. >> republican senator susan collins and lisa murkowski voted against the bill today. they support their own bill, which they say more closely -- senator murkowski released a statement saying, i strongly support women's reproductive freedoms, including the right to abortion established by roe and casey. the legislation before the senate today -- the women's health protection act -- goes well beyond the precedent established in roe and casey. it does not include the hyde amendment, which prohibits taxpayer dollars from being spent on abortions. and it has been the law almost as long as roe. it does not include conscience protections for health care providers that refuse to perform abortions based on religious belief. it explicitly overrides the religious freedom restoration act for the first time. it also allows late term abortions without any notable restrictions. after the vote, senate majority leader chuck schumer said this. >> you elect more maga republicans if you want to see a nationwide abortion ban. elect more pro-choice democrats if you want to see the right to

and what about moderate republicans lisa murkowski and susan collins? senator collins, who once said she was convinced justices kavanaugh and gorsuch would not overturn roe versus wade. here's rachel scott again tonight. >> reporter: tonight, metal fencing now up, protecting the highest court in the land. but still a flood of demonstrators showed up at the steps. senate democrats are now vowing to hold a vote on legislation that would make a woman's right to obtain an abortion a federal law, codifying the roe decision. >> republicans will not be able to hide from the horror they've unleashed on america. >> reporter: only two republican senators support abortion rights. one of them is senator susan collins. she voted for justices neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh, convinced they would not overturn roe. >> so a good judge will consider as precedent of the united states supreme court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other. >> one of the important things to keep in mind about roe v. wade is that it has been reaffirmed many times over the past 45 yea

they are not going to get murkowski and collins on this. what it is now going to be is 49 democrats voting for it. 51 other senators, joe manchin and republicans voting against it. then they are going to look to the states. at the federal level, i think all of us who are here know this, there's really not much more that can be done outside the halls of congress. even the white house is constrained on this. everyone who i talked to in reproductive advocacy groups, everyone says it's a battle fought in the states and that what it could shake out as is those more than two dozen states that have trigger laws are going to look very red, very restricted, very conservative after this court decision. other states that are a little bit more accessible are going to be places that see women and childbearing people flood to them. the haves and have nots are going to look stark on the map. >> senator mccaskill, your reaction to these likely no votes? joe manchin just now in the hallway describing his decision to oppose it. >> the bill we have today to v

you also are waiting to hear from senator murkowski and waiting to hear from manchin. your thoughts on the pressure, the outside pressure that might move them? >> there's a ton of outside pressure. and groups are rallying next saturday, may 14th, to put pressure on not only just the senators but also the governor, the gubernatorial races, and putting pressure across the country to let them know, listen, if you're in the voting to not only protect our rights but expand our rights because the majority of americans want to see abortion access protected in this country, and that's just the way, i think voters are signaling that they will be, there will be dire consequences for folks who are running for re-election in nove wler that is manchin on the democratic side or collins and murkowski on the republican side. folks who have said they are pro choice. they are for abortion rights. and yet, they were able to believe these justices who said in their confirmation hearings that they wouldn't overturn roe v. wade and they showed us in the draft opinion that they lied and now

alaska's lisa murkowski: >> if it goes in the direction that this leaked copy has indicated, i will just tell you that it-- it-- it rocks my confidence in the court right now. >> reporter: maine's susan collins said reversing roe would be completely inconsistent with what justices neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh told her before their confirmation. the president said lawmakers supporting abortion rights should write them into law. >> i think the codification of murkowski are sponsoring a bill >> reporter: collins and murkowski are sponsoring a bill that would narrowly protect abortion rights but oppose a democratic bill that broadly prevents federal and state governments from limiting access to abortion. chuck schumer says he'll force a vote with republicans who oppose it on record.his andal as it gets. >> reporter: as for this year's midterm elections, democrats believe abortion rights will be a big factor. >> the contours of the november election this year changed. >> reporter: the bombshell leak was on the mind of several voters casting ballots in ohio's primary today. >> i felt parti

