shelters. "the kud lo report" moments away. larry kudlow up next, and you do not want to miss it, especially because jurors truly will make an appearance on where to put your money, depending on what happens with the big obama care supreme court decision. it may surprise you, so you better stay tuned. all right, i thought pvh was terrific. people will sell it down, shoot first, won't ask questions, and that's your opportunity. don't forget, all the great veteran stuff this network will be doing tomorrow. and don't forget, always a bull market somewhere. see you tomorrow. hey, larry, what do you have in are. >> obama care takes hate in front of the speemz and ben bernanke worried about rising gas prices this is "kudlow report." the supreme court once again takes up the most important court case of our generation. obama care. it could fundamentally change the relationship government has with its citizens.

key questions from anthony kennedy suggests that obama care might be repealed, and nothing compared to the fact that obama care could bankrupt america. house budget chair paul ryan tells bus thaus about that, on . and health care stocks head up. dow, s & p, and nasdaq go slightly down. and ben bernanke is worried that economic growth could take a hit from rising gas prices, here is bernanke on abc news moments ago. >> well, gas prices are a major problem. obviously hardship for lots of people. >> all right. but i don't want to contradict the chairman, but i want to remind you what i said last night. i think gas prices may well be peeking, and stock market investors may be very pleasantly surprised. get to all that in a few moments. another example of obama

regulatory overreach tonight, the epa issued a new carbon rule that could literally end the coal industry and put hundreds of thousands of workers out of jobs, ohio governor john kasich joins us for an exclusive interview. we begin tonight with the most important story of the day, the supreme court getting to the heart of whether the federal government can control your behavior. which i believe is all wrong. by forcing to you do something you don't want to do. forcing to you buy something you don't want to buy. i ask is there no limit to federal power? nbc's pete williams joins us now. good evening, pete. >> some of the same questions inside the court today, larry, from the conservatives on the court. quite clear the four conservatives don't agree with you, basically, believe this law is unconstitutional, and it's equally clear that the four liberal members of the court believe it is not, that they would vote to uphold it. that leaves us with justice anthony kennedy. they were sort of book ended questions that tell the story

here. at the very beginning, he was very skeptical, he said to the government lawyer, isn't -- doesn't this law alter the relationship between the individual and the federal government and if it does, and if it's unprecedented, to pressure you into buying something, which congress has never done before, then don't you, government lawyer, have a heavy duty to show it's constitutional. and justice kennedy, the questioning was along those lines. limits to what congress can do. at the very end, it came back to a point the government is making. government has been saying the health care market is different. not like we're calling everybody to buy broccoli or cell phone to respond to emergency services. the health care market is different, because only in the health care market, if you can't afford to buy health care, you still get it provided for you, and that cost is shifted to others. at the very end, justice kennedy says maybe that makes this

industry different. that's what troubles me he said. there is a reason for the obama administration to have a glimmer of hope. but tonight i think the future of the health care law is very much in doubt. based on the argument and who knows what will happen in the several weeks before the decision is finally written. >> all right. many thanks, nbc's pete williams, we appreciate it. joining me is greg katsas, he helped prepare for today's testimony and argued on behalf of the 26 states and the national federation of independent businesses yesterday. greg, thank you for joining us. may i just ask you, justice k kenne kennedy's statement, he said the court has a very heavy burden of justification for requiring people to purchase insurance, and he goes on to say, that that changes the relationship of the federal government to the individual in a very fundamental way. greg katsas, what does that mean to you? what's your interpretation? >> well, i think that's a good

sign. justice kennedy has always recognized that the reason we limit federal power is to protect individual liberty and this unprecedented expansion threatens individual liberty. very hard to predict outcomes, based on what justices say at argument, but that is a good sign. >> greg, let me ask you. if it was kennedy or somebody else, might have been scalia. look, the federal government can regulate the insurance market. the insurance market, but can't make you go into the market. >> exactly. >> what does that mean? >> regulate commerce has always been understood as establishing the rules for commerce. if you buy a product, the government can regulate the price of the product. if you are in the labor market, the government can set a minimum wage. what they can't make you do, what they never tried to do before is force people to buy

