>> unreal. >> i like the story too. i like the airlines. they've been sold off. americans led the selloff, but delta and united, buy the airlines. >> tiffany's rocketing after earnings and will continue. >> the highs from august 15. >> go to the ritz carlton, use your visa, a great company. >> i like xrt for border adjustment trade and at the bottom, it's a good short term. >> good stuff. good seeing you as well." power" starts now. welcome to "power lunch," i'm michelle caruso-cabrera. here's what's on the menu as the clock ticks on the big health care vote. you're going to hear from one house republican who thus far is promoting no on the bill. however, he just left the meeting with president trump. i mean, two minutes ago, did they hammer out a last minute deal? headed to the camera and find out straight ahead. also ahead, what the vote means to your money. the three market scenarios that could play out and how to position your portfolio as we await the big vote.

later, big bullish bet on energy. one analyst says this oil stock is about to double. the name and so much more coming your way. power lunch starts right now. thanks, michelle. stocks are moving higher, a little off if the health care vote passes, that signals the rest of the president's agenda, including tax reform, will get done. the dow is up just under one-half of 1%. disney popping, that on news bob will be the ceo, all the way through july 2019. speaking of disney, the vacation trade working today. carnival, royal caribbean, and wynn hitting new 52-week highs. melissa? >> thank you. i'm melissa lee. one american among the dead in yesterday's terrorist attack in london. three others killed, including the attacker.

the latest on the developing story from london straight ahead. back here in the united states, some bullish data on the housing front. new home sales jumping more than 6% in february, hitting the highest level in seven monthings. con mir mags hearings underway, and clayton testifying before the senate banking committee. tyler? >> thank you very much. good afternoon, everyone. a big show today. kicking off, as we often do these days, with a developing story in washington. the house expected to vote on a new health care bill. that is expected later today. the market, of course, watching as it's been for weeks. let's get to cnbc live on the hill with the latest. kayla? >> reporter: could be the house expecting to vote on the bill, but lawmakers on capitol hill is clear the ball is in the white house's court, and they are in wait and see mode to see what comes from the meeting that the president and vice president held with members of the freedom caucus that ended moments ago.

i spoke with alabama congressman heading to the meeting, saying nothing changed overnight, and that there were ten yeses and 25-30 no's, but looking to see what the president had to say. he was the toughest nut to crack, but some of his colleagues may, and that's what we're looking for. i know you are going to be talking to a few of those. he's a tidbit about the reception of the president according to a special adviser at the white house tweeting this, a picture, saying, lernty standing ovation from the freedom caucus when podus walked in. #repealandreplace. the question, though, while the president and freedom caucus share a party affiliation, ideologically, they are on different ground. there's constituents in the districts not in favor of the american health care act, so the president, under the white house's instagram account, moments ago, posted a video taking his appeal for the bill directly to voters. listen. >> go with our plan. it's going to be terrific.

you're going to be very, very happy. call your local representative. call your senator. let them know that you're behind our plan. >> reporter: of course, time is of the essence, and the clock is running out for anyone to do that, and lawmakers have been taking the temperature of their con tich wents for quite some time on this. that being said, some strategists, political economists out of washington, tried to put the odds on the passage in the house either tonight or at some point before the april recess. the odds on that from compass point, evercorp., isi range 50% to 75%, and if we get something tonight, guy, it could be late. everything, almost everything on the calendar here on capitol hill postponed as people wait and see what happens in the meeting at the white house. back to you. >> waiting, waiting, waiting. thank you. a lot of uncertainty as highlighted surrounding this bill. top of mind for consumers who have bought health insurance this way. how will their health care

change if they bought through the kpaexchanges? let's bring in the former ceo of healthcare.gov. good to have you here, sir. >> nice to be here. >> i guess we don't know that healthcare.gov survives, eventually, depending on what comes out of the bill, right? >> well, i think we know that it's through 017 that it's safe, but you're right. i think we're going to learn a lot more, what happens today, and, obviously, there's complexities based on what happens in the senate. >> so the details that are being leaked today, is that some concessions have been made that are designed to make a final product more affordable. reduce the number of essential must-cover items so you are closer to a catastrophic plan, catastrophic care. what does that mean for somebody buying their health insurance through the exchanges? does that mean cheaper plans? >> well, it could mean more confusion. the reality is the consumers find buying health insurance to

be not only expensive, but complicated and confusing. one of the benefits of having a standard set of benefits is that it clarifies to consumers exactly what they are buying, and they can make choices based on quality, based on networks, based on the actual price. one of the challenges about having a lot more product freedom is that when maps don't cover certain coverages, consumers may not know that, and so they may end up buying a plan not covering certain types of protections, limit the money paid for hospital or surgical procedure and leads to increase in not only confusion, but personal bankruptcies. >> you're talking about consumers who are not doing their homework, correct? kevin? there's an assumption behind this you're going to do your homework because this is your health care plan. >> you're right. and -- but doing home work in health care and health insurance is a lot more complicated than it sounds. the languages are anticked.

it's technical. people don't understand insurance terms to begin with. we've seen in the past that people can get confused very easily, and the buying something based on price and not covering what they have to spend. >> we see plain language use sang now when it comes to mortgages. there's a lot of things. i'm just not sure that based -- the whole vision for health care reform under president obama was that really couldn't trust the consumer. that the individual can't take care of themselves. you really believe that? that sounds like an underlying premise to all this. >> i would actually don't buy that premise, actually, at all. i'm being honest as i can with you. i think the reality is is that it's very, very discreet top of product category. it's complicated for people to understand. most folks don't understand things you and i take for granted. >> they buy their car insurance. >> yeah, but i can't understand it, michelle.

i can't understand my coverage. e get eobs, and i cannot figure the -- sorry, damn things out. >> too much intervention, too much between you and buying the product. >> i agree with that. >> comcast buys that product. >> comcast buys the product, but i don't know what's covered and not covered, and they can't explain it clearly to me. i'm sorry, kevin, not getting into the offline conversation here, but it's a hell of a lot simpler if there was a freaking single payer in the country and everybody knew what it covered. >> well, i think the two of you are actually having a discussion that is not unkpon at the employer website or among different types of consumers. many people in the insurance industry go around the water comer talking about plans because it's complicated. >> it is complicated. you can't figure it out. i defy you to figure it out. >> you don't understand

catastrophic care? car zats, cancer, premiums low, coverage high, the max you cover is x in the worst case of scenario. that's understandable. >> out of pocket of $11,000 a year. that's fine. i get that. i get that. right now, that's not anything like what i have in any private market. i don't have it here. i can't figure it out here. >> because the company chose for you. at the state level, there's intervention by local governments that it's difficult. >> i -- i think -- we have not seen them perform yet. >> the private insurers exist. i believe that's exactly their goal. >> i think they want me confused. . >> i will write the damn check. >> kevin. thank you. ran out of time. i think you're right. this mimic manies the conversations happening in the world at the moment.

more aggressive parts passed like tax reform and infrastructure. based on commentary like what was laid out, firms with national securities and others, here's the three scenarios tonight and what the likely results of each will be for your money. scenario one, they do the vote. the gop gets the 215-plus votes

needed, repeal passes, that should send stocks higher tomorrow and bonds down. scenario two, they vote. it does not pass. this is likely the worst possible outcome for your stock investment, as stocks likely sell off friday with bonds rallying. and scenario three, the president realizes they do not have the support they need, and they postpone the vote. this would also likely send stocks down tomorrow, but not as much as a no-vote because the markets realize if they seemed close, the gop huddles up to get something done later on. bottom line it. in two of the three scenarios, stocks likely fall sending a big signal that the gop and the president are too fractured to get anything done, especially what we all agree is the most important thing to our viewers, the investor, tax reform. of course, guys, that's if they vote tonight because even that is still up in the air, but there are your three scenarios. >> thank you, brian.

