something that no president has accomplished for a president. think about theodore roosevelt who put a plank in his, and fdr trying to get it into his social security bill and he didn't. and harry truman had a bill that was ruled social lis tiistic an lost out, and jfk was also deated and so was president clinton with the louise ad. and this is the historic ak k accomplishment that all presidents wish they could accomplish when they come into office. >> basically what doris kearns goodwin is telling us is not just a moment in obama's presidency, but a moment in history. thank you so much, doris kearns goodwin. we appreciate it. >> the important thing to look at even more so when you look back at ronald reagan and the

fight with lyndon johnson over medicare and the words he used was that it would compel all americans to spend their sunset years telling their children and their children's children how it was when men were free, and that is what it is like. and however, medicare has been sustained and approved, but the public sentiment lay ahead. one thing we have not gotten and what the president has been trying to do today which as you say is to make a clear understanding of what this bill is about. because lincoln said with public sentiment nothing can fail and without it nothing can succeed. so without it, he who encourages it, will continue. and so that is the battle of the louise ads with president

clinton, and so that is the side that americans have to come down on. >> thank you, doris kearns goodwin. just a little past the hour, and the supreme court has upheld the sweeping health care reform law proposed by president obama. i'm candy crowley. in a 5-4 decision, the court upheld the individual mandate and it requires almost every american to have health insurance or pay a penalty. the requirement takes effect in 2014. president obama reacted to the ruling last hour. >> i know there will be a lot of discussion today about the politics of all of this, and about who won and who lost. that is how these things tend to be viewed here in washington. but that discussion completely misses the point. whatever the politics, today's decision was a victory for people all over this country whose lives will be more secure because of this law, and the supreme court's decision to

uphold it. >> the supreme court's landmark decision upholding president obama's signature affordable health care law is a stinging defeat for those who claimed that the law was unconstitutionali unconstitutional, and mitt romney set out to put the ruling in perspective. >> make dleer what the court did and did not do. what the court did today was say that obama care does not violate the constitution. what they did not do was say that obama care is good law or that it is good policy. obama care was bad policy yesterday. it is bad policy today. obama care was bad law yesterday. it's bad law today. >> i want the bring in republican congressman tom price of georgia. what we are hearing now, congressman, from the republicans is while the law is constitutional and it is still a bad idea, and i assume then taking it to the campaign trail. but can you beat something which

is the president's now upheld health care law with nothing which basically is what the republicans have put out there so far at least in the form of mitt romney. >> well, it is a good talking point, candy, but the fact of the matter is as chief justice roberts said today, it is not the role of the court to protect the people from their political decisions. this is a political decision that was made. we have positive solutions to all of the challenges that we face in the area of health care that don't require putting washington in charge, and that is why the american people by 60% plus continue the believe that this law ought not to be held the law of the land. they don't want the independent payment advisory board and people deciding in washington if seniors get care and they don't want $500 billion in tax increases and they don't want $500 billion removed from the medicare program. that is the bad news. good news, there are wonderful solutions. hr-3 hr-3000 is a bill we have authored and will save billions

of dollars all without putting washington in charge. >> and congressman, the numbers that you cite, we have to put in a caveat, because some people say they don't like the law, because it didn't go far enough, and not because they were against the individual mandate, but they didn't feel it went far enough, so it does not seem like totally sound political turf for republicans to venture out in this election year. >> well, we are happy to have the debate. what the court said today is that the law is constitutional, because it is a tax. that is not what the president said when he introduced the bill. but the court said it is okay, because it is a tax. the debate that we are happy to have is that our friends on the other side of the aisle want to tax what you do and even what you didn't do. we don't believe in increasing taxes at this time of the nation's history is a wise idea and it harms the economy and harms businesses and we don't belief that having this bill in place is a wise idea for health care. as a physician, i can tell you that this destroys the quality of health care in the country and increases accessibility and increases cost. those are not the thing has the

american people want. that is why we are happy to have the political debate as we move into the fall. >> congressman, setting aside what the republicans and the congress on the senate and the house side have proposed as alternatives and albeit not a holistic plan, but there have been ideas up there, do you believe that looking at mitt romney as the person who is leading the party in these elections this year, do you think that he can get by without offering something of a republican al teternative? is it enough to say this is a bad idea and obama care is a bad idea and we need to repeal it? >> well, that is what you continue to say, but it is not true. governor romney has put out a very specific plan that talks about increasing patient choices and increasing market choices and making certain that the states have greater flexibility to cover the indigent population which is vital and making certain that we work to reform medicare and medicaid and social security which are the biggest cost drivers that increase the cost of health care in the country and not bring it down.