senator collins certainly has made it known that she felt misled as well as senator murkowski. you make a really good point that we need to have a check on what these people are saying when they show up and they raise their hand and take an oath. host: the other big story besides the vote in the senate was the information on inflation in this country. inflation hit 8.3% last month, compared to one year ago. the headlines from the washington times today, biden looks powerless in the inflation blame game. what can be done despite inflation? guest: well, everybody wants to fight inflation. let's be clear about that. i think the president is at the top of the list. so, what he is doing is he is relying on the federal reserve, which generally is the body that tries to regulate our economy. they only have certain tools to do that. we are dealing with two things that are directly affecting inflation. the pandemic and the war in ukraine. and as everybody knows, one of the big parts of inflation is the price of gas. and the price of gas as just skyrocketed, largely because of the war in

nevertheless, work is happening on that murkowski-collins proposal. here's durbin talking about that earlier. >> why have democrats chose not to work with susan collins, lisa murkowski and try to get a bipartisan result? >> i think that effort is under way. the votes today are important, baseline politically but we're going to continue to reach out and try to build whatever margin we have today. >> i think the underlying consensus here, katy, is democrats and the strategy they've chosen today that we'll see start unfolding in about an hour, they have chosen to go forward on this in a way in a will fail in partisan fashion effectively. 49 democrats voting for the women's protection act and 51 people, one democrat among all the republicans, voting against it. >> it's very interesting, jake, that senator casey says he's going to be voting for this. senator bob casey is not for abortion rights in general. he has not been in the past. what does that say to you about his position in pennsylvania or just the electorate in pennsylvania for a senator from in a

senator murkowski saying her confidence in the court is rocked. senator collins saying that what this opinion says is inconsistent with what the justices told her in their meetings and in their testimony. this is a pretty significant breach. >> it is significant. i would say that the fact that roe v. wade appears to be on the verge of being overturned is not the shocker today. the justices of the u.s. supreme court themselves have been signaling that for some time. if that's the part that has surprised these members of the senate who voted to confirm them, then they haven't been paying close enough attention. the one thing that is, besides the leak itself, which we talked about, is the manner in which this opinion appears to ready to overturn that precedent. i agree with pete earlier in that roe looked like it was on its way out of the door. the way that justice alito absolutely eviscerated roe v. wade but also as we were just talking about, eviscerated the constitutional underpinning, which is the substantive due process right, and just sort of s

. >> senator murkowski is next, we think she's out in the hall. so that's -- >> this hearing will come back to order, i will call on senator murkowski, who is next. >> thank, you madam chairman. mr. attorney general, welcome. before i begin asking my questions, i wanted to note that, when senator leahy was asking you about the voca fix, know that something we are monitoring very carefully. we worked hard to make sure that we had $5 million for the victims service organizations in alaska, to help. that was a real panic cry that we heard from the state. i am concerned, senator leahy has emphasized making this a priority. but i want to make sure that we're not in a situation where we are looking, again, realizing we're not measuring up here, there is a gap. so, if there is any kind of alternative funding line items to ensure that our victims organizations are able to receive this, i certainly hope that the department is looking at that. he also raised an issue with regards to some of the new grant programs in vawa that, for reasons known or unknown,

murkowski and collins have put out their own narrower bill that would codify the protections of roe v. wade but it has some exemptions which reproductive rights advocates say are gaping loopholes that weaken this to the point where it's no longer a robust protection. so their view is that if congress wants to codify roe v. wade do it in a narrower manner, don't add additional protections on regulations and providers, which does go beyond precedent but that does not seem to have more than two votes. democrats want a more aggressive version of this bill and murkowski and collin, as they are in the past, are likely to vote with the rest of the party to block this from going forward. >> thank you very much. coming up, what one west virginia mother is trying to do to revive the child tax credit. plus, whether you're flying or driving or staying home, summer goes prices are going to hit you hard. how much higher will they go? next. how much higher will they go next [bacon sizzles] ♪ [electronic music plays] ♪ woo! bipolar depression. it made me feel trapped in a fog. this is art inspire

natalie brandt, cbs news, washington. >> senators rosen and murkowski say they hope votes can happen on their bills this year. lawmakers also are working on a different bill to get more mental health counselors in schools. stco,in of lunc what about pizza with a little something-something extra. >> careful what you wish for here. wait until you hear the mystery ingredient >>> well, the nationwide shortage of baby formulas has scammers busy. coming up on the news at 3:00, the better business bureau joins us with what you need to look for. >>> the national weather service is on top of it. this red flag warning, if you're just tuning in now, just got extended until wednesday, 11:00 a.m. on wednesday. we're still dealing with dry conditions, strong winds. on the bright side, once we head into thursday and friday, we cool off a lot. partly cloudy skies returning to the forecast. even though we're getting close to the triple digits tomorrow, we cool down a lot into the rest of the weekend. >>> all right. when you get pizza a lot of the time, you'll wash it down with soda, but not like this

