barack obama and i approve this message.
♪ for us to say that you got to take a responsibility to get health insurance, is absolutely not a tax increase. >> it may be fair, good, public policy. >> but, george, you just can't make up that language and decide it's a tax increase. >> i don't think i'm making it up. tax, a charge usually of money imposed by authorities for public purposes. >> george, the fact that you looked at the dictionary, the
definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching it a little bit. >> your critics say it's a tax increase. you reject that it's tax increase. >> i absolutely reject that notion. >> apparently chief justice john roberts said not. that debate continues this morning with our roundtable. joined as always by george will, donna brazile, terry moran, artur davis and keith olbermann. george, let me begin with you. there are so many ironies in this case. you know, you saw president obama's signature legislation saved by a chief justice that he opposed. an argument that he rejected. and you said that is a major victory for conservatives. >> yes, and i'll tell you why. the conservative legal insurgency made two arguments both of which were dismissed as frivolous as the law professor, both of which won. the broccoli argument, tea party argument if you will, against
the commerce law said that if you affirmed this under the commerce clause to prescribe mandate and to regulate behavior of every individual in every existence of their them. they didn't do that. then, on medicaid expansion, for the first time in history, a majority of states challenged the constitutionality of the legislation and they won. for the first time since the new deal, 75 years, the supreme court has overturned a federal spending statute that by coercing the state, it undermines the dual sovereignty. for two reasons -- and these reasons are going to be there, if come november, if there's a romney presidency, a republican senate, obama care will gone. >> keith olbermann? >> we may be overthinking this from a larger standpoint in this country.
the premise of the mandate as tax or taxes. mandate, various subdivisions of what the meaning is, they're important to us and to the people analyzing to this. the public, the outcome something that the president proposed was upheld. also in a larger sense, what is a mandate? do we have them? is this taxation possibility for nonusers legitimate? every day in our lives we're subjected to the largest mandate that any of us ever have. each day, we have to buy a product each day the united states government. that mandate supplies things every day, wars that we don't go along with, to the salaries of the supreme court justices. i think if you look at this from a layman's point of view, i think it's a clear-cut victory for the president. >> do you agree? >> no, i don't think it's a victory for the president.
the bottom line is that, a law that is the single least popular piece of domestic legislation and arguably, you know, george, the history maven here, arguably since 1938, this is the least popular domestic legislation that's been passed. i remember when the debate was going on in 2009 and 2010, the democratic mantra was, well, as soon as this has the legitimacy of being signed into law, people will decide they like it. they'll give the democrats credit a win. now, i hear my democrat friends saying, well, now, given the decision by the supreme court, that will somehow give it legitimacy. the people who don't like the law, the conservative democrats and swing voters who don't like it, they don't dislike it because of their constitutional jurisprudence. they dislike it because they think it costs too much money, they think it's unpredictable.
they think it goes further than it needs to, and i don't see any of those doubts going away especially when a significant part of this law still don't go into effect for another four years. >> donna? >> i don't think people dislike it because it's an overreach of government or many democrats that dislike it, we didn't achieve a single option. we will see just how bold the republicans will be if they manage to try to repeal and then replace it. we know that they -- in the house they voted already last year to try to repeal, repealing is a job killers. look, george, the big issue, this was a moral victory for the country in large part because we have millions of americans today who are already enjoying the benefits of this act. whether it's senior citizens who are paying less for their prescription medicines.
young people, 3 million or more who are still on their parents' insurance, up until the age of 26. and, of course, i'm no longer a pre-existing condition. as a woman, a majority of the population. they'll continue to make their arguments. many of them are misleading. democrats will have to continue defending. >> before we get to this, let me turn to terry moran who covers the supreme court and and talk more of the role about chief justice roberts. the vote did surprise a lot of people and even some suggestions that he switched his vote? >> this opinion is a detective story. you read it. you see the clues. it looked like chief justice roberts switched his opinion. and then, couldn't go along with the conservatives who wanted to strike down the whole law. if some of chief justice roberts' opinion is torturous.