let's game out the scenarios. with us, editor and publisher of the gartman letter, dennis, great to see you. >> good to be seen. >> what do you think happens? >> i think that if you don't -- if you asked me the question 16 hours ago, i would have thought they would probably not been able to pass it. however, i think there's so much political capital at risk here that the president and mr. ryan, the speaker of the house, really cannot avoid having them literally lock the doors tonight and make sure that there is passage of the legislation. it has to go to the senate, have a joint revolution in the future, but there's just too much risk. i would have thought they would have failed, but i think now they'll probably have to. >> scenario one laid out, scenario one, basically. the thing passes, stocks go up.

key to that assumption is stocks rallied and not necessarily factored in or in a minor way, tax reform. it might seem that if it has con official what the market believes, that tax reform happens, and not much happens to the target. what do you think, dennis? >> well, i -- first of all, if it does not pass tonight, tax reform is off the ballot. it'll be almost impossible to get it pushed through. we need to -- what we need to understand while talking, in the last 1 pennsylvan5 minutes, the5 points. something must have hit. nobody's paying attention to that -- >> because i threw a tantrum, dennis. >> he's been reading the explanation of benefits. >> i'm going to get them and show you the 37,000 pages. >> single payer comment, revealed to the world your roots and heritage, tyler. >> happiest people on earth. >> it's the most -- is this vote

tonight the single most important thing for our viewers' money right now? >> i think it is. no question about that. what's more important in the end is if we get it passed, tax legislation taken care of, but for right now, what's on the -- what's on the ballot is this vote, and this is terribly, terribly important. as i said, so much political capital at risk, brian has to close the door, president has to be around, twisting arming to get the 215 votes. my bet is they will. >> we lived this movie before. obamacare passed by one vote, two votes? >> one vote. >> right down to the wire. just like this. >> exactly the same. >> just like this. >> just like this. >> everybody thought, oh, it's not going to pass. disaster, obama's dead, and it passed. >> then dennis, this time, i think they read the bill. >> it's smaller than the other one. >> maybe. >> it's only a thousand pages rather than 2,000 pages or some odd number.

tyler, i'm with you. thank goodness i have a bride who is wiser than i to take care of it. >> she understands it? >> she does. i can't. >> do you think the 1% decline the other day is a start of a correction that you've been calling for? or -- >> yeah. >> if it passes, ahca passes, we can avert that? >> if e we walk into more -- let's say the vote goes as it should be and passes, dow opens 100 higher. propensity shall be at the point to fade the rally. i really fear that that's what's going to happen. you walk into tomorrow morning, see the dow open higher, s&p open ten points higher, and then you start -- propensity would be to fade the rally. >> dennis, thank you. >> thanks for having me on. >> guys, one quick thing, too, in the reading, it 215 votes, it actually probably is more like 213 because there's expected to be democratic absences.

so maybe 213 can get it done. we'll see. on deck, a new ceo takes the helm at macy's, but can he, or anybody, really turn retail around? plus, "street talk," oil and gas company analyst says should double in the next year. that name ahead for you, but, first, forgiving week of expected guidance, just a ford problem or a big warning sign to the entire auto industry? we'll hit all that and much more as the dow slides 50 points off the highs as dennis said. back with more market coverage and more after this. is the stuff that matters? the stakes are so high, your finances, your future. how do you solve this? you don't. you partner with a firm that advises governments and the fortune 500, and, can deliver insight person to person, on what matters to you. morgan stanley.

experience exciting offers on sales event is here. our most thrilling models ever. get up to $2,500 customer cash on select 2017 models for these terms. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. i am benedict arnold, the infamous traitor. and i know a thing or two about trading. so i trade with e*trade, where true traders trade on a trademarked trade platform that has all the... get off the computer traitor! i won't. (cannon sound)

i won't. we're opening more xfinity stores closer to you. visit us today and learn how to get the most out of all your services, like xfinity x1. we'll put the power in your hands, so you can see how x1 is changing the way you experience tv with features like voice remote, making it easier and more fun than ever. there's more in store than you imagine. visit an xfinity store today and see for yourself. xfinity, the future of awesome.

shares of ford lower, well below estimates. phil lebeau has more. phil? >> talk about the guidance right now. the estimates at.35 cents a shar shar share.lower fleet volume, and unfavorable exchange rate. with costs, some are things you understand, such as higher costs for commodities, warrenties, things in the business now, but ford is spending a lot of money out in the silicon valley, and its investment in autonomous drive technology, future technologies is driving higher costs for the company. in terms of its current business in the showroom, a number of questions to the cfo bob shanks

today, what the company is seeing with regards to residual values on used vehicles impact new vehicle sales. they expect a dip, but close to 17.pennsylvania million vehicles. strong demand for trucks and suvs, but bob admitted, yes, they are watching what is happening with used vehicle, residual vehicles, lease vehicles in the market, the pressure that's putting on the company, one important point, guys, they are not yet to the appointment seeing what happens with residual values that they are worry, back to the levels in 2007 and 2008. it is worth watching and what wall street asked about, but not yet to a critical point. >> all right, phil, thank you very much. stick around, by the way. digging deeper into ford investors and employees, remember, a 12% drop in the stock over the past year. now we have james, senior analyst and consumer at research, james, a ford problem

or an auto industry problem? >> yeah. thanks for having me, brian. i think it's an auto industry problem, that's why, you know, the market refleblgted negatively the announcement from ally this week that used vehicle values are declining, residual values are under pressure. we talked about that with ford, but there's more overtime, it's happening, a supply problem, a lot of vehicles coming back to the market offlease, so that's the main focus here today. i think as it relates to volume, pressures, and so forth, some of that's going to be different, talk to gm, others, but broadly, commodity costs were benefit last year. they will be a head wind this year, an industry problem as well, and emerging opportunities, that's going to be more stock specific. gm's going to try to revolutionize the way we think about mobility through volume enhancements, the cruise automati automation, ford's investment in engineering, artificial intelligence, and so forth,

plays out over time, and we think it's near term. >> no reason to own ford stocks. >> not necessarily a reason to belt against it either. i think it's a range bound problem here, and i mean, if you think about, you know, peak cycle concerns, we had strong pricing and strong mix for the last few years, just very difficult tor investors to get over there. i think that's probably more eps revisions. >> okay. >> james, i apologize for cutting you off, but we have breaking news from d.c. now to john harwood. >> brian, we have gotten an initial readout from that white house meeting between freedom caucus members and the president and vice president. our colleague, casey hunt, chased down patrick mchenry, a congressman from virginia who said that those members of the freedom caucus have gotten a take it or leave it offer from the white house. now, we don't know what's in the offer. we know that the members wanted to gut the regulations of

obamacare, which had not been in the original bill. the so-called essential health benefits just don't know whether they are beginning to say yes, and just as i was standing up before the camera, got a text from the member of the leadership aide who said we are simply waiting to hear an answer. so that's going to govern, if and when we get a vote, and what the outcome's going to be. >> is that why we've seen a delay thus far in the republican meeting that was supposed to happen this morning, and is that why we're still waiting -- >> yes. >> paul ryan was to do his weekly lecture, and that's not happened either, right? >> exactly right. >> they initially scheduled a meeting for 9:00, and when everybody realized the freedom caucus was going in late morning to the white house, they thought it was pointless to meet as a caucus until the meeting took place. i expect that republicans are now going to convene at the capital and try to figure out where they are. it was a strong presumption within the republican leadership. they wanted to force members to vote today, and that, of course,

is going to depend in part on what the freedom caucus's answer is. >> we hope to get an answer, john. >> yeah, we're all hoping. >> coming up, a member of the freedom caucus, just left the meeting with the president, and now he plans to vote, or not, "power lunch" will be right back. people with good-paying jobs. connecting consumers and budiness through mobile, internet, and entertainment. at&t invests more into america's economy than any other public company. bringing american's more choices, more freedom, and entertainment everywhere. no company is more invested in america's future than at&t.

welcome back to "power lunch", rick santelli here live at the cme group. unchanged. look at the wuchb week of tens,

unchanged, remits a downward glide. look at one-year charts, everybody's looking to japan these days. look at the 40-year japanese government bonds. around 103%, five basis points since the cycle high. the dollar-yen, dollar's at the worst levels since november. year row versus dollar toying with the best levels, worst on the dollar since november. and the dollar index clinging to the one little area there at 99.5. watch that on a closing basis, and one thing for sure, don't touch that dial as "power lunch" returns in two minutes.

hi, everybody, i'm sue hererra with your cnbc news update this hour. kirk dock ran killed and his wife injured in the terrorist attack in london. they lived in utah, celebrating their 25th wedding anniversary.

she has a broken leg, ribs, and cut to the face. the attacker has been identified as 52-year-old kalid of i think lapgd. they arrested a 19-year-old israeli jewish man as the suspect in a rash of bomb threats targeting centers in the u.s. he had dual u.s.-israeli citizenship and found unfit for compulsory service in the isr l israeli military. 20,000 evacuated in ukraine after a massive fire followed by exploess at a military arms depot. no immediate word on casualties. a 25-mile area of the depot, one of ukraine's largest, closed to flights. it was seven years ago today that president obama signed the affordable care act. in a statement released today, he said, quote, we finally declare that health care is not a privilege for a few, but a right for everyone, end quote. that is the cnbc news update this hour, melissa, back to you.

