Skip to main content

tv   FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace  FOX News  July 1, 2012 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT

6:00 pm
captioned by closed captioning services, inc. >> chris: i'm chris wallace. the supreme court upholds obama >> the supreme court up holds obama care. giving obama a victory but giving mitt romney a new issue. we will find out what president obama thinks of the court's decision. and how healthcare reform will work in the real world. white house chief of staff. promising to wipe the law off the books. we will discuss the gop plan for repeal and replace. with the senate's top republican mitch mcconnell. plus obama care and the 2012 election. we will ask our sunday panel how the court's big rulings will
6:01 pm
play on the campaign trail. all right now on fox news sun dach dachlt the supreme court issued a historic ruling in obama care this week. that didn't end the intense debate. joining us from new york to discuss the ruling and how the law will be implemented is white house chief of staff jack lew. welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> thank you for having me. >> does the president feel the law is safe or does he believe it must clear another hurdle in the november election to take full effect? >> chris, one thing that is great about our system is when the up preem court rules we have a final answer the law is constitutional it stands. we are going to proceed as we were proceeding to implement the law. i think the thing the person people want for the divisive debate on healthcare to stop. we already see that with the
6:02 pm
implementation to date of the health bill there are benefits people are seeing in their everyday life. before they graduate and get a job they still need health insurance people who have medicare and fell in the doughn doughnut hole and prescription drugs are covered. families are preexisting children don't have to worry if they qualify. we have to get on with the implementation now and that's what we should do. >> you say the debate should stop? you know it's not going to stop. republicans are talking about repeal and replace. are you saying that's wrong? >> i think any one who wants to repeal is going to have to explain to the people that i just described why they are going to lose the benefits they are already getting why their kids are going to lose coverage on their health insurance why the doughnut hole will come back. as far as the debate goes, i understand there remains a disagreement. the question is if you want certainty, if you want the business community and individuals we are going forward you can calm things down and say
6:03 pm
we are going to give it a chance and implement it. that is what whie do once we ha the supreme court withhold it. others might choose to have a debate. i think the american people want us to focus on the economy on creating jobs on moving forward. we sent congress plans on which they were enacted we would create a million more jobs. teachers, firemen, policemen in home refinancing and building our roads it is time to move on to the agenda american people want us to be worried about. >> mr. lew, the fact is a lot of governors believer and governor romney believe having all of these regulations and taxes and mandates in fact is hurting jobs. a lot of businessmen say i don't know if i can hire somebody because of the fact that it is going to cost me more money because of their healthcare. if there is going to be a debate about taxes we welcome that debate. under this administration we have cut taxes for middle class families by $3,600. in this healthcare bill it cuts
6:04 pm
taxes another 4,000 dollars. the only thing that puts a burden on individuals to pay more is a penalty for those who can afford insurance and choose to t not to buy it. to be clear that's 1 percent of the population. in massachusetts where it was tested in the plan governor romney put in place one percent of the population ended up paying the penalty. the congressional budget office looked at this. when they looked at the federal law they said that would be roughly the same amount one percent. the other 99 percent what it means is security the day their family gets coverage it means benefits they get will offer better coverage and it means nobody has to worry if somebody gets hit they lose their health insurance. >> if i may mr. lew, during the 2008 campaign the president made some promises the republican national committee made rulings that the mandate they have in fact put out a video noting what
6:05 pm
the president said to voters when he was campaigning in 2008. let's watch. if you are a family making less than 250,000 dollars a year, you will not see your taxes go up. >> you will not see one dime's worth of tax increase. >> any form of tax increase. >> question, didn't the president break that promise? >> if you go back and you look at the laws that have been enacted since the president has taken office we have cut taxes for those families. we have reduced their taxes. >> but according -- >> no that's not what the supreme court said. they said it was constitutional didn't matter what congress called it. it's a penalty -- >> wait a minute. they call it a tax. >> actually, technically what they said is congress has many powers and there's a commerce clause taxing powers and it was constitutional.