goodsor services that they don't want. that's crossing a rubicon, and i think justice kennedy recognized granting that power would be very dangerous. >> is that what chief justice roberts meant when he said can government require to you buy a cell phone? >> yes. exactly. this is all about limiting principles. the administration recognizes that giving congress a general power to make people buy things they don't want, is completely indefensible. so their entire strategy was to try to argue that health insurance is different, and the chief's questions and many other questions, suggest that they are skeptical about that. >> all right. greg katsas, thank you very much. we appreciate your inputs and the work you've done. now, let me break down the true cost of medicare this is very brief. originally, the obama administration told us about

would cost about $900 billion, nowist about $1.8 trillion and counting higher, according to the congressional budget office, and also from the cbo, we can expect from $250 billion to $500 trillion in new taxes. don't forget, there are payroll taxes and investment tax hikes in there, and we can expect 800,000 jobs to be lost in the next decade because of obama care. so who better to ask than the man who crunched the numbers. and the paul ryan from wisconsin, his new budget headed to the house floor tomorrow. as always, great to see you. you stated owe b d obama care as anybody around if it's implemented will, it bankrupt the u.s.? >> it vastly underestimates how

many will drop their employer offered health insurance and dump people into a government exchange. within a couple of years of implementation, about two-thirds of employers will wash their hands of offering health insurance, and as many as 120 million would be eligible to entitlements, larger than medicare and will explode fiscal costs. so we see this bill bankrupting medicare, we see this bill destroying the health insurance system. we think there will be five insurers left, blue cross, united, cigna, and anthem. five would be sort of like five regulated utilities, and just about everybody will be in the exchange. if you meet with actuaries, they say it will be medicaid for everybody. i painted in six sentences the story of the implosion of the

health care system and explosion of public debt. >> all right. so i'm not far wrong. my fears are not far wrong. i appreciate honesty on that. i want to turn to your budget. you'll get a vote tomorrow on the floor of the house. hold on a second. let me play a quick sound bite from donald trump on the network earlier today. take a listen of what he had to say about the budget. >> i don't like his timing. i think for him to do that, just before the election, puts a tremendous negative spin on the republicans, i think it's fine. come out with a budget, do the budget, but don't do it at this time, and i can tell you democrats are sitting back and laughing, they can't believe their luck. >> all right. you heard him. paul, democrats may be laughing, or they may be crying. i don't know which. what is your response to donald trump? timing is wrong, politics are wrong? >> i never met the man. we have to follow the law. at least we believe in the rule of law, we should follow the law, and budget law says you

have to pass a budget by april 15th. point number one. and number two, a debt crisis is coming. you know this, i know this, the president knows this. and we feel we have an obligation to show how we will preempt a debt crisis, and medicare is the primary driver. don't get a handle on medicare reform, you never, ever, ever balance the budget, let alone get debt under control. what we're saying, let's do this in gradual ways, and current seniors not even unaffected. we get rid of the rationing board and leave current seniors in the promises they have in current medicare and reform them for the next generation so we can cash flow the current generation and get the budget on the path to prosperity and the rest and we get debt under control. we have an obligation to constituents not to hide and say trust us, we'll fix it later. no, we have an obligation to tell people who we are, here is

what we believe and the exact solutions we want to employ and put in place. that way we are honest with the country about what we need to do to fix the problem. going to the country of solutions and if we eastern victory in this election, we have the right to put in in place, and i think coming from a district that went from duck as accident -- dukakis, clinton, gore. people don't want to be pandered to like children. i think -- i don't know donald, but i think he's underestimating where the american people are, which is way ahead of the political class on this they want solutions, know the country is on the wrong track, and i think they will reward us for taking on this challenge. >> one thing. when you spoke aa group of conservative journalists in washington, over a week ago now. some conservatives say your budget doesn't balance fast enough.