>> i'll take it. on that note, going to capitol hill where freedom caucus members who met with donald trump are speaking. >> the -- listen to and ultimately -- >> i got to run, guys. >> okay. well. >> that was informative. >> glad we did that! >> he has to run, apparently. >> that was a "power lunch" production. >> john harwood, moments ago, the president presented a final deal, take it or leave it deal, so they are just emerging from the meeting. we'll speak to the members later on this hour. meantime, markets have been higher. >> higher, yes. >> at the top of the hour, there was -- turning lower here, but we are still in the green. take a look at the clarts here, the dow was as high as 96 points up on the day, and we're now up by 27 points, so we're at about a third of the prior gains.

snap, a great day, up 4%. and we have the stock with a new tral, a , not a sell, which it was. session highs of snap. >> nothing knew came out of the trump meeting, if the vote is held tonight, it will fail. that may explain why there's the stocks. >> as we walked through earlier, one, we could postpone it. if the gop's not humiliated and going up there -- if they vote tonight, one assumes they know they got the votes. it could just -- if it dies today, it doesn't mean it dies ultimately, but maybe the vote could happen tomorrow. who knows. all right. meantime, google's problems of major advertisers is growing more, well, extreme. more companies pull ad dollars from google owned youtube over fears google cannot control the ads, running to offensive,

extremist, or racist commentary. here's more, julia? >> that's right. johnson and johnson and at&t the biggest advertisers in the world, are dealing a blow to youtube and google and pulling their digital ad spend from youtube globally. taking a stand against ads potentially appearing that could be extreme in content. at&t, saying, quote, we're deeply concerned our apps appeared next to ads promoting terrorism and hate. the companies are joining verizon, enterprise, and u.k. boycotted more than 250 companies. this began after the times of london, antisemitic video google failed to quickly remove, and volkswagen ads on the youtube channel of a pro-terrorism extremis extremist. not just concerned about optics, but financially supporting creators. youtube pays creators to put the revenue from ads. google says, quote, we've begun revealing the advertising policies and made a public

commitment to put in place changes that give brands more control over where their ads appear. we're raising the bar for ad policyings so stake dollars are towards advertisers brands. they are looking at the the google display network most concerned, warning it could take several quarters for spend levels to return to normal. analysts expects minimal near term earnings impact to youtube's projected $12 billion in gross revenue this year, but be warned that if google does not nip this issue in the bud, we believe there's broader repercussions around youtube's brand. could the damage hinder entirely how quickly it reassures brands this will never happen again. tyler? >> all right, julia, thank you very much. for more on the impact of this on google and what it means for the future of digital ads, let's bring in our chairman and ceo of rocks media. partner of nbc universal, cnbc's

parent. welcome, thank you for being with us, jim. >> thank you. >> why is this happening now? it's not as though this content was not there on youtube and elsewhere before, and that these companies wouldn't have known about it. what happened? >> timing with a broader realizization across the advertising community not all digital advertising is the same, and if you're building a brand as opposed to the bottom of the marketing funnel, where you are just trying to fulfill the man, the internet has been a great direct response heed yum, but now marketers are looking to shift brand building dollars, dollars concerned about image and demand creation as opposed to demand fulfillment, and in order to create an image, build an identity, context matters,

quality matters. while the web has been able to provide great scale -- >> jim, if i might, what happens that this happens tuesday? that at&t decides to pull and verizon pulls, and now jj decides to pull? what was -- what was the moment that crystallized this for these companies? >> i really think it's been building up for a while, so while i don't -- i'm not inside those offices, i can't tell you what happened, but i think one of them did it, and as the other one did it, of course, there was an issue with the guardian last week, which was the catalyst, and that catalyst led to some cmos talking, saying, hey, we've been talking about this internally for a while, there's now an external catalyst. let's be leaders here. >> okay. how big a dent is this 20 a company like google? how -- and how do they expect fix it in. >> google's going to be fine. youtube is enormously popular. we at box media, the partner

there too, but the industry has to provide -- >> jim, i'm sorry, can you -- could you hold just a second? i beg your pardon, back to capitol hill and listening in to some more commentary on the hill. >> by the way, this process has been open and fair house leadership made it that way, and i -- it's a breath of fresh air considering the last eight years. it was just that. this president has had more hands on thoughtful involvement than any president served under in 15 years. >> are you a yes-yes? >> i'm not going to address that. i'm not addressing that. >> walk away here. >> doing the best thing we can for the country. >> one of the members of the freedom caucus talking after a

meet i meeting with the president talking about, to his likes, he's not worked under a president who's been so hands on and involved in this kind of legislative matter. >> but he's still not saying what's happening. >> certainly was not ready to say yes. >> hands on, he means on the collar shaking the guys, get the vote done. >> whatever works. >> i'm a negotiator. >> leaving jim behind? he's behind our apologies to him, ceo of fox media, talking more about google and ad issues later today. again, we thank mr. jim. another milestone, the maybe health care vote, but the new chief executive at macy's, biggest department chain in terms of sales. they are taking over in a tough time as spending shifts online and discounters. macy's trading at levels not seen since 2011. bringing in courtney, starting with you, courtney, so lungren,

putting that aside, how did the stock do under him? can he be proud? >> so under terry's ceo, the stock gained 100%. he can be proud of that. accounts for the 56% lost in the last two years. things went well under mr. lundgren, huge accusation in 2005 swelling sales to the level around which they are today. those increased 70%. >> oliver chen, you know, what annists and what investorsment to know, what have you done for me lately, and what does he have to do? >> there's a lot of issues. three main issues, slowing mall traffic, getting people in the stores, secondly, the rise of amazon as well as offprice, and,

thirdly, i would say the consumer has fundamentally changed. customers expect the need for speed, and the way they shopt, they want goods immediately. also, fashions have been changing so rapidly, that macy's needs to focus on the supply chain as well as getting products to customers very quickly. so there are a lot of big near and long term challenges with the transformation happening in retail. >> oliver, is he the right guy or miss an opportunity to get somebody from the outside to shake things up a bit? >> the important thing here is to motivate macy's from within. there's a lot of culture changes happening and people changes. so in that way good to have someone in the inside understanding the organizationment at retail at large, major transformations are happening, and you have to rally the troops. what we see at macy's is a refocus on labor and people, and

that's what we see with customers, too. a personized experience, but multiyear in nature in terms of changes. >> courtney, the new ceo will do what oliver says? >> he's a guy that's ready to put the head down and go to work. he's been with macy's since the start of the career, began in the executive training program in 1983, waited his entire career for today to take them to the next century. people think he's the right man for the job, but i think there's big questions about what happens to the department store sector in general. you can have strategies in place, but this is a sector shrinking. that's going to be a problem for any executive. >> yeah, oliver, courtney, is there any man for the job, any person for the job? or is that a sector in decline because of the issues talked about? >> it's a little bit of robotic data, real personalization efforts, interesting task.