6:06 pm
>> i can't let you go there. it specifically said it is not constitutional under the commerce laws it is constitutional under the tax. the question will raising taxes for the middle class let's look at the record. congressional budget office estimates in 2016, 4 million americans will pay the mandate penalty for tax and 75 percent of those people will make less than 120,000 a year. between 2012 and 2021 those folks will pay 27 billion in additional taxes. let me make this point i promisepromise i will let you talk. they are taking quite a hit by what the supreme court says is a tax. >> if you look at all of the laws enacted in the last 3 and a half years you would see those families have a tax cut. all of the independent analysts whether it's congressional budget office or others would validate there has been a tax cut. >> i am not arguing that. all i am saying is this is a tax
6:07 pm
increase on on the middle class of 27 billion over the next ten years. >> this is a law that says if you can afford insurance and you choose not to buy it and you choose to let your health costs be a burden to others you pay a penalty so you pay your fair share. that's what the law said. for the 90 percent of people who buy insurance or get it through the tax cuts that are in this act, they are not going to be affected. you keep your insurance you don't pay any penalty. nor the peop-- for the people w want to be free riders there's a penalty. it is not a burden on the middle class. nonpartisan says 4 million americans will be paying that tax by 2016. let's look at why chief justice robert called it a tax. it will be collected and enforced the internal revenue
6:08 pm
service. what you pay is calculated as a percentage of your income, and here's what the president's lawyer, the solicitor general donald ber rilly told the court in defending the mandate. >> not only is it fair to read it as exercise of the tax power but this court has an obligation to say it's a tax if it can be upheld. >> if it walks, looks and quacks like a duck it's a duck. >> chris, it has been a long time since i practiced law but one of the things about our judicial system is you can make arguments to the court on mullti multiple grounds. he said there is a lot of ways to look at this. it was set up it was not called a tax. there are powers congress has and you can justify a law in mum tim ways. the court took that route it was a penalty in the law and something people choose whether or not to be subject to. most americans want health insurance. 99 percent of people will take
6:09 pm
advantage of the fact they have affordable coverage they can protect their families. for the one percent that whooz not to have insurance they don't control whether they will have an accident or be struck by illness. if they wind up in the hospital and they have to have expensive treatment those costs will be born by other people to pay for insurance. this penalty says you cannot be a free rider. you cannot go without any payment. the that payment. very few people will choose it. in massachusetts one percent of people choose to pay the penalty. people want healthings. >> i want to move on but i have to ask one more time, there are lots of taxes people either choose to pay or not the cigarette taxi don't pay because i don't smoke. maybe somebody else pays because they do smoke. there are plenty of taxes that are discretionary in terms of what your behavior is. would you agree that in chief justice robert's ruling he said that this is constitutional only as a tax?
6:10 pm
>> i would say that wihat the opinion said is there are mum tim powers congress has to make bau and this is the case. that's not what he said. states don't have to expand medicaid as obama care requires. a number of republican governors -- medicaid weather. if they do what happens to the millions of folks who fall under the mandatory expansion of medicaid up to 133 percent of the poverty level and doesn't that in fact prevent if some of those governors opt out doesn't that prevent universal coverage? >> i for the life of me don't understand why a governor would refuse to let the people of their state take advantage of medicaid coverage. it's 100 percent paid for out of the federal budget. >> only for the first few years. >> then it is close to 100 in the 90 percent range. i think if you look at the
6:11 pm
history of medicaid, in it the 1960s when it was created, in the 1990s when the child's health program was put into place, over time they all choose to come in. it doesn't all have the vast majority of states will come in right away. that's the right thing to do that's what i think most states will do. the whole law is built around states having a lot of flexibility to implement the whole health law in different ways that are work in their own states. we have actually proposed legislation to give more collect ability to the states. this is a law that will cover millions and millions of people who don't now have health insurance. i hope the states come around in those few states that are slow to accept this coverage and add it. >> what would you say to a governor who is considering now that they have the option decide i am not going to get involved with that because i think it's going to cost me down the line? >> i think those governors have to answer to the people in their
6:12 pm