you said and told me on this on a squawk box" if you have the right growth assumptions, pro-growth tax assumptions. can you briefly walk us through that. and is this your answer to some of the conservative critics? >> yes, we have to unfortunately have to use what is the static cbo baseline that assumes massive tax increase and explosion of debt which hurts debt in the long run. we have to assume that in the baseline, as if it would if we have economic growth. we have tax reform and debt reduction. with recently growth assumptions we show with alternative growth scenario that we'll budget -- balance the budget far faster than the static cbo analysis shows. that means if you get economic growth and spending control combined, you'll have a budget balance far far faster than you estimate with this static scoring from cbo. >> last one, mr. chairman, on sunday, you said you would consider a vice presidential

nomination. today is tuesday, where are you on that? >> i didn't say i wouldn't -- larry, didn't say i would consider it. i haven't given it any serious thought. i'm in the middle of trying to pass a budget as you know. if i was dieing to become president or vice president, i would have run for president. i'm not, so i didn't. so i'm focused on doing my job in congress and haven't given this any serious thought. there isn't any point to giving this serious thought. someone's decision a long ways from now, and i am trying to do my job in congress, trying to pass a budget to show how we would avoid a debt crisis. >> good luck on debt passage. paul ryan, we appreciate it. bernanke, breaking news. fed had worries that higher gas prices could lead to higher in nation and slower growth. we'll talk to former federal reserve governor larry meyers about that. and the importance of king dollar. plus jimmy cramer says if obama care goes down, earnings for

every company will go up. that's right. every company. whoa! does jimmy have that right? we'll hear from jimmy cramer right after the break. and don't forget, free market capitalism, not government mandates is the best path to prosperity. i'm larry kudlow. we'll be right back. people really love snapshot from progressive, but don't just listen to me. listen to these happy progressive customers. i plugged in snapshot, and 30 days later, i was saving big on car insurance. i was worried it would be hard to install. but it's really easy. the better i drive, the more i save. i wish our company had something this cool. yeah. you're not... filming this, are you? aw! camera shy. snapshot from progressive. plug into the savings you deserve with snapshot from progressive.

you know how hard if yit can be to breathedo, and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down?

gas prices gas prices are a major problem. obviously a hardship for lots of people. must be awfully frustrating to get a small raise at work and have it all eaten up by the higher costs of commuting. >> that was fed chair ben bernanke on "world news with diane sawyer." look, i believe that strong king dollar is the key to boosting economic growth and jobs in america, and, unfortunately, u.s. dollar index down almost 3% since mid-january. now, just a few hours ago, my next guest testified before the joint economic committee about sound dollar legislation. so here is former federal reserve governor larry meyer and senior managing director of macro economic advisers. thank you for coming on. can i just ask you, you heard

the bernanke clip, maybe you saw it, i don't know. what is he trying to say? anything new here, seemed to be emphasizing higher gas prices, more sluggish consumers and a more sluggish economy. what should we read buy that, larry? >> absolutely nothing. i haven't heard anything new. i haven't heard anything new from the chairman since his last press conference. now, he's very cautious, as he should be. forecast hasn't been very good. too optimistic as we have. of course gasoline prices are creating hardships and restraining consumer spending. but the basic forecast hasn't changed. >> let me ask you, reading into what the chairman is saying today, before, last week, the week before that, the business economists, the students at george washington university, all these speeches, very active chairman, does he say that buying long-term treasuries, keep those long-term rates down, will that be renewed when the

program expires in june? is that your reading? operation twist has a second life? >> absolutely not. there is extremely low probability of that. look at the fed's portfolio, hardly any short-term assets it can sell to fund longer-term assets. one of the least likely possibilities. >> and would you say the same thing about qe 3 and parts of wall street long more money creating and balance sheet expanding and qe3. what's your take there? >> my feeling is that if the economy evolves similar to our forecast, we won't see qe3. on the other hand, hey, forecasts aren't always that good, and the economy could turn out worse. we have to see a deterioration in the committeeconomy, relativ fomc expects to get qe3. >> looking for about 3% gdp, is that your number? >> no, closer to 2% in the first