so senators manchin, collins and murkowski did not vote for this bill, the women's health protection act because they say it goes beyond codifying roe v. wade. for example, they say it would not allow states to have any restrictions on abortion whatsoever. democratic leaders say they wanted a messaging bill to put everyone on the record. so the record is going to show, ultimately, bipartisan opposition to your bill. so was the strategy a mistake, do you think? >> jake, frankly, that's just an excuse on their part. all of those three have never exactly said what they would support. but the women's health protection act the senate is voting on, that doesn't allow all abortions. it codifies roe v. wade, and roe v. wade puts forth a pretty clear framework on what's allowed and what's not allowed. and so, this is just an excuse on their part, and by the way, the bill that susan collins says is a narrower bill that codifies roe v. wade, it has a poison pill in it because it allows abortion providers to just refuse to provide abortions if they don't want to on a conscious claus. so it's rea

why didn't senate democrats just take up a more narrow bill that senators collins and murkowski could have gotten behind and perhaps senator manchin? >> that was one of the questions at the start of the push for democrats was how they wanted this bill to fail. no matter what, they weren't going to get 60 votes to actually overcome a filibuster on this. the way in which the bill failed would have been bipartisan in the positive direction had they gone with a bill that was narrower in focus and, frankly, more conservative in ethos in the protections it gave, specifically, a bill pushed by collins and murkowski, that they are talking with democrats at this point about but at the same time democratic leadership in the senate said they didn't want to make this first vote about that because they wanted it to be meaningful and because they wanted to have that stark contrast going into the midterms. to them, this was a way to energize the democratic base ahead of november. at the same time, i also think that the thinking around if a more conservative bill had come up, would the vote have been

and murkowski, you know, said look, this is not the decision or the direction i believe the court was going to take. and then when someone asked her, okay, what do you do with it, she said i haven't processed it yet. that she's kind of trying to figure out how to process what she was told versus what actually happened? >> and based on what you just read, i think it's really important that our viewers are hearing for themselves what was said at those confirmation hearings. so take a listen to what the three justices appointed by former president trump said about roe v. wade during the hearings as well as what'ven justice alito said during his confirmation hearing on this very issue. >> is roe a super precedent? >> how would you design superp superprecedent? i think it indicates roe doesn't fall in that category. that doesn't mean it should be overruled scholars say, but it does mean it's not a case that everyone has accepted and doesn't call for its overruling. >> as a judge, it is an important precedent of the supreme court. by it, i mean roe v. wade and planned parenthood jer sus cas

you mentioned potentially getting murkowski or collins on board. they do have a piece of legislation that is narrower that would codify roe or planned parenthood versus the casey decision. not going farther than that, potential getting joe manchin on board that would effectively get them 52 votes when they need 60, with the filibuster. it's not clear whether democrats view as a political strategy, worth while to say they have manchin and collins on board with the plan. maybe they want to give them the vote, they haven't said they do. ultimately, this is going to be a messaging issue. this is going to be a talking point. having more and more of these votes are bound to end in the same result here which is failure. >> okay. we will continue to keep an eye on this vote, bring you the results when it happens, abby, gloria, manu, thank you saul. >>> cnn has new details about the public hearings on the january 6th insurrection, the testimony will begin in just under a month. >> sources tell cnn that people may hear from members of the trump family, not l

here is the thing, republican senators lisa murkowski and collins don't support today's bill. they'll be having to vote on. they support some abortion rights. they put forward their own bill called the reproductive choice act and prohibit states from imposing an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability. i just wonder why not go with their bill that can get bipartisan support >>well, i think i probably dispute that characteristiczation of their bill. i actually don't believe it. >> it's in the wording of their bill. >> no. i think if you read the bill, you can see it would continue to allow for states to put onerous restrictions on a woman's access to abortion above and beyond what many believe is guaranteed in roe. there's a disagreement about what their bill does. i think it's a big step backwards from the roe protections. just as important -- >> respectfully, though, respectfully -- i am reading the direct language out of their bill. it says the purpose, quote, "it is the purpose of this act to codify t