states. you look at the people who are going to be eligible these are working people who are low pawas who don't have healthcare. they are exactly the kind of people most governors should want to help. >> turn to the politics of this. governor romney said he will end obama care on day one of his presidency. he says it raises taxes by $500 million cuts medicare by 500 billion and adds trillions of dollars to the deficit. are you happy to be owe -- to see obama care be a riveferendu in this election? >> i think the facts are different than that. congressional budget office made clear the healthcare law saves not spends money. it puts important mechanisms in place to help get control of healthcare spending more broadly. when he was governor of massachusetts governor romney put a plan in place that has many features the affordable care act makes available on a national basis. massachusetts is one of the
6:13 pm
states that that will be eligible immediately because of that. i don't think the american people want to have the debate again. i don't think they want to be pulled back to decades of debate to get where they are. we have a law. the law is constitutional. we should implement it. the president said on many occasions he wants to work across party lines if there are things that can be done to improve the law that's the conversation we should be having. we need to move on and deal with the economy and jobs. we need to put our efforts on creating opportunities for americans to be employed. >> we are running out of time. i have a couple of quick questions on other issues. the justice department told the house on friday that it will not prosecute attorney general holder on the house's citation of holder for criminal contempt. did the president approve that decision? >> executive privilege has to be envoeked by the president then the justice department relied an opinion from the reagan administration which is that you don't prosecute once the executive prufl ledge i--
6:14 pm
privilege is invoked. the justice department made that opinion. >> does they think it's right to ignore the house's siding to holder in contempt? >> we made clear that we think the actions of the house were political, that they were not based in fact. you go back to that issue here. the fact of fast and furious. it was a bad procedure to run guns to mexico. it started in the bush administration in the regional office. the attorney general didn't know about it. when he learned about it he stopped it because it's wrong. he's given all of the information to congress to understand what's happened up until that point. there is now a fishing expedition for documents that get well beyond finding those facts. >> i am going to move on. we do have to point out the fact that that in february of 2011, two months after the border patrol agent brian ferry died it was the justice department that sent a letter to congress
6:15 pm
denying that this operation existed. that did create some of the confusion. >> and chris, just to finish that story the attorney general made clear he did not know about it before that. that letter would not have gone if the attorney general of washington knew about it. something bad was going on. the justice department recognized the attorney general stopped it. the policy here -- >> it took 11 months for the justice department to retract the letter. if i may ask you one last question. in the investigation of national security links the pentagon has ordered all of the top relevant officials to preserve all of their documents that record of national intelligence says relevant agents must take lie detector tests. have you ordered each of those with your step? >> i can't speak to the details of how investigations are being responded to because as you know those details themselves are classified. but i can tell you -- >> no, no, no.
6:16 pm
it's out there that the justice -- that the pentagon is ordering documents be preserved and the dni is having polygraph tests. that's not classified. >> there will be full cooperation and the fact of the matter is that the president feels very strongly we need to find out where these leaks happen. he relies on classified information every day to make life and death decisions. there is nobody more concerned about where this goes on than the president. >> he feels strongly he will agree to questioning himself? >> i am not going to speak to the details of how the investigation will be handled. >> we have to leave it there. i want to thank you so much for joining us. as always it's good to talk with you. >> pleasure to be with you, chris. >> up next gop how republicans will try to repeal obama care and what they will put in its place. mitch mcconnell after a quick break. place. ♪
6:17 pm
why not make lunch more than just lunch? with two times the points on dining in restaurants, you may find yourself asking why not, a lot. chase sapphire preferred. high schools in six states enrolled in the national math and science initiative... ...which helped students and teachers get better results in ap courses. together, they raised ap test scores 138%. just imagine our potential... ...if the other states joined them. let's raise our scores. let's invest in our teachers and inspire our students. let's solve this.
6:18 pm
our cloud is made of bedrock. concrete. and steel. our cloud is the smartest brains combating the latest security threats. it spans oceans, stretches continents. and is scalable as far as the mind can see. our cloud is the cloud other clouds look up to. welcome to the uppernet. verizon. fight both fast with new tums freshers! concentrated relief that goes to work in seconds and freshens breath. new tums freshers. ♪ tum...tum...tum...tum... tums! ♪ [ male announcer ] fast relief, fresh breath, all in a pocket sized pack. but they can also hold you back. unless you ask, "what's next?" introducing the all-new rx f sport. this is the pursuit of perfection.