half. 2.75% in the second half. 2.5% this year, 3.25% next year. some people think that's optimi optimistic, but that's pretty cautious. >> the vice chair of the joint economic committee, and i believe a strong sound dollar does a good thing, and in the 200s when the dollar led by 2,000%, it led to housing bubble, energy bubbles, commodity bubbles. did you testify for or against the sound dollar act? >> first of all, there was nothing in the sound dollar act about a sound dollar, if you mean exchange rates, absolutely nothing. and we didn't talk about it at all today. so what congressman brady means by that clearly, he's talking about price stability, taking away the fed's dual mandate that gives them the opportunity to respond to the great recession,

when the unemployment rate got to 10% and tried to move it back to a more normal one. so this bill would -- would push the fed to a mandate that no other central bank in the world has. >> a lot of these central banks, for example, the ecb, has an inflation target, and that's all. would tie the employment mandate, i agree, and also the dollar to gold and commodity index and the federal reserve exchange rate. >> that's very confused actually. he hasn't made up his mind, and the fed to focus on every thing. the forecast is important. increasingly, because of macro

concerns. you know, the notion that somehow you should monitor those with consumer price stability, i have no idea about that. >> maybe we disagree. i appreciate that. in the '70s, the dollar collapsed and a terrible period of high inflation and slow growth. in the 200s, under republicans, the dollar collapsed and led to the massive housing bubble and energy bubble. shouldn't we have a sound dollar? >> larry, let's be clear about one thing. there is no such thing as dollar policy. the dollar does what it's going to do in markets. you are absolutely right. in the 1970s, double-dimmit inflation, that's crushing for the dollar. we've got everybody forecasting. the list of everybody who is forecasting the inflation won't get to 2% over the next several years. so, look, the dollar appreciates when europe looks like it's going town the tank. when europe looks stronger, the

dollar then depreciates a little bit. >> all right. i hear you. i hear you. >> nothing in the sound dollar bill about the exchange rate. >> i'm a sound dollar guy. larry, we appreciate everything you say. as always, thanks for coming back on. up next, the dow, nasdaq, and s & p close slightly down. health care stocks led the gainers again. jim cramer says if obama care gets knocked out, it will be good for everyone. oh, my gosh, good evening, jim. >> hey, lawrence, i have a memo for those predicting the demise of obama care, over the constitutionality of this landmark length los angeles. supreme court is one of the great black boxes of our time. anybody who tries to gain it from the questions asked, have been completely wrong. and the swing justices can't be predicted with any certainty. i've attended many supreme court hearings in my time and studied rulings of the court at law school.

for the life of me, i couldn't predict anything, and if anything, they were misdirection plays. talking about how hospitals might be the winners if part of the legislation is struck down, might be the losers if other parts are ruled unconstitutional. i heard you have to buy well point because of kennedy's tough questioning of the government. i wouldn't even try to hazard a guess of what might happen to well point off a couple of pointed questions to anyone by anybody. i'm not denying the importance of this ruling. just the opposite if obama care goes down, you can raise almost every company's estimates for 2013, if approved, i'm flashing numbers. the best place, man power and kelly services, temporary help places. tons of companies will go temp to avoid the costs of hiring full-time employees. so you can wager all you want. i would try to gain three-card monte, six fewer cards than justices. back to you, larry.

>> jimmy, thank you very much. are you completely spot on. by buy stocks if this obama care thing goes down in the courts. coming up, more big government over overregulation. the eps, sets strict unreasonable limits on coal plants that will kill u.s. jobs and damage the economy and could end the whole coal industry as we know it. epa on coal and energy. [ male announcer ] how do you trade? with scottrader streaming quotes, any way you want.

fully customize it for your trading process -- from thought to trade, on every screen. and all in real time. which makes it just like having your own trading floor, right at your fingertips. [ rodger ] at scottrade, seven dollar trades are just the start. try our easy-to-use scottrader streaming quotes. it's another reason more investors are saying... [ all ] i'm with scottrade. it's another reason more investors are saying... [ donovan ] and i thought "i can't do this, it's just too hard." then there was a moment. when i decided to find a way to keep going. go for olympic gold and go to college too. [ male announcer ] every day we help students earn their bachelor's or master's degree for tomorrow's careers. this is your moment. let nothing stand in your way. devry university, proud to support the education of our u.s. olympic team. yeah, scott. i was just about to use... that's a bunch of ground-up paper, lad!