read further down, they plowed through a lot of precedents to do that. this is a major -- this is a very significant victory for conservatives. from now on, liberals who want to use the federal government in innovative and creative ways to solve problems, are going to be playing defense at the supreme court. >> george and i, we were both strushg by this article that said this compromise that chief justice roberts fashioned is true to his deepest principles. >> exactly. three things about justice roberts. he's not a fool. he's not a liberal. and he's 57. he's going to be here for 20 more years, at least. and he's going to be building upon new ways of circumscribing latitude of congress but the federal government in general. >> let me take issue with this idea that this is a closet victory for conservatives.
the reality is, yes, the commerce clause was strengthen, i guess theoretically, it's harder to pass mandates now. politically, it's going to be hard for congress to pass mandates. if republicans frankly -- actually, it's not. what will happen in the future, especially if you're on the liberal side of the equation, it always hard to say, it's hard to tax people. easy to tax companies. i can imagine a future democratic administration, let's have a corporate tax code that says we're going to have a 10% rate for companies who don't outsource and 35% rate for companies that do. you think all kinds of examples. that's the point. it would be an incredible intervention in the free market economy in this society. i think this idea that somehow chief justice roberts said we're
going to cut down the commerce clause the reality is -- there's a reason why these mandates don't -- >> most conservatives are much more frightened of an unlimited commerce clause than of an expanded tax code. if this was called a tax, during the congressional debate on obama care it would have fallen five, four senate votes of passage. >> well, maybe, george. but i think the problem is, again, let's go back to the outsource example. i'm here with george stephanopoulos. it will also be easy for congress to go after certain industries and to distort the market. by saying that previously the court has not said. we have tax credit. but we have always had principle of equal taxation. we have a principle that companies pay a certain rate. a principle that individuals pay
if government dresses it up in encouraging -- >> they do that all the time. they tax gas guzzlers, tax code is used to shape behavior. >> stronger power now than before. >> but this court will limit that. >> and keith, are you worried about the tax argument in the election? now that chief justice roberts has firmly said that this is a tax. >> again, i think it's got to be a concern for the president that wasn't there before this terminology was used. but this was already such a huge issue in terms of this divide between people who are opposed to the obama care concept and yet support each aspect of it. it was already a hot-button issue. that very little to do with the facts that i don't think this is going to be muddy -- >> anything that the president can do for the independent voters who have been skeptical of the law? >> he can now point out that it did get the support of the supreme court, that's the easiest thing for people who are
not in this the way we are, in addition, governor romney is now not only running against a program very similar to the one he engineered in massachusetts, he's not only doing that, but he also has to say that he opposed to the decision who was, until this week, was supremely conservative chief justice, no pun intended, they can't be a win for him. he has two insurmountable problems. >> it helps mitt romney for three reasons. you have already seen him argue that to remove obama care you have to remove obama. second, we have a president that has proposed a substantial on the middle class. the most important, the romney campaign has been a one-trick pony, economy, economy, economy. >> i don't think it helps mitt romney at all. because, keith is right.
this was one of his signature issues as a governor in 206 when he signed this into law in massachusetts. obama care is romney care at a federal law. if it's a tax or a penalty in massachusetts, well, it's a tax or a penalty. because the irs, because if you fail to obtain -- if you fail to opt out of health insurance, you'll be penalized. >> you can't anymore, though. >> don't tax me. don't tax you. tax that man behind the tree. >> before we get to the politics of it, here's the policy irony all of this. defenders of this law are celebrating a victory on the mandate which by their own estimate might affect 1% of the population. they're glossing over the ruling a few days ago which wipes out the medicaid provisions.