6:19 pm
6:20 pm
>> chris: we want to get the gop view of this week's big deci >> we want to get the gop view of obama care. joining us now from kentucky is mitch mcconnell and senator, welcome back. >> good morning. >> you just heard white house chief of staff jack lew say the court has spoken it is time to move on. are you persuaded? >> somebody is doing the best he can with a really tough situation. the president said it was not a tax. the supreme court which has the final say says it is a tax. the tax will be lever sried 77 percent of it on americans making less than 120,000 dollars a year. so it is a middle class tax cut -- tax increase. beyond that, chris, the core of
6:21 pm
the bill is worth reminding people it's a half a trillion dollars in cuts to medicare, that's hospitals, nursing homes, home healthcare and the like, $500 billion tax increase. the congressional budget office says it is also a job killer that it will cost the economy between 800 thousand and a million jobs. this is the single worst piece of legislation that has been passed certainly in modern times. it will be an issue, a big issue in the fall election. i think the chief justice basically said is it up to the american people to decide? we have one last chance here to defeat obama care, we can do that in the november election. now, since the supreme court justice, chief justice roberts came out with this ruling declaring the mandate is actually a tax, you have been hammering the president for imposing a new tax on the middle
6:22 pm
class. but mitt romney has a mandate in his massachusetts healthcare reform plan, and the people in massachusetts paid more than $20 million last year in that mandate, pen amount, tax, whatever you -- penalty, whatever want to call it, isn't that a tax. >> that was a massachusetts decision not a national decision. number two, every single set of democratic -- every democratic senator voted for obama care. it passed without a vote to spare. every single democratic incumbent on the ballot in november was the deciding vote to pass this bill. this law is deeply unpopular with the american people. these senate races across american will indeed be a river ren dumb on th-- river reeferen job killing mandate. >> if the obama mandate is a tax
6:23 pm
on the middle class isn't the romney mandate a tax on the middle class? >> i think governor romney will have to speak for himself about what was done in massachusetts. i can tell you that every single democratic senator voted for this tax increase and it's $500 billion cost in medicare and it will be a huge issue in 2012. chief justice has in effect said this will be decided by the american people. that's why we have elections. we will have won the first tuesday of november. >> let's move on. if voters elect a republican president and a republican senate, your top priority will be you say to repeal and replace obama care. i want to drill down into that with you. one of the keys to obama care is that it will extend insurance access to 30 million people who are now uninsured. in your replacement how would you provide universal coverage?
6:24 pm
well, first let me say the single best thing we can do for the american healthcare system is to get rid of obama care. get rid of the half a trillion dollars in medicare cuts, get rid of the half a trillion dollars in taxes. in other words, the single biggest step we could take in the direction of um proving american healthcare is to get rid of this. >> you talk about repeal and replace. how would you provide universal coverage? >> i will get to it in a minute. the first step we need to take is get rid of what is there. this job killing proposal that has all of these cuts to existing healthcare providers. secondly, we need to go step by step to replace it with more modest reforms that will not be a 2700 page republican alternative. we will not take a meat ax to the american healthcare system. we will pull out a scalpel and go step by step and make the kind of more modest changes that would deal with the principle
6:25 pm
issue which is cost, things like interstate sales of health insurance. right now you don't have competition around the country in the selling of health insurance. that's a mistake. things like lawsuit reform, millions and millions of dollars are lost every year by hospitals and doctors. those kinds of -- >> we are going to run out of time. i want to ask what specifically are you going to do to provide universal coverage to the 30 million people who are uninsured? >> that is not the issue. the question is, how can you go step by step to improve the american healthcare system? it is already the finest healthcare system in the world. >> you don't think -- >> we are not going to say the american uninsured is an issue? >> let me tell you what we are going to do. we are not going to turn the american healthcare system into a western european system.
6:26 pm
that's what's at the heart of obama care. they want the federal government to run the healthcare. they can't handle medicare or medicaid they are already in trouble. we need to clean up what they are already responsible for before we start to i am modestly try to take over all of healthcare. big step in the wrong direction. >> obama care guarantees that people who have preexisting conditions and who don't currently have health ints cannot be denied coverage because of the preexisting condition. if you repeal obama care how will you protect those people with preexisting conditions? >> over half of the states already have these high risk pools that deal with that issue. that kind of innovation ought to be encouraged the federal government. i don't think anybody thinks the federal government can take over this area. we can't even handle the healthcare we have already got. that he is the kind of thing