on statements that have been made. >> i have one thing to say to senator murkowski. girls, you got played. they may have been told one thing in the office. certainly some of the these justices testified to something completely different during the confirmation hearing, and now we see they intend to vote a very different way. they lied to those senators in their face in their offices, and susan collins and lisa murkowski, who should know better, got absolutely played. to what alice first responded regarding whether conservatives should be celebrating, frankly, alice is the only voice i have heard on tv today actually embracing this and celebrating it, celebrating the substance of it. because most republicans and conservatives i've heard on tv and i've heard responding to this are laser focused on the leak, the leak, the leak, because they know the majority, the overwhelming majority of the country wanted roe v. wade to be thought of as established law to be upheld. so they are going against the overwhelming majority of the country. and they know that's got political c

i think everyone will be closely watching to see what's senator collins and senator murkowski do. they confirmed these justices, who are part of this apparent radical majority, to get rid of roe v. wade. notwithstanding representations made to the contrary that they didn't believe that that's exactly what these justices voted to confirm, like kavanaugh and their, would do. i think it is important, now that this has been a material, adverse change in the judicial landscape to see where everyone within the united states senate stance. >> so, just to be clear, you think it is possible that senator collins of maine, and our senate shirt murkowski of alaska, vote for the bill, in support of the bill on wednesday? >> it is theoretically possible. i think we have to see them put their money where their mouth has been. as it relates to what apparently is coming down from the supreme court, it clearly requires legislative action. but people who i believe have expressed publicly there is support for the roe v. wade precedent. if that in fact is your position, senator collins or senator murk

we heard from senator murkowski. she was asked whether she believes she was lied to by the justices during their confirmation hearings. here she was. >> when you look back at what kavanaugh and gorsuch said, were they being honest to you? >> i don't think that these types of questions are appropriate at this moment. what you are operating off of, what everybody is operating off of right now is a leaked draft that we understand was penned by justice alito. so i don't know what or how the other justices have weighed in. >> if finalized -- you can only give this a matter of weeks before we will have the final answer, kim, to you, there's something that those senators, collins and murkowski could do about it. >> there's something they can do. they can end the filibuster. they could pass legislation that protects access to abortion. for women in america. they can be clear about what their own responsibility and their own accountability is in their jobs. and say, if they believe they were lied to, say that immediately and

in area after area and what i would say to senator murkowski. is brace yourself, brace for self on a whole bunch of things that maybe are not as important to you as abortion but gun rights, on the ability of federal agencies to issue regulations. on the separation of church and state. on affirmative action next term at the court. this is a court that is in the operation and the mission of transforming the law. >> we have a written statement by president obama and michelle obama today saying, today millions of americans woke up fearing that their essential freedoms under the constitution were at risk. if the supreme court ultimately decides to overturn the landmark case of roe v. wade, then it will not only reverse nearly 50 years of president it will relegate the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues. and ruth we don't have any statement from former president trump who appointed three of the justices who are doing this. and we don't have any triumphant statement from president george w. bush

lisa murkowski had this to say. >> do you think justice kavanaugh lied to you? >> i'm not going to comment on that. >> do you feel misled by some of the candidates? [ inaudible ] >> got to say really one of the things that surprises me from court watchers, from other people that have followed the supreme court for a very long time is, this presumption that what came out yesterday is going to be what everybody's going to see when the court finally brings down its decision. you have the chief justice of the supreme court saying there's nothing in this ruling, the statement at the top of his comments said there's nothing in this ruling that tells you where people are going to end up. they may end up that way, but it's not possible. i do think -- i know this sounds naive and premature to ask susan collins and ask lisa murkowski if they were lied to by brett kavanagh because we don't know where brett kavanaugh is going to end up. i would bet, though, it's not going to be lined up right behind the harsh rhetoric of justice alito. one other thing too, and i've heard it

john: but republican senator lisa murkowski of alaska, an abortion rights supporter and key confirmation vote for recent conservative justices, lamented the report. >> if it goes in the direction that this leaked copy has indicated, i will just tell you that it rocks my confidence in the court right now. john while overturning roe could : well be the last word on the constitutional question, the front lines in the abortion battle would shift to the state legislatures. for the pbs newshour, i'm john yang. judy: for more on the impact, both inside the court and around the country, i'm joined by marcia coyle, chief washington correspondent for the national law journal. and mary ziegler, a florida state university law professor and author of "abortion and the law in america." welcome back to the newshour to both of you. let me start with you, marsha. give us a sense of the status of this. this is an opinion that was written, we think some time ago. it is subject to being changed before the court actually issues an opinion. help us understand what we have here. >> ok, judy. the first thing i