scotts ez seed absorbs and holds water better. it's guaranteed to grow grass anywhere, even if you miss a day of watering. [ scott ] seed your lawn. seed it!

welcome back to "the kudlow report." another example of big government overreach that has be outraged. today, new regulations announced that would substantially cut carbon emissions from new power plants. what this means? it will be impossible to build new coal-fired power plants in the united states. that's about one-quarter of our electricity and still negotiating carbon limits on existing plants and they too may be put out of business. my 2 cents real quick. in an economy struggling to recover, obama is assaulting on oil, energy, and by the way, these global warming models are wrong. the data is fudged by left-wing academics. hasn't even been a change in temperature in over ten years and scientists say carbon isn't even positlutant.

a total catastrophic embarrassme embarrassment. bottom line, epa, backoff! back off. that's my take. my next guest will totally disagree with me. let's bring back distinguished house member peter welch. democrat from vermont. you are great to do this jousting, i appreciate it very much. we're all worried about energy, the economy and jobs, and the epa wondering through and shut down the coal business, a quarter of electric power. >> the folks in american electric power disagree with you. they don't have plans to build coal plants. this exemption really a blank regulation. not going to affect existing coal plants and the 24 power plants on line. only theoretically affects future plants and not building coal plants. natural gas is so much cheaper. cheaper, cleaner, complies with

this regulation. and this is a regulation, trying to catch up with industry. >> peter, we have more coal than saudi arabia has oil. i don't agree with you existing plants are going to have to negotiate with the epa. it is simply not the case. and i don't understand. >> that's round two. >> william happener, princeton, "wall street journal" no temperature increase in ten years. the models have never worked. those guys from east ang lee a proven wrong. we're jousting over something that doesn't exist. >> we're arguing global warming and this is a regulation. i don't want to see your blood pressure go up too high on legislation that doesn't impact what you already fear. natural gas is cheaper, people are using less electricity in the cost of coal has been rising. not because of this regulation. we have april credible abundance

of natural gas. the industry is moving toward natural gas. now, if some coal plant wants to produce and as i say, american electric power is saying we don't have the plans to do that for economic reasons. not just environmental. >> and i think that the prices went down. coal, still supplying a quarter of our electric power. you can't tell us hundreds of thousands of jobs won't be lost by shutting down plants. coal is a huge industry. >> we won't shut down the plants. >> we can't eviscerate coal and have no negative consequences. >> if you were talking about shutting down coal plants, you might have an argument. if you depend on coal, and the folks won't have a job, but this regulation is about future plants and there are no -- and it doesn't affect existing plants. >> it will. >> it will, peter, the news reports say they are in negotiations right now on the existing plants and the way the

epa is going, they will price them out of market for carbon that may not even be a pollutant. >> i will concede you have a reason to be apprehensive for what the regulations will be for existing coal plants this regulation here doesn't have impact at all. >> it's coming down the road and i'm using it as a leading indicator and i thought we wanted to strengthen coal, not shut it down. >> coal industry is trying to do carbon capture and sequestration if that works that will be good for the industry. >> agree with you. >> and good for the environment. >> trouble is, those guys don't think they can afford it, and they can't raise wall street capital. i appreciate your jousting with me, even though i totally disagree with you. we appreciate it very much. folks, breaking news coming into cnbc. get this, a jetblue captive had to be tackled and restrained by passengers mid flight after he shouted there was a bomb on the plane.

nbc's tom costello with details. good evening, tom. >> reporter: larry, good evening. jetblue flight 191 from jfk to las vegas when apparently mid flight, there was a major issue. some sort of a breakdown involving the captain. apparently while he was in the cockpit, according to witnesses, he started flipping switches and steering the plane erratically, the copilot became so concerned, he persuaded the pilot to leave to go to the restroom. while the captain was in the rast restroom, another captain from the back of the plane, came into the cockpit, and locked the door behind him. when the first captain came out, he started banging on the cockpit door, trying to get in. he was literally foaming at the mouth, talking about iran, afghanistan, iraq, and about a bomb being on board. the flight attendants asked for help and quickly, five or six