6:27 pm
that ought to be dealt with at the stable level. we ought to be encouraging that. >> insurance companies say they can't afford to make this deal that they are going to take anybody even if they have a preexisting condition unless they get all of those customers, the millions of customers from the mandate. >> that's what these state based high risk pools are for, chris. that's exactly what i am saying. >> you are saying that would take care of people who don't have insurance who want to get insurance, but are being denied it because of a preexisting condition? >> i am saying this ought to be dealt with at the state level bile these sta risk pools over half of the states i believe have already developed. >> even if you win a majority in the senate chances are democrats are still going to have enough votes to be able to conduct a filibuster. some of your republican colleagues are suggesting that the way even with the republican majority but not a filibuster proof majority that you can undo obama care is through a budget
6:28 pm
process called reconciliation where you only need 14 vot-- 51. would you consider using reconciliation to undo? >> the chief justice said it's a tax. taxes are clearly what we call reconcileable. that's the kind of measure that can be pursued with 51 votes in the senate. if i am the leader of the majority next year i commit to the american people the repeal of obama care will be job one. by the way. i think we will also be insisting that we have a vote on obama care again before the election. but in terms of achieving it, it would take a different senate with a different majority leader and a different president. but yes, that can be done with a simple 51 votes. >> the reason i ask is because when they were passing obama care through reconciliation, you were very upset with it. you called it secretive, anti
6:29 pm
democratic, beau partisan. why the difference? the first time it passed the senate it didn't pass through reconciliation. it got 60 votes. there were 60 democrats and 40 republicans. they were able to pass permanent law. look, reconciliation is available because the supreme court has now declared it a tax. they have unearthed the massive deception that was practiced the president and the democrats constantly denying it was a tax. you have heard the president chief of staff continue to try to deny it was a tax just this morning as the supreme court the chief justice made it clear. it's a tax. as a tax it is eligible for reconciliation. >> i want to ask you finally about chief justice robert's ruling. some conservatives are calling him a trader for saving obama care but some other conservatives are noting that he sharply curtails congress' ability to use the commerce law to regulate everything. he sharply curtails the federal
6:30 pm
government's ability to tell states what they have to do or punish them if they don't. how do you read the robert's ruling? >> well, it was deeply disappointing. i think justice kennedy got it right. he found both individual mandate and the medicaid mandate unconstitutional and said clearly congress would not have passed the rest of it without these two which he found unconstitutional. he and three others, four of them justices agreed that the whole thing should be replaced. i am sorry that didn't happen. this was a huge mistake for the country. but chief justice declared it a tax. therefore he has upheld it. now the american people have the final decision and i am confident they are going to give us the votes to repeal it. >> do you not see anything for conservatives in what justice roberts said about the commerce clause and the ability to dictate the states in what they must and must not do? >> i agree with that and the
6:31 pm
other core justices felt that way as well. >> i am going to have to leave it there. senator mcconnell thank you for coming in. always a pleasure to talk to you. we will stay on top of this debate straight through to november. >> okay, thank you. coming up the sunday panel tackles obama care. chief justice on tcontroversial ruling and what it means for the 2012 presidential race. [ male announcer ] this is the at&t network.
6:32 pm
in here, every powerful collaboration is backed by an equally powerful and secure cloud. that cloud is in the network, so it can deliver all the power of the network itself. bringing people together to develop the best ideas -- and providing the ap and computing power to make new ideas real. it's the cloud from at&t. with new ways to work together, business works better. ♪
6:33 pm
with new ways to work together, business works better. [music playing] announcer: movement. along with weight loss, it's one of the many ways to fight osteoarthritis pain. for more information on managing pain, go to what happens when classroom teachers get the training... ...and support they need? schools flourish and students blossom. that's why programs like... ...the mickelson exxonmobil teachers academy... ...and astronaut sally ride's science academy are helping our educators improve student success in math and science. let's shoot for the stars. let's invest in our teachers and inspire our students. let's solve this.