here's where that's important -- 50% of the number of the reduction of the uninsured. the number of that administration said will be the new rate of the uninsured, the supreme court stripped that power away, so i have to say, there's a certain part of hypocrisy. >> but this is a crucial part of the vote. it will require the confidence and the cooperation of the american people and the states. if you have a political agenda of massive resistance to it, it will not work. >> it works both ways. >> lot of people know, lot of low-income people who believe, they think they've got coverage now. they're going to find that if they live in alabama, mississippi, louisiana, where their governors turn it down --
they're not insured. three years from now, they'll have less confidence in government. >> and many will turn it down. mr. lew said few will turn this down. you're a governor and you're facing your state universities being pruned all across the board, you got a choice, do i expand medicare, medicaid rather, or do i protect my public universities? i think more governors are going to resist this. >> you guys point out the resistance, keith. i want to bring to you, the flip side, all of those popular provisions. jack lew and vicki kennedy talked about it. i think make it very difficult to see an actual repeal take hold even if mitt romney wins. >> that's a very optimistic point of view. i think there's a lot to it. i think also -- >> you don't agree? >> i'm not sure because it's politics. i tend to be a little cynical about it. people will -- against their own interests, against the interests of the people in their states, these governors will turn this money down even though it's 100%
federal expenditure to begin with. and then a 90% federal expenditure. they'll still turn it down for the political victory. >> the chief justice said this is a tax not a penalty. because it's not sufficiently punitive. it's not sufficiently punitive because it's still a smart move to pay the tax, penalty, rather than the much more expensive decision of buying health care. therefore, congress may soon find that it has to increase the -- that word again -- tax, to change this behavior and i don't see them doing that. >> four years ago, we heard that if you pass this legislation, premiums would go down. they've gone up and they're projected to go up five percentage points. we heard two years ago, if you pass this legislation the ranks of insured will disappear. that's not going to happen.
and we heard that long term this was going to end up reducing the deficit, no one believes that anymore. >> it will increase the deficit by $230 billion and full implementation will reduce the deficit over a ten-year period. look, we only implemented just a few portions of the law. many small business owners, like myself, when we're able to go into the exchange, the marketplace, to find more affordable insurance funds, that's also going to bend down the health care. let's look at it when the implementation happens in 2014. >> and there's something that better than nothing. the democrats can stand up now and say never again, under this law, will an insurance company be able to deny you or your loved one coverage for pre-existing conditions. they were against it and they don't have a plan to fix it.
>> a it speaks to something fundamental, about the nature of any government, we all agree, conservative, liberal, that the primary function of any government is to protect its citizens. we usually think about this in terms of the department of defense. it now becomes, as the world situation becomes more secure, in many respects more secure the primary part of that is what happens in hospitals? i saw everybody in that hospital. when my dad was sick in the surgical icu. i saw patients, i saw families trying to decide whether or not they could afford the same care that my dad as a vet got for $800 and anything that moves the ball towards this primary role of our government protecting its citizens will be viewed in a generic sense and in a general sense, as a positive thing and those who stand against it will
probably suffer if not in the short term but the long term. >> i want to move on to another point. in the interest of fairness, we were pretty tough, on donald verrilli, after the oral arguments. he clearly took it heart. watch this at the columbia law school commencement. >> let me just say on that point, that if people say that there's no such thing as bad publicity, have no idea what they're talking about. there is definitely bad publicity. being on the wrong end of a jon stewart monologue is bad publicity. especially when you're the solicitor general. >> george will, in the end, chief justice roberts took the lifeline that donald verrilli gave him. >> yes, he did. it's a lifetime that was extended a long time together. they were trying to figure out, in late december 1934, how to fund social security and to make it constitutional. at that tea held, he leaned over
and when is period in her ear, it's the federal taxing power. while we're in the midst of this celebration of john roberts, one year from right now, after the next term of the supreme court, we are going to be talking about the roberts' court having overturned a racial preference sytem at a university of texas, overturning section v of the voting rights act of 19644 as an infringement on americans. in the spirit of that wonderful decision citizens united. >> you agree with that? >> i do. he's playing the long game here. those are the issues that he personally as a justice cares about. when issues of affirmative
action and racial preferences come up, you hear john roberts get an edge in his voice. >> the sort of business -- >> before this week, his legacy was citizens united. but this is one progressive that's not there. >> i'm not as confidentry on what john roberts going to do. john roberts exposed this week that he's very attentive to elite public opinion in washington, d.c. and the attentiveness to elite public opinion is going to pull him up opinion it's going to constrain him. the reality is, we don't know, but we should know because these guys and ladies are supposed to be reading opinions and listening to the arguments and being independents. the reality is for conservatives
this week, underscores a point, conservatives aren't going to prosper putting their confidence in courts. they have to put their confidence in grass roots. >> i want to weigh in here. because i think the answer to you comes from john roberts himself in his senior thesis. the man of character didn't fight in the thick of political battles but rather raised himself above the conflicts. that's the value that he showed. he was acting on this week. george, i want to add one more piece to your litany, what about gay marriage? i wonder if justice kennedy will approve gay marriage? >> justice kennedy is much more understood. because he's sometimes there and sometimes there. i think he's driven in both directions by a constant come pass and that he is a libertarian. and the libertarian dimension of
him may cause him to be the fifth vote, not the sixth, the fifth vote for gay marriage. >> underscoring the point, conservatives are depend on court. you have to go to public opinion. when the argument is on public opinion. and it's happening by the way in the context of health care. the argument of public discourse is being won by conservatives. >> and i want to get one other issue before we go, this outsourcing debate that we referenced already. right now, in the battleground states. >> romney's companies were pioneers in shipping u.s. jobs overseas. investing in firms that specialized in relocating jobs done by american workers to new facilities in low-wage countries. like china and india. du iowa really want an outsourcer in chief in the white house? >> barack obama's attacked
hillary clinton with vicious lies. >> so shame on you barack obama. >> not the last time we see that. >> they're making head winds on this argument. romney is fighting back hard. fatcheck.org has weighed in and said there's no evidence that romney shipped jobs overseas when he was in charge. >> of course, much more enjoyable political system if factcheck was in charge. i'm going to read a tweet from an unusual source this morning. mitt romney last week, tough pro will be hard to beat unless he drops old teams and hires some pros. i'm quoting rupert murdoch. if you read his tweets, there's no telling what per accept tates his tweets. it speaks to a perception.