there are specific proposals that we have, and again, we are happy to have that debate, and in fact, this poor decision made today may actually clarify the contrast between the folks on the left side of the aisle who want to continue to increase spending at the federal level and increase taxes and now even tax what you don't do, as opposed to what you do, and those on the republican side who believe in individual freedom and lib erty an patient choices and greater opportunity for folks across the land. >> and finally, congressman, if i could ask you using the background, you are a doctor. i spoke to a doctor from california today who said, okay, but what really worries him is that you are putting 30 million uninsured people into a system that is broken and part of what he said that i know that nobody wants to talk about doctor reimbursement, but we are losing do doctors and losing health care workers and we need to talk about medicare reimbursement essentially and taking a long hard look at physician reimbursement, and do you think that is necessary as well?

>> without a doubt. the status quo is unacceptable in medical care. that physician is spot-on. what he is saying is what we know because we have been out there talking to my former physician colleagues across the country. there are many people who are leaving the practice of medic e medicine, not because they have forgotten how the treat patients but because the system is so onerous and making it so difficult, it is not viable. so we need reform of the reimbursement system for physicians to make it so that medicare patients and doctors can see each other regardless of what the federal government dictates what they must do. if we allow that freedom and flexibility in the system, we can strengthen medicare and medicaid which is what our budget will do on the house side. >> thank you congressman tom price. >> thank you. and now i want to bring in jeffrey toobin who will chew over things that we need to talk

about of what the courts said about the states, because it seems that the next challenge may be in the state's courts. >> well, it a complex task ahead of the federal government and one they are happy to take onn . let me explain what the courts said. medicare is insurance for the poor people, and the way it works is that the government set requirements for how poor people should be cared for, but the states administer the programs. and what they, the obama care bill did, and what the aca did is that it established more requirements for what the states have to do for poor people. they have to treat more poor people and less poor people, and people who are closer to the middle-class, and what you have justice roberts' opinion said that you are imposing too many

requirements on the states. it is true, he who pays the piper calls the tune, usually, but if the federal government is giving money, they can condition, and put conditions on that, but there were so many conditions on this that chief justice roberts said, you are essentially commandeering the state functions and coerce iinge states, and you cannot do that. so the question now is, what is going to happen to those poor people? are the states going to cover them or -- what happens to those requirements? >> and what about the individual mandate in terms of enforcement? so the enforcement sounds like it is now up to the irs, and so that the state does not really have anything to do with that, right. so that's done -- >> that is a very much a federal issue. and in fact, the chief justice went through that very clearly in his opinion, and in court, he said, look, if you don't get

health insurance, you will have to pay a penalty on the 1040 and check a box that i don't have health insurance and you will have to pay some, you know, yet to be determined amount. that's a power of the power federal, and it is a tax and it is constitutional. >> and as we heard nancy pelosi say, if you want to call it a tax, she is happy with the decision. jeffrey toobin, thank you for your time. >> that is what the democrats are saying all over town. >> we have the take a quick break, and dr. sanjay gupta is coming back and he has viewers with questions, and he has the answers. from psoriatic arthritis hit, even the smallest things became difficult. i finally understood what serious joint pain is like. i talked to my rheumatologist and he prescribed enbrel. enbrel can help relieve pain, stiffness, and stop joint damage. because enbrel, etanercept, suppresses your immune system, it may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, and nervous system and blood disorders have occurred.

before starting enbrel, your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if, while on enbrel, you experience persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. [ phil ] get back to the things that matter most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biolog medicine prescribed by rheumatologists. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biolog medicine would you mind if to be i go ahead of you?omer. instead we had someone go ahead of him and win fifty thousand dollars. congratulations you are our one millionth customer. people don't like to miss out on money that should have been theirs. that's why at ally we have the raise your rate 2-year cd. you can get a one-time rate increase if our two-year rate goes up. if your bank makes you miss out, you need an ally. ally bank. no nonsense. just people sense.

sfx: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering sfx: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering so, i'm walking down the street, x: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering just you know walking, sfx: sounds of marching bandnd and crowd cheering and i found myself in the middle of this paradeeet, x: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering honoring america's troops. sfx: sounds of marching bandnd and crowd cheering which is actually in tquite fitting becauseadeeet, x: sounds of marching band and crowd cheering geico has been serving e military for over 75 years. aawh no, look, i know this is about the troops and not about me. right, but i don't look like that. who can i write a letter to about this? geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. . >> we want to know how you are reacting to the supreme court ruling that upholds the president's health care law.