technology and digital, as well as supply chain will be very important. is there anybody perfect for the job? it's a tough role. retail has seen a lot of management changes at large, so that's not an easy question to answer, but a lot can happen here. a setback is a setup for a comeback, and we're looking forward to it. we acknowledge there's too many malls in the united states, and we need some changes. >> i like that, a step back is a setup for a a comeback. >> a lot of zingers. >> how much smaller is the store footprint in five years, al voer? >> they are closing 100 stores, and e-commerce penetration is increasing, mid to high teens level to probably another 10%. you could see more store closures. i asked about this on the conference call. this is their plan for now, and for the next three years, but, really, as mobile phones grow and amazon and others grow faster than they expect, you could see additional closures.

that's entirely possible. we think there's no -- >> no sales on the stock, oliver, no sales. not a single analyst says sell it. >> well, we have a market perform on the stock. keep in mind there's a good dividend yield as well as cash flow generation and management is making a good choice in a hard environment. >> does the new ceo look as much like a ceo? >> full head of hair, he's quite tall. [ laughter ] >> you know, there may be a macy's mold, and he stepped into it. >> looked handsome. >> it matters. >> it matters. >> oliver, thanks. courtney, thanks. >> thanks for having me. stocks losing steam hearing from members following their meeting with president trump. freedom caucus chairman says there's not enough votes to pass the health care bill should a vote be held now, but he does remain hopeful about an agreement, for more on the developing story when we return.

various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to create over 45,000 jobs. and each job created by the energy industry supports two others in the community. altogether, the industry supports over 9 million jobs nationwide.

these are jobs that natural gas is helping make happen, all while reducing america's emissions. energy lives here. all while reducing america's emissions. what?pony neighing] hey gary. oh. what's with the dog-sized horse? i'm crazy stressed trying to figure out this complex trade so i brought in my comfort pony, warren, to help me deal. isn't that right warren? well, you could get support from thinkorswim's in-app chat. it lets you chat and share your screen directly with a live person right from the app, so you don't need a comfort pony. oh, so what about my motivational meerkat? in-app chat on thinkorswim. only at td ameritrade.

we just talked retail. now, let's get insight into the consumer with perhaps the most consumer discretionary company of all. winnebago. joining us now is michael happy, the ceo of winnebago. you live up to the name a bit today because the stock and quarter is up a bit, michael, by i'm wondering, why do you think investors are not giving your stock a little more respect, down, lately, and not up that much into arguably another good quarter. >> well, you're right. we had a very solid second quarter. fiscal '17 year, and optimistic that not only our momentum at winnebago continues, but the rv industry in total is going to continue its upward momentum. 2016 shipmentings in the industry up 15% over 2015, and

we believe we're positioned for several more years of growth in the future. >> what's the average? what's the average price of the rvs? they go up to multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars, what's the average price? >> varies. if you are looking at the towable side, rv lifestyle can be as cheep as $15,000, up to $100,000, but the motorized side, you spend somewhere in the neighborhood of $80,000, but you can spend as much as a half million as you want. >> wow. >> for some of the large diesel coaches. >> class as. interest rates on the rise, with housing, are you interest rate sensitive? people borrow money. >> long term we are interest rate sensitive, but in the short term, we believe interest rates are historically low, and -- >> mr. happy, i'm unhappy to interrupt you, going to sean spicer talking about the health care bill.

stand by. >> obviously, this is something they understand there's a balancing act going on as yo try to get 216 in this case, but i think we continue to make progress every day. we walked out with more members in support of the american health care act today than we started the day with, and i continue to see that number to climb. hour by hour i anticipate we'll get there. >> patrick mcren ri said -- [ inaudible ] what's the status as far as you know? >> i think there are some members who, in the meeting, stood up, told the president, i'm with you now. i think member by member, that's how they are going to vote. they are going to -- i think we continued to see that number

rise. the same thing with the tuesday group. there's member that is have not been with us, that are expressing their willingness to be part of it. the president went over several commitments and changes made to us folks, that have continued to evolve, and i think that we continue to see the number rise, but i think we continue to see the number go up, not down, and that's a very positive sign. >> do you know how many came across, and what it was that brought them across? >> it depends. again, no singular issues in a lot of cases. there's a lot, i think, a lot of -- we talked a little bit about sections of the bill that they -- that there was an issue with, you know, and so i think -- there's a couple areas that there is common ground on, but we know 30 members there today, and some of them had specific aspects they wanted to see improved, and some of them,

frankly, came to say, hey, thank you, what you guys have done already has been an improvement. >> essential health benefits the sticking points? >> there was a lot of members that was the number one thing, but that was not universal across the board, but, again, i think some of the measures that have been taken along the way, but, again, there's beyond that, a lot of discussion about phase two and three. i think the president and the vice president committed to continuing working and improving and making commitments on the totality and commitment how to do this. for a lot of the guys, it's down to premium increases, concerned about what they are seeing and what the con stish wentch wents. the chief of staff, the legislative affairs team, we're all continuing to work to talk about certain measures that have been put in place to drive down costs, and i think when you realize it, what we've continued

to talk about, that costs are too high, premiums spike, dedukd deductibles are up, there's concerns for the members, and as they see overall total commitment on this, it's making them feel a lot better about not just this bill, but phases two and three. matt? >> two questions, both on health care. first one, is the president open to removing protections for preexisting conditions from the bill? >> that's been something he's been clear needs to stay in there. >> okay. seco secondly, about this essentials benefit protection, obviously, among those is maternity leave. how would removing that jive with the president's comment in the campaign that they can stay on maternity leave. this takes it out, and insurers no longer provide that. >> again, i'm not getting in a benefit by benefit discussion here, but there's a lot of concerns, as i said to blake, that part of the reason that

premiums have spiked out of control is because under obamacare, there were mandated services that had to be included, and what happened was that, you know, older men, older women who had gone past maternity age bought benefits not necessary for them, people who were at the younger end of the age scale were buying end of life benefits, and i think this goes back to the discussion, matt, which is we have now gone down to a system where in one-third of counties, there's one choice, it's mandated benefits everyone has to have. we lost consumer choice. so people are paying for benefits that neither they, their spouse, their family needs, which is driving up costs for every. so part of it is not about necessarily benefits, but it's about -- it's about a series of benefits mandated for everybody, and so what is happening is the cost of health care for every

individual has gone up, the choice has gone down. there's a philosophical discussion going on about what we can do to make sure that people have actual coverage, something we talked about before, but doing so in a way that does not drive up the costs for everybody. >> following up on that, then. is the president concerned that without having essential benefits in there, there's a situation where women are just paying higher health insurance, obviously, they pay for maternity leave. >> no, there's a family plan. the point is it's not -- it's not -- again, you're make picking one benefit and extrapolating it. that's saying young people pay for end of life care. the idea is to instill choice back in the market so it's not just about one particular benefit. it's allowing people to tailor a plan and a cost point that's good for them or their family or them and their spouse, but it's not just about one particular benefit. it's about locking at this and figuring out what are the cost drivers and how do we give people choices they need.

sarah? >> the white house and house leaders have initially defends the way the bill was written saying it needsed to be structured a certain way and exclude certain things to be able to proceed through the senate through budget reconciliation. what's changed now to put the substantive policy changes on the table? what's begin the white house and republicans confidence to survive through this process in the senate? >> i think that's a lot of discussion that's going on without getting too into it. the issue at hand is the bird rule, and whether or not it affects the budgetary -- you can't have policymaking things that don't have a budgetary impact. there's certain things that are being raised in certain ways, and crafted in accordance with the rule, but there's a lot of smart people that are very familiar with the rules and trying to do things in a way to make you conform in those ways. zeke? >> two questions. one on the health care bill.

first, question about the way the bill is now being modified to -- [ inaudible ] >> the bill looks like oba obamacare -- seven years later doing the same thing. >> not at all. doing exactly what we intended to do. i just -- the exchange we had, it's actually going -- the two goals set out to do it's doing. driving costs down. finding ways to lower premiums. keep deductens within reason, giving people to choose a plan that fits their budget, and secondly, doing things that instill competition and choice. so the things that are being done actually achieve the goals that have been set forth.

jim? >> different question. yesterday, secretary mattis testified they were willing to work with congress, have a public debate around this, is that -- traditionally started in the executive branchs, white house willing to put one forward, given that round of discussion? >> refer you back to secretary mattis. that's one the department of defense has. >> operative to the white house, that the white house now -- >> no, no, no. i think that was brought up in the context of a conversation that he is willing to have with respect to overseas c, and currt cools we have to combat them, but there was a discussion about whether or not we should have a discussion on authorized use of force or not and how to have that. jim?