6:34 pm
it should be pretty clear by now that i didn't do this because it was good politics. i did it because i believed it was good for the country. >> the supreme court ruling did absolutely nothing to improve the president's failed healthcare law. it remains unworkable. unaffordable. and very unpopular. >> chris: president obama taking advantage of a second chance to try to persuade voters they will like obama care while republican senator
6:35 pm
john barasso is having none of it. time for our sunday panel. well, chief justice roberts ruling clearly closes off the legal avenue as a way to overturn obama care. but it clearly as we could hear today doesn't end the political debate. brit where is obama care now? how secure is it as a big government programt >> well, as a political/legislative matter it is more vulnerable to appeal than it was before for the reasons you just discussed with senator mcconnell. this opens the pos isibility th it can be acted on potentially repealed using a process called budget reconciliation which means no filibuster allowed simple majority of 51 is enough to undo the law. and furthermore in terms of the
6:36 pm
popularity of the law, in jack lew's interview it was a classic illustration. this is going to do nothing with the law's popularity. it is unpopular it will be a sizable tax increase and the admin stwrags is terribly eager not to have that get around as you can see. as a political/legislative matter the law i on shakier ground. >> how secure is obama care? >> i am not totally sure that i agree with that. it's unclear exactly how easy it is going to be for republicans to repeal the whole thing using reconciliation. perhaps now because it has been label add tax that portion can be repealed. there are other parts of the law there are detectives to insurance companies that can't deny coverage for people becauseth preexisting conditions that sort of thing. it will all have to be dealt with and if they can't get that through reconciliation it could
6:37 pm
be bigger mess. de fund the parts -- republican talks about de funding it which could be a bigger mess which romney and senate would have responsibility for that. i am not sure. >> this is the way this pen salt slash we now know as a tax, was the way to fund the whole provision that says you can't deny coverage based on preexisting conditions. i doesn't think there is any reason why that couldn't be undone with reconciliation they are intertwined. >> there are democrats who think you take the budget issues out but they are separate from other parts of the law. if democrats can block the other parts it creates a bigger mess. i am not sure it will be necessarily good with 50 republican votes in the senate. >> i want to tdig down to the chief justice's ruling. i want to ask you the same question i asked mitch mcconnell. they are still debating the long-term effects of the robert's ruling. on the one hand he safes obama care. that's the big deal that's the
6:38 pm
bottom line. on the other hand he appeared to new limits on what congress can regulate under the guys of the commerce laws. he set new limits on what the federal government can mandate the state has to do. in terms of the long-term constitutional implications how do you read the roberts rule? >> i think it will be so tough for any one who wants to pass a similar program under the similar argument. it will be a tough time. this is not going to be an easy opinion for anybody who sites you. a lot of people see it as a 1-44 decision. >> 144 meaning the chief justice was here then the four liberalings and four conservatives. >> right. it will be tough to look to it as a top precedent. a not a license to regulate an individual from cradle to grave. he real that had in. he talked about the fact this is a tax and sdoontsly turned it back through the regulalegislat process. it doesn't give an opinion under
6:39 pm
the wisdom of affordable care act. that judgment is veefshed for the people. there are references that sounds like it goes back to your legislators. if you don't like them address it to them. >> you know the court far better than i do. is that unusual for a justice to say we may not like this but it's up to the voters? almost seems like an invitation to say over turn obama care but you have to do it at the polls. >> some people say it's a minefield that he tucked in they supported the law who say listen they didn't like it. he did uphold it but he provided a lot of tools potential outs ways to go after it. it sounds unusual but he says i don't get to the merits of whether or not this is a good law. i tell you to take it elsewhere. >> you are a long time court watcher, how significant is this ruling? >> well, you know, i have been watching john roberts ever since he was arguing cases as a lawyer. i have always had the impression that while everyone else is playing checkers john roberts
6:40 pm
was playing chess. what he has done in this brilliant opinion is to sacrifice a pawn called the individual mandate to put the entire great society in check. he has done that by getting two liberal justices to agree with him in a 7-2 ruling that there are serious limitations on the federal government's ability to have spending power to get the state to cooperate in wealth fair and education programs a lot of things work including education medicaid, et cetera. he has done that and gotten liberals to applaud. now next terne voting rights section 5 in affirmative action come you up before the court, and he votes with the other four conservatives to strike them down all of the liberal who's might otherwise complain might have to acknowledge that the fair minded statement john roberts was involved in that decision. this is a man of great brilliance and all of those conservatives were griping about this ruling need to give it a second thought. >> shannon as our court watcher
6:41 pm
there is a lot of chatter that perhaps roberts switched his votes that he was at first on the side of the conservatives he switched to the side of the liberals and he may have been to youed by outside liberals saying if he went with conservatives it would show to you heart san the vote was 5 conservatives voting down a president's big plan. do you buy any of that? do you believe he switched his vote? >> i think it is a very legitimate theory to be considered. if you think about the fact that the president in the rose garden in april actually publicly called out the court and said he was confident the president wouldn't do something as unprecedented as this. jack lay hue railed on robertson talking to citizens uniting the fact that the court was losing the con dpins of the american people. i think it's possible if you read the dissent it is found in many places as if it was written as a majority opinion. if they have the vote and lose
6:42 pm
it at some point i think it is entirely possible. >> i was interested today to get my advanced copy of time magazine. robert's rules. there is a lot of coverage today of the chief justice. do you expect to see the mainstream media revise its opinion of john roberts from a right wing zell lot to a statesman? >> for a while. i think it is reasonable to say whether he switched his vote or not that this decision that he reached was more institutional than constitutional. thor matter of it being a tax strains reasoning. it has the ear marks of a tax and it does have some. then i read the dissent on that oh, boy. the dissent is much more xiling than that. i think this was a strained piece of legal reasoning and it was a tact kel and strategic piece of juris prudence that lays a minefield.