passengers subdued that captain, wrestling him to the floor. he was continuing to to scream and act erratically. it went on nearly 50 minutes, until then flight was able to land at amarillo airport. medical personnel and police came on board and they removed the captain. he was restrained and in a wheelchair, they took him away. he is now in fbi custody, but receiving we are told medical care. no word at all what happened or why this happened and of course, great concern for the captain's well-being. larry, back to you. >> all right. many thanks to nbc's tom costello. coming up on "kudlow" target obama care. it sounds like supreme court justices are suggesting that the personal mandate is in trouble. but we ask, can this country tolerate government control over personal behavior? what about personal freedom? we'll be right back. the next revolution in music is happening here.

pandora rocks the big board.

welcome welcome back to "the kudlow report." day two of the supreme court hearings on obama care. today, the constitutionality of the individual mandate. here is keith boykin, and jim

pethakoukis. american enterprise institute. what happened to personal freedom. obama care dictates personal behavior. you have to buy health care insurance whether you want to or not, like broccoli or cell phones? >> this is what you get when you have a bunch of technocrats forming policy. they won't look at philosophical issues or the constitution, not issues of freedom. they are just going to make sure that the numbers balance at the end of the day and this is what you get. >> i'm glad you admit that numbers actually balance, because if the supreme court overturns this or congress repeals it, it will add $140 billion to the deficit and 32 million people -- according to the cbo, 32 million people will lose insurance. this may be unpopular right now, there are a lot of elements that people do like, like coverage for preexisting conditions, people under 26 being able to

stay on their parents' plans. >> it's unpopular because it's unconstitutional. >> there is nothing unconstitutional about this. >> jimmy, whatever happened to limits to government? is there no balance, jimmy p.? >> listen, if the supreme court throws out this mandate, it will be for that exact reason. this mandate, constitutional, there are no limits to government. and that's what justices were trying to determine. they were given the solicitor general opportunity after opportunity to create some sort of limits on this power and it wasn't able to do it. listen, i think at the end of the day, they will end up upholding the mandate. they will create their own limits in the opinion. but i think that's the key issue. >> hang on one second, my friend. i have to skip to a different topic. from domestic to foreign policy. president obama didn't intend for the world to hear him tell russian president demity trim ii

medvedev that they would have more flexible. but he knew his mike on when he made light of the flap. >> first of all, mike is on? look, what i said yesterday is i think something that everybody in this room understand. >> all right. my quick two cents. you know what? flexibility, i worry could mean concessions and accommodation to russia on u.s. nuclear defense in europe and alaska. that is an outrage. why didn't mr. obama warn russia to play ball with us and stop assisting iran? and abide by the sanctions? that should be our policy. i want to know what other surprises or flexibilities are lurking after the election? we bring back keith and jimmy. jimmy, what will happen here on the domestic front? what are we in store in a second term, even though we may be accommodating russia?

>> the czech american and polish american voters in illinois will think that's hilarious. one issue that you want to worry about, tax increases. i think the president will be very, very tempted to let all of these bush tax cuts expire and raising taxes on the middle class. >> keith, what's your defense? what is he going to do to us that we don't already know? >> first of all, he said what we already do know, in an election year, almost impossible to get anything done in washington. next year, once people aren't running for office, we'll get progress on jobs. >> that's when he'll sell out eastern europe. >> whatever this is not about -- mitt romney wants to run on foreign policy in this election, i welcome that. he'll lose on that. election will be about the economy, about jobs, and that's what people are concerned about. >> all right. well, i wonder what the economic surprises will be. jimmy p. says higher taxes. sorry we're trutruncated tonigh.

more than half of the states filed to repeal obama care. we'll talk to ohio governor john kasich. that next on "kudlow." [ artis brown ] america is facing some tough challenges right now.

two of the most important are energy security and economic growth. north america actually has one of the largest oil reserves in the world. a large part of that is oil sands. this resource has the ability to create hundreds of thousands of jobs. at our kearl project in canada, we'll be able to produce these oil sands with the same emissions as many other oils and that's a huge breakthrough. that's good for our country's energy security and our economy.