i don't know why susan collins and lisa murkowski, who i respect very much, i don't think that they went around for the last so many years saying that they do not support roe, so what i don't understand is why they do not support the bill that will be before us today. that's a question that should be asked of them. >> let me explain what some of the concerns are, is that this would not allow for, as they would phrase it, religious freedoms. it would require catholic hospitals to perform abortions, it would ban some of the waiting periods, it would ban ultrasounds that are mandatory in some states, and that is what some who are against this bill, who support a women's right to choose say that this ex sfpands what the states allow right now. >> this bill does not prevent catholic hospitals from not doing abortions. so far collins is wrong in that. and as far as the other limitations the states have been passing for a long time, i mean basically republican legislators with republican governors, are all kinds of limitations that have nothing to do with protecting a woman's health. these are

senator collins and murkowski. obviously they have their own proposal that they're looking to get a vote on. do you see that being successful? no and in in my world, we would call that a cover vote or, you know it's a cover alternative. they were feeling pressure to be supportive of today's vote, and since they were going to vote no, they wanted to have something else to point to say. oh well, we would have voted for this. it's not a serious proposal. it does not qualify row versus wade. it actually allows most of the restrictions on abortion rights that are happening today in conservative states to stand, so it's not. it's not meaningful alternative it's designed to accomplish a political objective. senator. all right, donna crane really appreciate your time this afternoon. thanks again for talking with us in regards to today's failed senate vote. thank you. thank you. meanwhile governor newsom is proposing the state increased spending on reproductive health services. the governor's new proposal adds $57 million t

>> well, there isn't support as of now for the collins murkowski bill, yes. there are two women senators on the republican side who are pro-choice. we hope that they will do the right thing and, on wednesday, vote for the women's health protection act. right now, we believe that we have 49 democrats who will vote to uphold this bill. and it's really important for the american public see where their senator stand on this issue. they need to see what their vote will be, and we certainly hope that, if senator collins and murkowski really believed that they were deceived by gorsuch and kavanaugh on the supreme court when they cast their votes, then it is important for them to make up for the deception by voting for wipha. >> democratic representative judy chu of california, we always appreciate your time. thank you for joining us this morning. >> thank you. >> still ahead, you may never have heard of the summer of mercy in kansas, but it's an and to girl part of the battle for abortion rights in this country. we're going to get into the history and how it affects

you have collins and murkowski who have made their proposals that go far into codifying, and restrictions, but democrats don't want to entertain that right now. that is the problem. it could be bipartisan legislation, but even if it were to pass the senate, which i am not sure if it will and running up to the midterms everything has political consequences, but the house, those are democrats, especially aggressive, can get testy and may not support legislation that doesn't go as codifying roe v. wade. host: of go to robert, petersburg, virginia, on the independent line. caller: i want to say something about the judge and the thing going on and kavanaugh making the statement that he did about the important thing. then you have amy barrett saying that her religion will dominate her decisions. also about the guy who killed all those people. if you watch tv, every other commercial, you see a man and a woman and it will be a black man and a white woman. this is not going to get better, it is only going to get worse. people are just pushing things too hard and too fast. host: on the comments abo

those senate republicans include susan collins and lisa murkowski. why not as a democrat or perhaps why not the democrats embracing that much of the bill that they have proposed as a amendment to the women's protection act caught defying roe v. wade and keeping the current holdings of the supreme court intact for america? >> well, that is a question for the senate. the senate can get the votes for that and send it back to the house. then we can have a conversation about that. but until then, the house has to make it clear. we want row in federal law. so every single woman, every single woman, in this country, has a right to reproductive freedom and safe affordable reproductive health care. the house has made a stand. if the senate sends us something else which by the way they do all the time, then we will talk about whether we can move that. if you can even move the colin murkowski bill, you need to make sure that we are telling the women of the united states that we are on their side. >> the progress that republicans have made was due, in large part