6:43 pm
i think i really like chuck's suggestion that romney is playing chess and everybody else is playing checkers. >> you want to get in a final comment. >> i think again those who might suggest that there is something that is sort of pedifogish they are right. but i think roberts in his view sees it as more important to secure long-term objectives and very important to get liberals to buy into that so that they can't complain when he unfolds his larger plan later on. very, very -- >> we continue our discussion on obama care ruling and what it means for the presidential race. [ male announcer ] trophies and awards lift you up. but they can also hold you back. unless you ask, "what's next?" introducing the all-new rx f sport. this is the pursuit of perfection.
6:44 pm
just $14.99. start with soup, salad and cheddar bay biscuits then choose one of 7 entrees plus dessert! four perfect courses, just $14.99. come into red lobster and sea food differently. hey. hey eddie. i brought your stuff. you don't have to do this. yes i do. i want you to keep this. it'd be weird. take care. you too. [ sighs ] so how did it go? he's upset. [ male announcer ] spend less time at gas stations. with best in class fuel economy. it's our most innovative altima ever. ♪
6:45 pm
6:46 pm
6:47 pm
this idea has >> this idea enjoyed support by both parties including the republican nominee for president. >> if weigh tonight go get rid of obama care we have to replace president obama. my mission is make sure we do exactly that. >> romney and obama wasting no time turning the supreme court ruling into a political weapo weapon -- weapon. mcconnell picked up on roberts ruling saying the mandate is a tax saying he broke his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle clat. how effective is that argument with the fact that romney has his own tax problem he has a mandate in massachusetts. >> there will be challenges on both sides. this has been a tricky issue for the obama white house. we are talking about the economy
6:48 pm
you know this is not a good issue for them. i think there's something to be said for the fact that obama during the campaign did knottno campaign for individual man dat he. he voted against it. it is hurt because of that. y campaigned against it and now has to defend it. the irony is now he's having to defend it against somebody who passed one himself. in fact who arguably it was romney's signature achievement as governor of massachusetts. i think that is incredibly awkward for romney to have to go out there running away from his own record trying to attack obama on this. it is tricky for both sides. to some extent we will have new job numbers come out on friday. i think it will give a new dynamic to the senate races. i think senate candidates republican senate candidates will try to use the momentum
6:49 pm
from this to try to push to a return to majority. >> you can see mitch mcconnell doing that thing every single senator who voted was voting for a tax increase. they will try to wrap that around it. how do you think the dmant is a tax plays out? >> i think it whether you arbur. they are december pratted not to call it a tax. they know how politically convenient a tax is. liz was just saying if you talk about it there's a upssubset of voters enormously influenced a desire to get rid of obama care. how many of them are going to vote for obama because mitt romney has a mandate back when he was governor. not man kneel. he pledge to do over turn it he never stopped talking about it ever since. i don't think many people will be persuaded to go the other way because they think he once was
6:50 pm
guilty of this. >> to the degree of the november election i don't think it will be the central issue but to the degree it becomes a referendum in obama care one hand the president can emphasize the parts of the plan that are popular like as we talked about preexisting conditions or kids can stay on their parents's insurance until they are 26. it feeds into the idea that obama is it a big government president. >> i have always felt that politically the best result for the republican party of this supreme court case would be some ruling upholding the mandate. the reason for that is that this election both sides are pursuing a base mobilizing election. get your loyalists motivated to go to the polls. nothing motivates the republican base like the bogeyman of bow ma'a obama care. you just heard mitt rom nae or
6:51 pm
maybe it was mitch mcconnell say this is our last chance. the supreme court option is exhausted. for those in the republican base really dedicate to do getting rid of obama care. they have one more way to do it to go to the polls in mass numbers in november and vote out all of the democrats. in that regard i think this advances republicans politically. >> if the court had thrown out obama care and said the whole thing is unconstitutional then you have the constitutional law lecturer who spent a year in something that turned out not even to be illegal. on the other hand does this mobilize as charles is suggest -- karl is suggesting the tea party activists who have never been keen on mitt romney. >> there were thousands of them outside the court. if they are any indication when we got the opinion they continued to rally through out the day claiming their bells and saying this is it.