2 of -- 26 states filed suit to repeal obama care. governor john kasich of ohio joins us now. >> good to see you, larry. >> governor, let me begin with the supreme court obviously hearing obama care. the biggest story in the country right now. on the medicaid mandate, you signed that lawsuit, would this thing -- will this thing bankrupt ohio? how much is the cost of a problem, and what do you make of this story right now? >> larry, the problem is that we're trying to push quality based health care through medical homes that can help coordinate care. the problem is we start getting a lot of things mandated on discuss we pulled ourselves out of an $8 billion hole and this

puts us back in the hole again, and i would hope that the court case would be successful, if it is not successful, then, you know, i've already talked to the president's chief of staff about the fact that can we revisit parts of this? i have my folks working with the administration to figure out if there is common ground between dual eligibles on medicare and medicaid? we'll have to see what happens here. >> another example of washington overregulation and overreach, governor. the epa today, as i'm sure you know, issued new carbon regulations that many people believe will end the coal industry. could end the coal industry. certainly new coal plants would be way too expensive. existing plants, what does that mean for you? ohio is a huge coal state? >> it is. we're trying to do research into carbon capture, larry. we think it's important. we're on the veg of we hope a shale gas -- a boom in shale

gas, and i was with the president two weeks ago and told him that ohio was going to be an example of a state that was going to put in good environmental regulations, and could be a model for the rest of the country. in fact, we've even talked to the administration about this, because we would prefer for the federal government to allow us to do this. in terms of the epa and their carbon restrictions, you know, it has a devastating effect. we've had a couple of coal-fired plants, being announced. they are taken offline and really a challenge, and, you know, i think an overly agre aggressive epa is not something helpful to long-term economic growth. i believe, by the way, that you could have good economic growth and a good environment, and i don't think they are mutually exclusive. >> the really good news is the utica shale field and bp signing a lease today or announcing their intention to sign a lease. 84,000 acres. now, that is fantastic. what can you do to foster that

and how will that turn around the state's economy? >> yeah, well, larry, we've been working on this for a long time. in fact, we had an announcement of some mid stream guys, fractionators announced within the last two weeks. we have to make sure we have good environmental rules so the industry doesn't get themselves inside trouble with ground water contamination or anything and we think we have good rules that can be aid model for the rest of the country, not fuzzy rules, but things that are clear, we need to make sure we can have both environmental, good things and at the same time job development. out here, we're also trying to modernize our severance tax, larry. one company estimating they will take a trillion dollars out of the state of ohio and we're proposing in the early years, companies could recover their costs and then a 4% severance tax, lower than virtually every

other state in the country. a debate how it compares to pennsylvania. >> how does it compare to pennsylvania? that's a key point, john. >> in the first couple years, we allow cost recovery and let me tell you what the issue is, larry. presumably, if a trillion dollars gets taken out of ohio, a 4% severance tax could allow us to have $40 billion worth of income tax cuts. i'm nah favor in ohio of lowering the income tax. it's 5.9%. too high. a challenge to be competitive. and so rather than companies taking all of the benefits out of the state, we would like to make sure that ohioans in every part of the state are able to benefit, particularly the small business, which is the engine of economic growth. >> all right. >> we don't want to build ohio's recovery on one industry.

we want diversity and small business is the key to that. >> great stuff. thank you, governor john kasich. good luck on the shale and on the tax cuts. we appreciate you coming back on the show. >> thanks, larry. always good to be with up. >> up next, the real-life hunger games, safety first or nanny state? after 25 years, this new york city residents was told he could not donate food to the homeless because of new city rules. >> to us this is extraordinary micromanagement. my wife and i have worked for the city, for new york city, for many years, certainly no strangers to bureaucracy and even petty bureaucracy, but this is absolutely beyond the pale. >> we'll debate this case coming up. we'll be right back. [ male announcer ] you are a business pro.

omnipotent of opportunity. you know how to mix business... with business. and you...rent from national.

because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle. and go. you can even take a full-size or above. and still pay the mid-size price. i could get used to this. [ male announcer ] yes, you could business pro. yes, you could. go national. go like a pro.