lisa murkowski and susan collins, but they don't like this draft of the bill. susan collins told reporters on the hill she believes it doesn't have enough protections, for example, for catholic hospitals who may not want to provide abortions. she says that language does not go far enough. and chuck schumer was asked, why don't you try to work with these two republicans to come up with a compromise? and he made it pretty clear this is a messaging bill. this is a bill that is to show the public that democrats are the party that would protect abortion rights, and they want to make that message clear to the public. this isn't about legislating. not about policy making and they don't have a majority just amongst themselves. joe manchin, obviously, we talk about him a lot on the show, he does not support abortion rights and he would not support this. >> let me play devil's advocate. wouldn't a more effective messaging bill if that's what schumer is trying to do, be able to get the votes of susan collins and lisa murkowski and fail but have 51 votes. it's a bipartisan

senator susan collins and lisa murkowski of alaska, who also support legal abortion, they have a bill that they are floating. senator collins told me today she thinks joe manchin will get on board. that is a lot of explanation to say there is a bill that perhaps could get 52 votes in the senate to keep abortion legal in this country in every state. but i don't see any way that it could get 60 at this time. you have to train it -- have to change the filibuster, joe manchin said he would not do that over abortion. judy: even if you got senator manchin's vote, we are still not at 60. lisa: senatoranchin is not willing to break the filibuster. judy: thank you very much. lisa: you're welcome. judy: with decisions on abortion, potentially moving into the hands of state governments, none of us talks with two leaders on opposite sides of the debate about what this means for their residence. amna: this decision would mean states can determine who can get an abortion, when, and under what circumstances for the first time in nearly 50 years. some states will effectively ban abortions, while othe

collins and murkowski was telling them that. manchin, collins, murkowski were talking. we can support codification of the bill. once again, i don't know, i guess, you know -- i don't know how progressives think. i guess it's much harder for chuck schumer to do this than it looks from here, sitting around, drinking coffee and everything. real easy for me to say this here, but sure as hell seems like he would want to be able to send all of your people out to campaign and say, the republicans not only reversed 50 years of precedent, 50 years of precedent for a constitutional right that 70% of americans support, they wouldn't even let us vote on -- here's the operative word on the campaign trail -- a bipartisan bill to just simply codify roe. codify what 70% of the americans support. and the democrats can't do that? why can't they do that? i don't -- let's go back to "big." i'll be tom hanks. i don't understand, why can't they do that? >> the legislation was on the table, as mika said. susan collins and lisa murkowski was working on it. joe manchin said, i would have voted

. >> susan collins and lisa murkowski also have a more narrow bill to codify roe v. wade . senate majority leader chuck schumer said he does not want to compromise. stay with kpix 5 for the latest development on all of the affects that we will have coverage on air and online on www.kpix.com and streaming on cbs news bay area . >>> overseas ukrainian forces continue to hold on in the southern port city of mariupol. ukraine president is asking the united nations to help those who are trapped . bradley blackburn reports. >> reporter: the battle for mariupol is not over yet. russian forces are bombarding the steel plant. the foreign ministers said russia is not interested in negotiating. ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy says many civilians and wounded forces remain. some will need to be dug out by hand. the united nations is assisting with evacuation efforts in mariupol and working with the red cross to get another convoy there by friday . some women, children, the elderly made it to ukrainian save zones. >> we do hope that this operation will continue and that we will b

senator collins certainly has made it known that she felt misled as well as senator murkowski. you make a really good point that we need to have a check on what these people are saying when they show up and they raise their hand and take an oath. host: the other big story besides the vote in the senate was the information on inflation in this country. inflation hit 8.3% last month, compared to one year ago. the headlines from the washington times today, biden looks powerless in the inflation blame game. what can be done despite inflation? guest: well, everybody wants to fight inflation. let's be clear about that. i think the president is at the top of the list. so, what he is doing is he is relying on the federal reserve, which generally is the body that tries to regulate our economy. they only have certain tools to do that. we are dealing with two things that are directly affecting inflation. the pandemic and the war in ukraine. and as everybody knows, one of the big parts of inflation is the price of gas. and the price of gas as just skyrocketed, largely because of the war in