6:52 pm
we are awake. you have awakened a sleeping giant once again. the tea party didn't go away but we are coming back stronger than ever. it's interesting to step away from the tight politics of it. i went to the dentist on friday, he said wow a huge win for the president yesterday this is great for his campaign. as much as those who quote-unquote lost his opinion on thursday want to have political spin of it aren't as lucky as those of us sit hearing they think the president won big on thursday. >> her ben t-- dentist does a great job. i am not sure of his political views but he does a good job on teeth. >> it would have been a disaster for the president if it would have been overturned. on the other hand, does the fact that somebody said the winner celebrate the losers mobilize? >> i think it would have been worse if it had been overturned actually. it would have been embarrassing and it would have allowed romney to make the argument that
6:53 pm
obama's whole if i was term had been wasted he could have spent that time fixing the economy instead try to pass this huge thing that ended up nowhere. it would have been the worst outcome. the question will be whether the white house tries to make a concerted effort for the first time ever to sell this bill. >> what? >> i was waiting for that reaction. >> they are still jgun shy. >> remember how many speeches obama made? this is a problem the dogs don't like the dog food not because the ad campaign hasn't worked. it is unpopular similar margins before it was passed and remains so stood. the idea that it is legitimate as a tax is not going to help it. >> there is something problematic when you have people from the white house saying the american people are going to like this bill once it is actually fully implemented then
6:54 pm
they realize how great it is but can't sell it until then. >> you cannot underestimate the extent to which businesses all over the country feel this is a drag on their planning. it is a deterrent to hiring and so forth. it feeds into the bigger issue which is the economy. i think these two things go together and i think they are unmistakably burdensome for the president and his reelection campaign. >> i agree with liz in the sense this is a tricky one for romney, too. they could reach some sort of deal where neither has to talk about healthcare reform they would both be happy. i must say looking back on this when it is all over it will be interesting to reflect on the obama administration's decision to take this to the supreme court during the election. they had the option of pursuing it in lower courts a little further. i repeat i think it was a lose lose proposition for them. i do. they would have lost if they
6:55 pm
actually lost the ruling. there would have been the embarrassment you talked about. i think they still lose because having the individual mandate upheld and by the chief justice of the united states it mobilizes the republican base. >> i want to pick up on what britt said. i agree with it. i don't think this obama care is unpopular because the president didn't try to sell it. he will try to sell it again and again and again. dozens of speeches and hasn't been able to. you heard him in the staple statement he made i did this because it was good for the country. the mrur raility of americans are against the overall plan. they support some of the individual things like the 26-year-olds on their parents or preexisting conditions things like that. do you see the white house making another effort, a second effort to make a first impression or are they better off staying away from obama care? >> i think they make that first impression a second time. there were democrats on thursday
6:56 pm
who said openly it is a gift for us a chance to sell this again in a better way than they did the first time. their language. i also think there will be a lot of pressure on the gop where the house scheduled a repeal vote for july 11th was the last i heard. there will be impression on what they replace it with. they do like the individual tenants of this bill. they have to weigh carefully they would offer something better. >> i also think democrats have an opportunity to say if they want to we are the party to believe the universal coverage and republican party is not. mcconnell they could make that argument. >> see you next week. don't forget to check out panel plus where our group picks up with the discussion on our web site fox news we will post the video before noon eastern time. follow us on twitter@fox news sunday. up next, we hear from you. our cloud is not soft and fluffy.
6:57 pm
our cloud is made of bedrock. concrete. and steel. our cloud is the smartest brains combating the latest security threats. it spans oceans, stretches continents. and is scalable as far as the mind can see. our cloud is the cloud other clouds look up to. welcome to the uppernet. verizon.
6:58 pm
with two times the points on dining in restaurants, you may find yourself asking why not, a lot. chase sapphire preferred. [ thunk ] sweet! [ male announcer ] the solid thunk othe door on the jetta.
6:59 pm
thanks, mister! [ meow ] [ male announcer ] another example of volkswagen quality. that's the power of german engineering. right now lease the 2012 jetta for $159 a month. >>. >> chris: time for comments you posted to our blog an many of you responded to our interview last week with the executive. i always enjoy t. boone pickens. please keep your comments coming. you can find us at fox news that's it for today, have a great week. see you nex