>> now that chuck schumer has announce that filibuster of judge gorsuch, do you think it's time for the white house to take a stand on eliminating filibuster for supreme court nominees? >> i'm not going to -- senator mcconnell is a much more apt user and understander of senate rules. i'm not telling him what to do from here. >>. [ inaudible ] >> i understand that. it's his rules. his chamber. i'm going to let that go. john? >> sean, thank you. has anybody from the national securities team or the homeland security been in touch with their counterparts in london in the last 24 hours? >> yes. >> can you expound on that at all? >> only to the extent to say they've been in touch to evaluate, offer assistance, and,

again, i'm not getting inting classified discussions. [ inaudible ] >> yes. >> thank you, sean. chairman nunes today refused to defend the rollout, received the information yesterday ob sn surveillance. will you rule out the white house or anyone in the trump administration gave chairman nunes that information? >> i don't know what he actually briefed the president on, but i don't know why he would brief the president on something he gave them. >> that's why -- >> right. i don't know that that makes sense. i did not sit in on that briefing. i'm not -- a digit doesn't -- so i don't know why he would brief the speak aerp cohere and brief something on something we briefed him on. it doesn't make a ton of sense. i'm not aware of it, but it does not pass the smell test. >> clark meadows said there's no deal.

is the bill in trouble right now. >> it's not a question of trouble. we were not asking a deal. nbl unt they stood up, mr. president, we're with you, a lot said r we're going back to think about it, there was no move, do we have a deal. that's not why we had it. for some members -- >> final offer -- >> this has been this was a discussion the president continues to have. i think we've been very, very pleased with the direction it's going in and the number of members who have expressed support for it. we'll continue the discussion with the tuesday group, and the number's growing. the number of members sharing concerns, and i think that we have been very responsive as well as speaker ryan to the concerns and ideas that members have expressed from across the spectrum. >> you said there's no -- there's only plan a. >> right. >> at this point, is there an acknowledgement that, perhaps,

there needs to be a plan b? >> no. plan a. >> okay. follow-up. just the question asked speaker ryan to wait while they work on members to convince them -- >> right. >> has the president asked -- [ inaudible ] >> offering the opportunity to respond to what leader pelosi said today, it's a rookie mistake to set a date for a bill before there's a concept in caucus. what's the response to that? >> i -- thank you. i -- i appreciate that. i think we have a strong record on the republican side of getting billed passed, getting things done. and so, i know they have a strong record of telling people to read the bill afterwards. we've done it the right way. we know we've dope it with the support that voters told members and the president they wanted it done in. >> this is related, if i might. >> yes. >> there are former white house lawyers who received in the prior administration who say

that by tweeting from his official potus account this morning, a video put on on official social media channels, they violated the antilobbying law using money that's appropriated by congress, is that a concern you guys appreciate, something that's been talked about? >> it is not -- the president -- it doesn't -- that is not for the president, no. you're referring to u.s. code 1819 if i'm correct. we're good on it. john? >> thanks, sean. the president wrote a book "the art of dealing," when it comes to negotiations. if this falls through, the bill does not pass, would he accept the blame for the failure, and if not, who would? >> let's get to the vote tonight. i'm not going to start. i think the president has done a phenomenal job. no question when you look at the effort that he's put in, the number of meetings put in, and the number of changes in the bill. there's no question how hard the

president, the team, vice president have worked to get this done. it's in response, at the end of the day, we can't force a vote, but as to mention with folks, i like the direction it's going, we continue to see the support with it. we're not seeing people fall off. we're seeing people come on board. that's a great trajectory to have, and so i like where we're headed. >> two very quick clarifications. i think the issue was with the -- [ inaudible ] >> 18 u.s. code, the department of justice consistently condition strewed the antilobbying act of the lobbying act of the president is a, in assistance with the executive office of the president, vice president, and cabinet members within the responsibility and other officials appointed by the president's responsibility.

there's a carveout there. next. >> when you're talking about -- not at any point overrule the rules. >> not a question of overrule. you don't overrule. they make interpretations. up to the presiding officer, so -- [ inaudible ] >> i do. i understand how the senate works. the senate asked for guidance. >> sure. [ inaudible ] i'm not answering hypotheticalh. >> timely, again, reported yesterday that -- [ inaudible ]

>> let's look what cnn reported, anonymous u.s. officials said information indicates that the campaign and suspect the operatives coordinated they admit is not, and the fbi cannot yet prove that collusion took place. i think there's more, probably more evidence that cnn colluded with the clinton campaign to get her campaign questions than the trump campaign gave collusion. i think when it comes down to reporting, it's filled with suggestive terms on what this person may have done this, possibly that, and at the end of the story, at the bottom, it says the fbi cannot prove collusion took place. i addressed this reporting in the past, and this pits right in. john? >> without getting too deep in the strategy is in the senate to get this bill through it, is the president confident that the

strategy's developed in the senate will result in a bill that passes most? >> yes. >> president told us several weeks ago that if it looked like the democrats were going to filibuster judge gorsuch, there would be a nuclear option. the president's position on that change at all? >> he's not spoken with him, and senator schumer, in the last hour, came out with the pox. i'm sure after we get through tonight, the president will have a conversation with the senator. we're not there yet. >> following up on the question, how did chairman nunes -- [ inaudible ] >> how did they end up at the white house yesterday? this morning, he said he invited himself here, but that's an uncommon way to end up here. takes through the ticktock of what happened. >> no. i don't know how he got here. i assume in a car. [ laughter ] i also don't track him. i don't keep his schedule.

no, i don't. he gave a press conference as we started, and said, i'm going down to the white house after we brief the press, and -- >> first time that the white house was made aware of the surveillance he brought to the president yesterday? >> following up on health care, any plan if the bill does not pass tonight? >> no. it's going to pass. that's it. katelyn? >> now that you've been briefed, can you say that information that nunes had was the same information that the president had that was revealed this week? >> we're not going to comment. there's -- the -- my understanding, because i was not brief on the contents of that, was that he spoke generally about what he had seen in the reports made privy to, but there was further details, he wanted the president to know what he had seen and it was not related to russia, but he's continuing,

as, again, all the public comments are that he's going to continue to pursue this and they have further updates later. i'm not aware of the specific nature of it. >> what would the president's reaction be to republicans who vote against the health care bill tonight? are they encouraged to vote with their conscious? >> well, i've addressed this before. the president made clear that republicans in particular have made a commitment to commitments to the american people if given the opportunity to have a republican president or republican senate and republican house that they would enact a repeal and replace and he believes, as mentioned, during when he met with the house conference, as mentioned with the freedom caucus today, in several meetings talked about, you took the free votes, didn't matter, you don't have a republican president. you got to vote for repeal, tell the constituents 50 times, but

this is a live call now. this is for real. we're going to do what we pledged to the american people and keep our word. he's made it very clear that part of the reason he got elected is because he went out and made a series of bold pledges to the american people about what he would do if president, and he's acting on those. he's acting swiftly, boldly with respect to this in particular, and that he believes that not just him, but the members of the house and senate have an obligation to fulfill the promise and pledge made to the american people. cecila? >> making a statement? >> depends what time the vote it. i know i don't want to commit -- i'm sure there's going to be a comment. >> similar to the question you asked, is the president, no matter what happens, prepared to take responsibility for the outcome of this? >> in what way? >> whether it's succeeds or fails? his name is on it. a lot of people think so. >> i think in the sense we've