murkowski and collin who is want to forge some sort of compromise here. senator tim kaine says he's in discussions with them. the reality is finding the other eight republicans who would vote to break a filibuster for that bill and pass this before the election has other political impl implications for the republicans. i don't see them doing that either. i don't think much will happen on the national level. i think they understand that's not going to happen and this will be an invigorating issue for young voters, a lot of women and you thnger men. the turn out in november will look different than a month ago. >> why is no one trying to do what the majority of americans want to do. >> it is kpas rating. i think this is why a majority of americans say they do not have faith in this two party system. it is not representing us. on the far right you have crazy town which wants no abortions. on the far left, you have crazy town which wants abortions with zero restrictions. most people are in the middle. they want abortion do be legal, safe. i'm pro-life. i want

one of the hang-ups we will watch to see if maybe they end up potentially getting murkowski or collins onboard, they would have to remove one of the religious exemptions from the bill. the reason they have it in there right now, as it has been explained to me, they want to make it unasalable in court. there's no court to make it unasailable from because there's no law, and that's the sticking point of most democrats voting for it and republicans voting against it, and joe manchin doesn't look like he will likely vote for it. >> in a world where roe existed this creates wedges and divides on the democratic side, and in a world where roe doesn't exist, you see all of those attempts go away and all the wedges and problems show up on the right. thank you all for providing your expertise. >>> coming up, how the abortion fight has taken center stage in one democratic runoff. it's an exception. for what it's worth, the woman running joins me. >>> the market, a lot of it has to do with the perception the economy is locked in. this post pandemic economy is a reality and this is wall street's re

votes if they'd had manchin on board and two two republican to-choice senators, susan collins and lisa murkowski likely would have vote is for it as well. but instead, biden, harris and schumer saying elect more pro-choice senators. >> i don't know that that collins and murkowski would vote for it, howard. they kind of say one thing and vote another way. when we look at what my party did, i was not in favor of that. the reason is you just have to look at what the american people, the american voters want, and that's the constituencies of these individuals who are elected to these positions. 9 and the majority of people in the united states, depending on which poll you're look at, favor a woman's right to choose, and roe v. wade, for the first trimester. it gets a bit murky in the second and definitely not popular in the third trimester. i would agree they should have said, okay, what do we have the votes for and then put that forth because, you know, to me, you've bot to put forth -- got to put forth legislation to get it passed unless you're trying to point out in the other party people on the

specifically senators lisa murkowski of alaska and susan collins of maine. don't you think just as an academic matter, neil gorsuch for whom you voted, don't you think he's probably going to vote to overturn roe v. wade if given the chance? >> i actually don't. i had a very long discussion with justice gorsuch in my office. and he pointed out to me that he is a co-author of a whole book on precedent. >> that was senator collins on justice gorsuch. here she is on justice kavanaugh. >> he noted that roe had been reaffirmed 19 years later by planned parenthood v. casey. and that it was precedent on precedent. he said it should be extremely rare that it be overturned. and it should be an example -- >> you have obviously full confidence. >> i do. >> today, senator collins reacted to the news with a brief statement, saying in part, it this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what justice gorsuch and justice kavanaugh said in their hearings and their meetings in my office. senator murko

this one helmed by two pro-choice republicans, susan collins and lisa murkowski but women's protection act had most democrats supporting it, except for joe manchin. there's no reason to believe even if this murkowski/collins proposal were something that would be voted on, there's no guarantee all democrats get on board. in fact, some think it's too watered down. so there's really few, if any, legislative paths forward here. >> thank you very much. >>> gas prices continue to hit americans' wallets very hard. national average reached another record high, $4.41. in battleground states like georgia, gas prices are becoming a major issue for voters and candidates. joins us from gainesville, allison barber. what you hearing this morning? >> reporter: jose, we are hearing from people that are very frustrated. they do not like the prices they are seeing at the pump. you mentioned the national average. come with me and we'll check out the prices in gainesville. unlead, $3.89 a gallon. diesel, $4.99 a gallon. in atlanta it's even higher. we have spoken to people at gas stations in three differen

at the time republican senator susan collins and lisa murkowski didn't back the legislation. murkowski said yesterday she will consider the bill with changes. >> i would actually like to see what changes, if any, have been made to that. as you know, i did not support it last time, because i don't think, i think it was overexpansive. if there is something new that is on the table today, obviously, we will take a look. >> evidently yer this week, i reported that president biden and his team are looking to turn the midterms into a contrast with donald trump and the republicans and now that plan appears to be in full motion. >> the united states senator in florida, with the senatorial campaign committee released what he calls the ultra maga agenda, it is a maga agenda all right. let me tell you about this ultra maga agenda, it self treem as most maga things are. what happens is if you have states changing the law saying that children who are lbgtq can't be in classrooms with other children. is that legit? on the way the decision? what are the next things that are going to be atta