that is of course why we brought our chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta along. he is in new york and he will take your questions and comments. sanjay, what are you hearing? >> well, we have been hearing a lot of questions and what this means politically, but for patients out there and people particularly who have had a illness or some sort of pre-existing condition, they are paying a lot of attention to this. we have a viewer in washington, and that is kathy. is she with us? >> yes, i'm here. >> hey, kathy. i don't know whether you had a question or a comment? >> well, i'm the mother of two chronically ill children so i came to washington from atlanta to hear the decision, because our family has such a huge stake in the outcome today. >> well, you know, it is interesting, because the whole notion, and the challenge of pre-existing conditions is one that people are paying attention

to for the first time. let me give you background, and kathy, you may know this, but for people who are tuning in, talking about the entire bill as a whole, a nd people who have pre-existing condition and illness several things are going to be different for them. for the children, these have gone into effect, and for adults they go into effect 2014, and basically when you say you can no longer be discriminated against by your insurance companies that means that first of all you can't be denied coverage. there are people out there who no matter the price they pay cannot get health care coverage, insurance, and that is going to change. they cannot be dropped from the plan. so if you have health care insurance and you get sick in the past you could have been dropped. that can no longer happen. also, i can tell you as a doctor, there is such a thing known as caps and annual cap on how much an insurance company will pay out and also a lifetime cap. and people with chronic illnesses can hit the caps very, very quickly, and those caps will also disappear. so you will pay, again, kathy,

you may know this for your children, but the amount of money that the health care premiums for your children's health care insurance is going to be the same as another child living in the community that is healthy. that is what a community rating simplistically means. so for people who have illnesses and as you do, kathy, with illnesses, this is a way for them to get health care insurance where they may have not gotten it before. or it would have been prohibitively expensive. >> with my children for example, my daughter is a graphic designer and works for a small firm. she is one pink slip away from no health insurance, but not after today. in 2014, she will -- we will be able to sleep now, because we know she will buy a policy and they won't be able to charge her more and of course, the same is true for our small group. we have a small group that covers my son who has type i diabetes, and in our small group we pay $40,000 a year for four people, but in 2014, when, you

know, community rating takes effect, we believe that our small group policy premiums will also go down, so this is more good news for people. >> right. and you know, the backdrop of this, candy, as you know, is that everyone has to have health care insurance and so for the people who can afford it, that i have to buy it or pay a penalty, but for those who cannot afford it, if they are depending upon how much money they are making will come under medicaid which is expanded, and something that you are talking about, candy, or get subsidies, and there a lot here. at some point, it is worth reading. i have read it a couple of times, but it is a glimpse into how some one like kathy who has two young children who have pre-existing conditions, candy. >> it is. sure go ahead. >> well, excuse me, one more point to be made on that is that

anyone who has health coverage today or on january 1, 2014, they will automatically comply with the mandate. they don't have to change their insurance or anything like that. that gives people, and should give them a lot of peace of mind. >> good point. >> thank you so much actually to both of you. we appreciate it, and sanjay, we will be talking to you later. there is also another historic decision. there is a house vote on holding attorney general eric holder in contempt of court over the fast and furious operation. [ music playing, indistinct conversations ]

the charcoal went out already? [ sighs ] forget it. [ male announcer ] there's more barbeque time in every bag of kingsford charcoal. kingsford. slow down and grill. do a lot of sending... and receiving. sending...and receiving. sending...and receiving. sending...and receiving. sending...and receiving. [ bob ] i got the tickets. [ male announcer ] and with citibank popmoney, it's even easier to keep sending...and receiving. let me get you back. no, it's on me.

i insist. no way. yes way. well let me chip in. [ male announcer ] send money from one bank account to another, with citibank popmoney. easier banking. every step of the way. the supreme court's health care ruling is not the only big

news out of washington today. this hour, the house of representatives is scheduled to begin debate on contempt of congress citation against attorney general eric holder. the republicans pushed for the unprecedented vote after the white house refused to turn over documents on the fast and furious weapons crackdown. for months cnn and other news organizations and even the justice department have referred to fast and furious as botched operation, but now some are saying that is not the case. joe from capitol hill, and can you explain to us what this is abou about? >> well, it is simple when you think about it, candy. the assumption has been for months and months now that the gun running operation called fast and furious actually intentionally allowed something like 2,000 guns to go to traffickers and that the government sort of did it knowingly and willingly. with this article, it attacks that assumption and says it was