been very clear about issues of priority. we worked with him, but, again, i go back to -- at the end of the day, we can't make people vote. we've done everything we can to listen to them. we incorporated their thoughts. we incorporated their ideas. to make the bill the best we can, but it's a balancing act. no mistake about it. there's a full spectrum of votes in the house that have desperate desires, but i think we can all commit that this is the one vehicle that's going to repeal something that almost every single republican i'm aware of plemged to do if elected or reflected, and i think there's a desire to add milt, will we understand not every member finds it perfect. that's what you get, in this case, 216 votes, but it's the best bill that takes into consideration all those concerns and all the goals and values. i understand that, in a lot of cases, some of is not a question

of the policy. it's a question of timing and some of the things people want that are happening in phase three and phase one, but we addressed the bird rule, an arcane thing, probably in the house, they do not have to deal with it in the senate that deals with whether or not, and if there is a -- if it is loaded up with things that are stricken. it does not turn good. it puts together a comprehensive approach to addressing how to actually repeal and how to actually replace. i think the president walks through with the house freedom caucus today, several of the administration acts that secretary price would be taken, in accordance with the authority granted to him by the obamacare legislation and by some of the actions that secretary sebelus took in 2009. there's concern among members about some of the sequencing on things, and we've continued to not -- this is not just about policy, but sequencing and

timing. the president and vice president and the team have done a lot to reassure on sequencing and how the thing is going to act. so -- so that -- that discussion, i think, is continuing to be very productive to reassure members how this thing is going to happen, and take place. >> thanks, sean. [ inaudible ] >> how many were there? >> not yet. i'm not trying to be cute about this. i think if e we do this as -- if we do it with count, i think as you can imagine that we've got to make sure we don't, this balancing act, you got to make sure people don't fall off, but we are keeping can the in the direction we're headed in.

[ inaudible ] >> what specific changes does the president offer them? >> it's not just changes. part of it is some of the administrative stuff, making sure there's reainsurancssuranc enacting the bill, and that will be acted upon immediately and, you know, so there's an enumeration of those things and commitment on the other aspects of those given about buying across statelines, and there is a lot of talk about that. that's where it comes down to now, especially both members, they feel it's good about the change that's been made, and they feel good there's questions about the commitment in changes that might take place in the senate, and enjoyed a lot of, can we count on this when this happens. so i just want to, you know,

some of this, working that way. doyle? >> couple questions, please. one -- [ inaudible ] yesterday -- [ inaudible ] these two, that unless we countries that are financing and training.

-- [ inaudible ] what way do we go? >> secretary tillerson in the meeting with members there, committee to addressing syria and isis. i'm not going to get head of the internal discussions that secretary tillerson's having. the add mministratiadministrati particular, but -- [ inaudible ] >> okay. >> it was 1976 when leader from india wanted to have --

[ inaudible ] -- >> to go on this, but now, you know, who had been now -- [ inaudible ] >> we discuss the nature of hate crimes in the past and condemned the act, certainly, this year, and, obviously, i'm sure that this is very important issue for them. the president, right now, focused, in particular on get ing obama care, repeal, replaced. issue in london, a lot affected now, and i'm sure we'll continue to monitor the situation as

well. >> health benefits, said he was not going to -- not going to find anything. and i'm wondering what he says, those relying on provisions for opiod addictions. if essential health benefits go away. >> that's a false choice. the problem with obama care is they took benefits, mandated they had to be offered, and what happened? this spiked insurance rate, spiked deductibles, and insurance went away. it's not making it go away or not, but it's a false choice. it's offering options. those in the country, you can buy what you want. sometimes there's a low price point, what you can afford, you buy features on a product because you want those features. sometimes you determine what,

but people have choice in the health care market the same way they do in almost every other industry. that's the poimpnt. it's not giving or taking. it's about the point they are mandated in a way, and that's the point. people should buy what they want and what is appropriate for their, themselves, their family. >> right now, where do they stand? part of this bill? >> part of the house bill. yeah. [ inaudible ] >> if you're an older man, you can generally say you're not needing maternity care. >> drug addiction, you don't buy insurance saying i need that backup coverage because i'm going to get addicted to painkillers or drugs. question is, is the president confident the choices we have

would be offered by insurance companies on their own? >> i think there's a market for things, but you don't buy insurance for anything, guessing, saying, i assume if my health runs down, i need to replace all these things. you buy insurance, that's the point of insurance policy. when people look, they may buy what they don't need, but you can evaluate it. same with retirementment plans, car insurance, evaluate your needs and evaluate what's best for your family. sarah? until nbl -- >> say the first part again. [ inaudible ] >> this is, the way that -- the term "associate" going around, i don't understand what it means. employees of the campaign, employees of the transition, the white house? that's one thing, but the way

this term "associates" is thrown out, an, again, we talked about it yesterday, you pull out a gentleman who was employed by someone for five months and talked about a client he had ten years ago, unequivocally say, no one in the past who may or may not have come in contact with them, sat next to them in a plane, grew up with them in grade school, that's, a lot of times -- [ inaudible ] the point i'm making, when you use a term like "associate" and use all subjective terms, there's a reason you do it, which is because you don't have anything concrete. if you do, come back to me, and ask, does nip in the white house, the transition, but when you throw out a term like that, it's a catch-all. can you be certain no one who works for a guy like turner has done anything illegal? that's a broad way of answering that, or who visited the

building? that's what you are equivocally saying. [ inaudible ] >> people in the white house are on that ground, appearing -- [ inaudible ] >> two issues. what i have a problem specifically with the reporting, one subjective term after another. it was associates that may or may not be there. all one projected term after another, with no proof that anything happened, no way. when you use a term like "associates," you don't put a time frame around it. it's nebulous at best to suggest someone over and over again making a claim the way you do and the narrative continues. talking about nunes, there's a reason we are dealing with classified information can't go out in the public and reveal

certain things because -- [ inaudible ] no, that's not what he said. i don't think he ever said it was classified. the message -- [ inaudible ] no, no, he was able to talk about the subject, not the specifics would be my suggestion, you can't talk about specifics of the case in terms of the sources, methods, and individuals. what happened is a lot of the individuals who have been masked or unmasked are supposed to be classified. just because it's in the public domain does not make it unclassify. that's the problem. yes? >> sean, the nuclear posture review, can you assure us that everything is on the table? incoming a listing of a moratorium, any clear warning? >> i don't have a full readout at this point. i'll get back to you. >> repeatedly said republicans

should allow obamacare to collapse because democrats would own that, and, therefore, maybe we shouldn't do anything about it. it's not fair to the american people to do that. >> right. >> is there a reason there's not a plan b because the president's plan is to allow obamacare to collapse? >> no. the president's pan, passed tonight, get it into the senate, sign a bill in conference. that's the president's plan. that's what the president's been fighting for it. that's why the president's been trying to make it stronger and stronger every day, but i think he states a clear reality. if it doesn't do this, that it is a false choice to compare what we do with obamacare because obamacare is collapses. choices are down. there is no equivalency. something is failing. we are trying to get rid of it. the point the president is making, the political expedient answer is to do nothing. the needs they have in terms of health care, we owe it to do the right thing.

>> so a follow-up question. who is the president holding accountable for the spliet in the party not getting something done. struggle it takes last minute. holding republican leadership, paul ryan, for bringing a bill. >> we're not focused on blaming, but getting it done and winning. >> selling this legislation as lower premiums, deductibles, and better health care. has he put republicans on the spot with this legislation? >> sure, but it is, yes. thank you for the advertisement.

appreciate it. we -- i think that's what -- >> it does that? >> of course, it will do that. the point is there's been, a, i think there's concern, as i mentioned earlier, about the timing, and i think we have continued to relay a lot of concerns, and because of the rules that they are, and against one of the things that explained to -- not tough to explain, but just the reality, that if we don't do it the way we do it, we need 60 votes, and we wouldn't, and the democrats are united in stopping any progress being made, so i think the point we had to make over and over again, is, i get it. in a perfect world, 60 vote, we could do it in a different way, have a much more kprecomprehens strategy, but as do we, undo it, the reason it's a three pronged approach is because of the nature that has to be dealt with.