i think i would like to offer an opportunity now for senator murkowski and senator collins, who seem to be very distressed about this potential decision to join with the senate democrats and pass abortion legislation now that legalize this is in the country. this is going to be devastating for women across the country. but right now, this falls on the shoulders of the republican party. this has been their mission and it looks like they may be successful. >> i just want to let our viewers know we're living pictures of democratic lawmakers speaking who are opposed to overturning roe v. wade. this is the type of scene that we have seen play out as the country has tried to digest this. what is your take when you hear that do you think -- and i know some republicans said this is an effort to try to change one of the justice's minds. do you think planned parenthood will try to do exactly that? >> look, i think the -- obviously, changing a justice's mind would be ideal. but honestly, i believe we're in a long-term fight now to restore a right, a constitutional right that women have relied o

senator lisa murkowski of alaska and senator susan collins of maine. both women support the nomination of new york will search and sarah collins voted for brett kavanaugh as well. now susan collins today said she would be quote, it would be completely inconsistent with what justice gorsuch and justice kavanaugh said in their hearings in our meetings in our office they voted to overturn roe which i got news for you a queen to the reporting they will. no word yet on senator collins plans to do anything about it. that said, the next four parties are a bit unclear right now. we are in a very strange moment. the draft opinion is leaked, it's there, we already. we don't know what's happening behind closed doors. so what to do about it is sort of a little up in the air. today's elizabeth warren without an angry very clear of how republicans have amassed reminding this for years. >> i am angry. angry and upset and determined. the united states congress can make roe versus wade the law land, they just need to do it. >> i've never seen you so angry -- >> this is

you have already seen two republican women, susan collins and lisa murkowski expressed dismay and that they feel misled by some of the justices, particularly neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh. they approved their candidacy but they were misled and statements during the hearings and in private meetings. laura: when do we find out the final ruling? reporter: we have to wait to find out how much this is a roadmap and much of this exactly comes to pass. this is typically when the supreme court releases. laura: as the u.s. braces for the ruling back of abortion rights, colombia, argentina, and mexico have expanded access to abortion in the last two years. will joins us from mexico city. is it easier to get an abortion in mexico than it is in texas? reporter: yes, in a sense it is. it is certainly harder in texas then in mexico city where abortion up to 12 weeks has been legal since 2007. there are plenty of other states that are moving in that direction. pro-choice campaigners, women's reproductive health campaigners are also able to help people obtain either abortion pills in mexico and all

stop this attack on our rights, our bodies we're -- senator collins, senator murkowski. prove the mean it when they say they're pro-choice. how about a filibuster if necessary. so, yes we're in a window right now, in which the public is alarmed and outrage. we also need supreme court justices to consider the implications before their final decision. they know the polls, they know 70% of americans oppose criminalizing people for having abortions. they do need to see us and hear from us, that we're not gonna do except this attack on our rights, our lives, antibodies. >> sorry go ahead, keep going. >> we also know that these judges, alina, kavanaugh in particular they were put on the court for this purpose. right? we are preparing for the outcome that is very close to the draft decision. we do think that some people feel powerless right now because republicans have built wet appears to be an answer insurmountable machine to impose minority rule. it'll take a lot of work and time to get to the place that we need to be. where we're seeing more than anything we're right now is

i'm looking at you, susan collins, murkowski, we need to legislate, organize, mobilize, because lives depend on it and they do. people will not stop seeking abortion care, which is health care, if this ruling becomes law. they simply will not do it legally. they will not do it safely. >> unlike some of the colleagues, collins and murkowski are open to movement on this. how do you approach that? i was talking to senator baldwin about this. there are things in the bill that they are proposing that is different than with your co-sponsor on. they do not go as far as what you would like to see or what democrats want to see. is there space for negotiation? is there an ability for these two women to unite with democrats and, again, it will not pass until we deal with the filibuster. will they have unity moving forward? >> let me say this. we do not want to give a shortage trip to the power. more often than not, the congress and the senate are not leading but are responding. i want to say to every person who calls this country home, every abortion rights advocate, every constituent, please ke