all all right. reports say new york city's mayor for life, michael bloomberg, has unleashed the food police on the homeless. new york post story gone viral. no kugel for you. the columnist jeff stor says that they are blocking food donations to shelters. here we have joel berg of new york city coalition against hunger. joel, if you are against hunger, you must be against these crazy

regulations. the city's bureaucracy has to assess it. this is the ultimate nanny state, homeless people could use the food. what is your position on this? >> actually, i'm one of mayor bloomberg's fiercest critics on homeless and hunger policy, but this critique is bogus. the truth, people can still donate to hundreds of private soup kitchens in new york city. this rule has existed for years, long before the nutrition standards went into effect. it's about food safety. people with compromised immune systems can die. the mayor is wrong about a lot of other things, but not this. >> is this a new rule or old rule? >> the mayor's best defense of this rule, and i think, joel, this is a great answer. this has always been the rule, and the people who have been donating food have been donating for a long time if this was about food safety they would have stopped donations a long time ago. the city enforcing the ban is very new. >> joel, new?

i can't figure it out, new rule or old rule? look, it's a bureaucracy. >> this is a homeless discussion. >> the article says that the bureaucracy has to sign off on a nutritional assessment, okay? and if they don't sign off or if it flunks the assessment, which by the way, could include jewish synagogue event food, homeless can't get the food. that's utterly insane. >> it would be if it's true, it's just not true. you can legally donate in new york city today to hundreds of privately run homeless shelters, hundreds of soup kitchens in new york city. this distorts the fact that are 40,000 homeless people in new york city. not because people can't donate. >> joel, i respect all of the work you do for the homeless and i appreciate that, but that's not the case. i spoke with the commissioner of the department of homeless services in new york city, and he told me that this rule is consistent with the mayor's new nutritional guidelines which

dictate everything from food, salt, sugar, they even have preferred condiments. >> to city-run shelters. there are hundreds of private shelters. >> this is the issue. the fight between the government saying we're in control of how people that we feed eat and the private sector wanting to be in charge of what they can give. >> let me ask you a question, though. new rule or old rule, why do we have this? no french fries for the homeless? why don't we let them get any food available. in other words, why do we need a rule like this, except part of the bloomberg nanny state? >> and the commissioner of the homeless services says this is consistent for the mayor's guidelines for nutrition. >> get rid of the rule. >> let me ask you something. have you ever met a parent of children who died from food-borne illness? most of the people in homeless shelters in new york city are children, most with compromised immune systems.

i met parents of kids who died, this is protecting from kids dying. they are getting guaranteed safe meals and still donate to hundreds of other private organizations city wide. >> food safety is important, but this is nanny state gone wild. >> we'll debate this more at another time. that's it for this evening's show. thank you for watching. i'm so tired of overregulation. washington, new york city, every place. [ barking ] appears buster's been busy. yeah, scott. i was just about to use... that's a bunch of ground-up paper, lad! scotts ez seed absorbs and holds water better. it's guaranteed to grow grass anywhere, even if you miss a day of watering. [ scott ] seed your lawn. seed it!

even if you miss a day of watering. i remember the day my doctor told me i have an irregular heartbeat, and that it put me at 5-times greater risk of a stroke. i was worried.

i worried about my wife, and my family. bill has the most common type of atrial fibrillation, or afib. it's not caused by a heart valve problem. he was taking warfarin, but i've put him on pradaxa instead. in a clinical trial, pradaxa 150 mgs reduced stroke risk 35% more than warfarin without the need for regular blood tests. i sure was glad to hear that. pradaxa can cause serious, sometimes fatal, bleeding. don't take pradaxa if you have abnormal bleeding, and seek immediate medical care for unexpected signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. pradaxa may increase your bleeding risk if you're 75 or older, have a bleeding condition like stomach ulcers, or take aspirin, nsaids, or bloodthinners, or if you have kidney problems, especially if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all medicines you take, any planned medical or dental procedures, and don't stop taking pradaxa without your doctor's approval, as stopping may increase your stroke risk. other side effects include indigestion, stomach pain, upset, or burning. pradaxa is progress.