a lot of folks, many are new to the process, many want it done in a different way. when it's sent to the senate, we don't have to have a huge fight about what the burden may be. that is -- while most people don't to it to, you know, fully appreciate nupances, it's a reality to get done. that's a big difference. peter? >> sean, yesterday when the chairman was here, we heard comments. today, behind closed doors, apologized to the committee. expressing regrets the way he handled it going public and president before speaking to the members of his committee. the question is, why was it appropriate? why does the white house believe it was appropriate for chairman nunes to come, give information to the president regarding investigation about the president's own associates in the campaign? >> two things, asking why he did

something -- hold on, getting there. i know where you're going, peter. i know where you were going, but the reality is that, he made a decision. he briefed the press first, no one had a problem, by the way in the press corp. getting briefed before everyone else, briefing your colleagues before anyone else. i don't hear crying about that. the reality is, then he made a statement, coming down to the white house to share this, as noted. he did not give up the heads up, made the announcement, coming out of the white house, asked for time to share with the president, and i think part of the reason, to be clear and to the question, is specifically to say if there's a big difference between any discussion about what's going on in russia and why this intelligence was picked up. his comments yesterday were clear that the intelligence and information picked up had nothing to do with russia, and i

think he felt as though, according to his words, in obligation to make sure the president knew what he had discovered. that's it. plain, simple. >> appearances matter on this, doesn't the white house have a concern that it creates the appearance that there was potentially interference by the president he was included in conversations about the investigation before it was completed? >> my concern, to be perfectly blunt with you, it's always -- you seem to have an obsession with the process and not the substance -- >> the president wants the conclusion. >> no, no, hold on, i understand that. chairman nunes, i'm going to make it clear, because he said he wanted to make it very clear that the discussion and the revelations that he had were not -- did not regard anything to do with russia, and he wanted the president to understand that. there seems to be this obsession with the process, how did it get here? when did it go?

what was the reaction? at some point, there needs to be concern about the substance. that's a very serious revolution made about what happened in the election with respect to our side. some of the things that happened, and at some point, i would implore, urge, beg some of you to use some of your investigative skills to look into what actually did happen; why did it happen? what happens going on back there? who knew what when? i think there should be a similar concern as opposed o figuring outs whether it was a skate board or car here to what happened and why it happened. the reality is that whether he briefed us first or briefed the democratic members issue and that's up to him to decide, the substance of what he shared should be troubling to everybody. that's what i think should be important. >> president trump said people shouldn't use sources unless they use a name causing a disservice. so i guess the question is,

chairman nunes came out, noted the sources he couldn't create and provide publicly, so why politically advantageous does that sources be okay, but when politically damaging, it's not okay. >> he came out and briefed people on what he knew at the time and said he was going to get further briefed with further updates. that's a big difference than reporting and making a serious allegation. in fact, he was doing the on sit. he was vindicating the president, saying there's something you need to know about the substance of allegations made against you, and why that may or may not. case because some of what i've seen -- >> just as important for the president to learn. >> sure. would have, and then there's no concern with that, would you? >> my question is to you. >> margaret? >> following up on that, you said vindicated. president said he felt vindicated. did he feel that having chairman nunes come down here help credibility? >> i think it is reassuring to

know what he discussed, well, again, the chairman made it clear he's not final in the processes what he's seen so far gave great concern or whatever the exact phrase before was, i guess, but to the concern in pause, the activity seen in the transition period. i think that's important. so, i think, yes, the president did -- it was helpful for the president to know that the investigation was bearing fruit. equally thing to note about yesterday was part of what the chairman said was it had nothing to do with the allegations and narratives about russia. that's very, very important

narrative to be clear on. >> are they meeting again? did the president accept the findings there was no wiretapping at trump tower? nothing planned for the chairman to come down again, but second of all, i have and the president has very clearly explained that it was not taken literal in the term wiretap, but surveillance in general. yes. once what chairman said there was evidence of surveillance that occurred in the election. i think that is important to note. again, obsession is with the process of how he got here, what time he left, who he briefed first opposed to the substantive issues. all i'll tell you is the public comments to you and colleague on capital hill he was concerned with the surveillance that he

had seen and reports of surveillance, individual masked and unmasked during transition. [ inaudible ] >> there's been questions about that including from republicans. yes. thank you guys very much. see you tomorrow. have a great one. >> okay. sean spicer finished up his daily press briefing. monitoring what's going on on capitol hill. we have news coming out of the key members of the freedom caucus. kayla? >> while the press briefing went on, the press secretary is not sharing current with counts, holding it close to the vests, not losing members, we heard from mark meadows, the congressman current chair of the freedom caucus, and here's what he told reporters. >> he's the speaker of the house and knows the conferences better than anybody.

we're certainly trying to get this, but, indeed, made reasonable requests and hopeful with the reasonable requests will be -- >> saying the president has the right to say yes or no what the freedom caucus put forth. that conflicts with other reporting saying the ball is in the freedom caucus's court to accept or leave on the table what the white house has offered. i spoke to gop aids that said as far as the vote schedule, guys, no decision made as to whether a vote will be held. they are trying to figure out whether the freedom caucus has a united decision in response to the white house or whether there's a last minute 11th hour deal to be made here. >> thank you very much. before break, guys, a lot of questions, guy, how many votes we need. 216, 215, i think it's important to know why.

congressman rush's wife passed away. the funeral is tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. obvious reason to miss the votes. then it's 215. another democrat of new york, if she misses, that's 214. 216 is the number, but likely 215 or 214. there's your number, folks. nobody asked, but i answered. scrambling at the white house drumming up votes. what would it mean if the bill gets through? what's it mean if the bill does not? what does it mean if they do not vote? ♪ it's been over 100 years since the first stock index was created, as a benchmark for average. yet a lot of people still build portfolios with strategies that just track the benchmarks. but investing isn't about achieving average. it's about achieving goals. and invesco believes doing that today requires

the art and expertise of high-conviction investing. translation? why invest in average? anything worth pursuing hard work and a plan. at baird, we approach your wealth management strategy the same way to create a financial plan built to last from generation to generation. we'll listen. we'll talk. we'll plan. baird. the newly advanced gle can see in your blind spot. ok let's call his agent. i'm coming over right now. [ dinosaur roar ] onboard cameras and radar detect danger all around you. driver assist systems pull you back into your lane if drifting. bye chief. bye bobby. and will even help you brake, if necessary. it makes driving less of a production. lease the gle350 for $579 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing.

right now, the american health care act still scheduled for an all-important vote tonight. now, that could change, but right now, it is scheduled. house leadership continues to scramble wrangling, arm twisting, whatever necessary, to get the 215 votes for passage. joining us now, former house majority leader.

you're probably glad you're out. >> do you miss it? >> on days like this, i'm good where i am. it's -- these are moments that, you know, so many -- and, really veteran members of the profession here before, just startling to me the drama they create. this is -- these are back and fort negotiations that happen all the time when you have such complex pieces of legislation, and this one is a big one. >> take us -- you've been in these discussions, not about this particular one, but others. how does it happen? how does it happen, eric? literally, the president and other members of congress, freedom caucus, what do you want? they throw it out, i can't give you all that, but we'll do this. what do they want? do you ultimately believe u they get the vote? >> the answer to the last question, of course, yes. i do believe they get the vote. this is a gateway issue to the trump agenda.

the fact the president and vice president leaned into this, the fact that trump is engaged makes the difference ultimately. i remember times republicans were in control of washington when i was there, you know, and president bush leaned in and took ownership of the legislation battle. he made the difference. this is where, i think, people ask, well, why can't republicans call repeal and replace, campaigning on this for the last eight years. it's been an issue for eight years, and when i was leader, criticized fiercely for footing billing one after another across the floor, but what was not in place at the time was the fact that there was a president who would sign the bill. this is a new dynamic, shooting with real bullet, so you know now stakes are high. this is a time when the president is owning the bill.