i'm not a big analyst. i don't know if romney did good things at bain capital. i know this is the wrong time to run as a businessman. it's become something of a dirty word. >> it speaks to a deeper anxiety out there. one of the things that the obama campaign is trying to do is put the entire era of hyperfinance that we lived through on trial. and the dwe that samuel huntington, where are the loyalties of the people at the top of american capitalism these days? are they to the commitment to the local communities or to their counterparts in germany and elsewhere? >> 30 seconds left. >> a poll taker said that if you go back to every election dating back to the second world war, starting with truman, with the exception of nixon, the winner in every election is the most likable, so the question is, not whether the outsourcing is valid or good economics, the question is, does it make mr. romney less than approachable
and friendly? >> and that's a big challenge coming up. we'll talk about it more. in coming weeks. thank you all, that was a fantastic roundtable. your voice this week is coming right up. but first, three moments from this week in history. what year was it? an open mike caught president reagan joking about the cold war. >> my fellow americans, i'm pleased to tell you today that i've signed legislation that will outlaw russia forever. we begin bombing in five minutes. apple launched its new macintosh computers with ads on "this week." >> if you can point you already know how to use it. >> and during the super bowl. religion and politics are related. >> and bob dole issued a warning about religion mixing with politics. >> i think there's a fine line. >> too far?
>> i think we're near the edge. 1982, 1983 or 1984? we'll be right back with the answer. this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com.
i'll be right back with one of your questions this week and the answer to what year was it. but first, we honor our fellow americans who serve and sacrifice. this week, the pentagon released the names of seven soldiers and marines killed in afghanistan. the names of seven soldiers and marines killed in afghanistan. [ female announcer ] goodnight gluttony, a farewell long awaited. goodnight, stuffy. goodnight, outdated. goodnight old luxury and all of your wares. goodnight bygones everywhere. [ engine turns over ] good morning, illumination.
by what's getting done.r measure commitmenty sedan the twenty billion dollars bp committed has helped fund economic and environmental recovery. long-term, bp's made a five hundred million dollar commitment to support scientists studying the environment. and the gulf is open for business - the beaches are beautiful, the seafood is delicious. last year, many areas even reported record tourism seasons. the progress continues... but that doesn't mean our job is done. we're still committed to seeing this through. so, what year was it? apple came out with the mac and ronald reagan had that memorable open mike moment, 28 years ago, 1984.
and in your voice this week, today's questions comes for scott wallace. how do most political strategists keep their professional loyalties separate from personal friendships with people working in the same industry? do you, george, have good friends that differ with you politically? the short answer is yes, i couldn't imagine otherwise. politics can't overwhelm all of the rest of life. of course, one of the best examples of opposing strategists overcoming their political differences. my friends james carville and mary matalin still going strong 20 years after the 1992 campaign where they fought each other professionally. they'll be on the show in a couple of weeks. that's all for us tonight. check out "world news" with david muir tonight. and thank you for sharing part of your sunday with us. and have a fantastic fourth. of your sunday with us. and have a fantastic fourth.