the legislative sort of reputation is on the line, and they'll get it done. >> why does the president matter? is it the poll numbers? low. reports from d.c. that there are members of the republican party who are, quote, are not afraid of him anymore, and do not worry about going back to the constituency. >> michelle, remember, the house and house ma joty is girded by the redistricting process that occurs, and as you know, most of the districts on both sides of the aisle are heavily one way or the other, so on the republican side, the republican base is the most vocal constituency they have. look at the polling, trump is extremely popular with the republican base. in fact, about a month ago, there were polls released that said he exceeded where ronald reagan and george were with the republican base. it was those in the democratic or independent column falling short. that's what is motivating the

members. i tell you having the president bear down on you and insist that you got to come along with the team makes a human, huge difference. >> what if it does not get done. do you believe the president's forecast that, you know, the people who run against it, they lose come next election? >> it will get done. it will get done. >> not entertaining the idea it doesn't? >> now, listen, like i said before, it's a gateway issue. momentum. as you know, the bill's operating under the reconciliation process, affording the privilege in the senate, and they cannot get off this and bring up the next major item, tax reform, without lu lugsilugosine ing privilege on the health care issue. it's a central theme to the election. as well as many other republicans for cycles now. they got to repeal and replace

obamacare. >> how do you thread the needle, and, please, freedom caucus, which would, like, preasumably fewer mandated items in the coverage and other things, yet threw a moderate senate. >> this is a multistage process. you know, you've seen paul ryan, tom price, others talk about the fact that this is stage one. it's the legislative stage, and then comes the regulatory stage, and perhaps another legislative stage. even. the first legislative stage, there are several steps here. this is only the first hurdle in the house. so the leadership working with the white house will do what they got to do to get this bill through, and they'll be in negotiations that transpire, obviously, in the senate, to insure the bill getting through there, and there's a conference committee that resolves the differences issue and then, again, the importance of the president and the white house coming forward, putting shoulders into this thing and owning if because it is president trump's party, and this is president trump's bill.

>> all right. okay. we're going to see if it happens tonight. thank you so much. good to have you with us with your expertise and know-how about behind the scenes. >> pleasure. >> being in the mix. >> meantime, where it happens, as they said in hamlet, now, if you don't know, now you know. >> hospital stocks higher ahead of health care. more on this on "trading nation" coming up. the trend tracker live data board brought to you byes cme group. i love how usaa gives me the peace of mind and the security just like the marines did. at one point, i did change to a different company

with car insurance, and i was not happy with the customer service. we have switched back over and we feel like we're back home now. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children, and that they can be protected. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life. call usaa today to talk about your insurance needs. hey!nicole. i just wanted to think your support team for walking me through my first options trade. well, we're all about educating people on options strategies. i won't let this accomplishment go to my head. get help on options trading with thinkorswim, only at td ameritrade.

we cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. fidelity, where smarter investors will always be.

down one day, up the next. banks jumping today, stemming a slide. let's get the best move for the trading nation team. chad, on tuesday, the entire market slid, but bank stocks took a hit. everyone said, well, the trump bump is dumped. it's over. apparently not. are you buyer right now of big bank stocks?

>> right now, no. we're neutral on this sector. what we're anticipating is, perhaps, a 3-5% selloff within the sector. a couple reasons. one, we think there's going to be, perhaps, a flattening of the yields curve. that applies pressure overall to the financials. also, another thing, valuations. you had just two standard deviation move up in the financials. we believe it's going to have the back end, going to have to fill in there. over the long run, though, i want to make this point. we are more constructive on the financials. deregulation will mean there's a releveraging of the bank's balance sheets and believe overall economic vitalalty kicks in in 2017 as the fed raises interest rates boding well three to five years for financials. >> all right. there's the longer term view. chart this for us, buy, sell, hold, ignore, what? >> the charts are very much in line with chad's outlook as well

there. they had a tough week, but, really, take a step back. here's a sector up over 20% in six months. this is really just much needed consolidation. it's not fully run its course. if we chart this, xlf, dipping into the january low, south of $23, below there, there's a rising moving day average with long term momentum to it. the key here is being patient. you just need time. i think you want to see it carveout that base, become second half of the year, we do think that financials continue to do well. more neutral near term. >> longer term bullish. all right, thank you very much. more trading nation, go to the tradingnation.cnbc.com website. >> markets awaiting the health care vote, and meantime, holding steady ahead of it, potential winners and lose ers and how business is bracing for the change next. and now, latest from trading

nation and the word from our sponsor. >> the best method for reviewing trade is to keep a trading journal. when you enter a trade, write down the reasons you went into the trade and the conditions under which you'll exit, both for profit and loss. take a screen shot

welcome back. pricing for the big vote on health care. no one knows obviously for sure what is going to happen on health care. the message is heard. ylan mui has more. >> tyler, the fight over health care on capitol hill is also dividing the business community. powerful lobbying groups are throwing their weight behind them. some of the names are u.s. chamber of commerce. they're calling it a key vote. closely watching who might step out of line going toward other big backers include the national retail federation and the national association of manufacturers, also the national federation of independent business. remember, they were the lead plaintiff in the supreme court case against obamacare.

they lost that lawsuit. the nfib repeals the law for driving up small business optimism. on the other side of this argument, many companies in the health care space, they're worried about getting stuck with higher costs if the federal government reduces funding for medicaid in the future. the american hospital association, the american health care association, they cover nursing homes and assisted living facilities. they're all against this bill. doctors oppose it, too. the american medical association put out a dramatic statement saying that they see patients from the cradle to the grave and they don't want to see anyone lose coverage in the future. so that is looking really tight. business groups on both sides of the aisle trying to move the ball. back to you guys. >> yeah, all of that last-minute lobbying going on. thanks, ylan. a lot of those people lobbying now, bertha. >> hospitals in particular have been a little bit like the heartbeat monitor. you take a look with the doubts

that the ahca will pass tonight, you've seen tenant health care breaking a five point losing streak. they're all higher. despite near term in positives that would come out of the bill for them. the bill would repeal near term $43 billion in obamacare hospital cuts and for the next couple of years it would add some extra money in transitional medicaid funding for states like texas and florida that didn't expand medicaid under obamacare. $300 billion. also, starting in 2020, the real negatives come in. medicaid cuts begin over the next few years. seeing if we keep obamacare in place. that is expected to result in

millions more people being uninsured, unable to pay for their care and even with today's rally, coming in today, tenent community health care both off double digits. hca off 4%. watch the hospital, moody's says this is credit negative until it passes. >> bertha, thank you very much. we're going to take a quick break and when we come back, check please.

( ♪ )

i moved upstate because i was interested in building a career. i came to ibm to manage global clients and big data. but i found so much more. ( ♪ ) it's really a melting pot of activities and people. (applause, cheering) new york state is filled with bright minds like victoria's. to find the companies and talent of tomorrow, search for our page, jobsinnewyorkstate on linkedin. search for our page, what's critical thinking like? a basketball costs $14. what's team spirit worth? (cheers) what's it worth to talk to your mom? what's the value of a walk in the woods? the value of capital is to create, not just wealth, but things that matter. morgan stanley

check, please. >> federal landlord, yes, there is one, has ruled that trump's washington hotel does not violate lease terms which for bid benefits to elected officials. remember he has that hotel on pennsylvania avenue and he can still own it and get the rent. >> still own it. let's talk about the health vote which is close but mr. spicer saying earlier today that he thought they had picked up some more votes since the day began. we will see whether there is a vote tonight which is still on schedule or not. >> mentioning watching the hospital stocks. i'm watching the small caps as a potential barometer here. obviously if health care passes the likelihood of tax carey form is higher and a big beneficiary would be small cap stocks. that group is in the market. it's up by more than a percent in the session. >> i'm disappointed we didn't

hear from the freedom caucus. keep watching cnbc because when they walk out of the meeting we're hoping they're going to come to the camera. >> i think the vote happens. i think it passes. i think michigan upsets oregon. >> lots of predictions. >> i agree on all but the last. >> thanks for watching "power lunch." >> "closing bell" starts right now. welcome to the "closing bell", everybody. i'm kelly evans at the new york stock exchange. >> i'm bill griffeth. investors waiting for that vote on health care in the house tonight. aren't we all? at this hour we're waiting for speaker paul ryan, he's expected to deliver his weekly news conference. usually it's in the morning on thursdays. now it will be scheduled for about a half an hour from now. the president is meeting with trucking industry ceos at the white house. we're expecting to hear from them coming up in a little bit. we will s