not done intentionally and the guns that got away was because of lax gun laws or prosecutorial influence or what have you, and the author of the article in "fortune" magazine appeared on cnn earlier today. listen. >> there is a sense that the justice department immediately wanted to deal with the potential political repercussions without necessa necessarily grappling with the substantive question of what actually happened. now i think they would say that they have turned to the inspector general to do a thorough investigation, and they are withholding judgment pending the review. but in fact, i think that anyone watching eric holder testifying would conclude that he believes that guns were walked. >> so what do you make of that? well, it would not be the first time of course that conventional wisdom in washington turned out to be wrong, but on the other hand, if you really read between

the lines here, there is certainly a suggestion that a lot of people in washington who had the ability and the information to know the truth either ignored it or went right out there and lied. so a lot of questions raised by the article, candy. >> there are. my sort of initial reaction to that is what do the republicans say to the new claim? >> well, charles grassley who has been one of the spearheading point men, if you will o on this into vestigation on capitol hill and on the senate side from iowa put out a statement today and again questioning the premise of the article saying in part, it asks the reader to believe that the atf drirector and the attorney general and the white house and congress all fell victim to the fabrication or completely misinterpreted or misunderstood the thousands of pagings of documents that corroborate the whistle-blower

allegations. and there is a inspector general report on the fast and furious now under way, so we will probably get at something much closer to the truth somewhere down the road, candy. >> does any of this have any effect on what we expect to happen today which is the contempt citation going on before the house vote? >> frankly, no. it seems that this thing is headed to the floor of the house of representatives, and the rule now being debated there even as we speak. probably around 5:00 eastern time was the last projection i heard. it does appear that it is going to go to the full house for the first time in history and sitting attorney general found in contempt of the congress in all likelihood. we are told that there are going to be some members of congress likely members of the congressional black caucus and perhaps others who walked out, but it appears that the republicans who are putting this on the floor have the vote tok is seed with it, candy. >> it does. as i recall the republicans

walked out during the bush era when a couple of folks were going to be cited in contempt of congress when the democrats were in control, so it is not new, but how big is the walk-out? do they vote before it and then walk out or not going to vote? >> that is what it sounds like. i don't know whether they are not going to vote or not, but it is pretty clear that at some point they are going to walk out in protest. nancy pelosi, the democratic leader on the house side also talked about this earlier today. you know, essentially using various words to describe it as outrageous and said she is certainly going to be there long enough f enough for the vote. the other thing to point out two products coming from the floor of the house of representatives and swun a civil contempt to essentially allow congress to go into court to sue over this matter, and the other is a criminal contempt which is going nowhe nowhere, because you have basically refer this issue to

the united states attorney's office for the district of columbia, who happens to be an employee of eric holder. >> joe johns following an important story for us which is whether in the first time of history the house will vote to hold an attorney general in contempt of congress. we will take a quick break and be right back. it's very important to understand

how math and science kind of makes the world work. in high school, i had a physics teacher by the name of mr. davies. he made physics more than theoretical, he made it real for me. we built a guitar, we did things with electronics and mother boards. that's where the interest in engineering came from. so now, as an engineer, i have a career that speaks to that passion. thank you, mr. davies. the u.s. supreme court upholds the sweeping health care reform law championed by president obama. the president says it is a victory not necessarily for him, but for the country. jessica yellin joins us live. jessica, tell us how the obama camp is framing this at the

white house and at the re-elect center. >> well, you hear the helicopter behind me, and the president is p prepairing now to take off first of all, candy, to visit wounded veterans at walter reed naval center. >> jessica, i hate to do this to you, but john boehner, the speaker of the house is u on capitol hill talking and we want to go to that and then be back with you. >> health insurance coverage has become too expensive for people in the country. the number one concern of small business owners and americans is the cost of health care act. the republican health care proposal will lower costs. and women make 80% of the health care decisions for the members of the family, and our health care reform will make sure that doctors and families make health care decisions and not bureaucrats here in washington. >> good afternoon, if for nothing else, today's health

care decision underscores the importance of this election. the people of america will have a choice the make in november, and clearly, it is a choice that will bear upon the direction of the country as far as the health care is concerned. the decision today shows that we have clearly entered an age where washington, the government, will be controlling health care unless something changes. most americans still like the health care they have, and the president has continued to say that his law will allow folks to keep the health care they like, but what we have seen is that is just not the case. obama care will preclude people from having the health care they would like. we have seen this law increase costs, and we are committed to changing that. we are committed to making sure that we can return to

patient-based health care in this country, where we can keep the costs low, and we can increase access. that's why when we return on july 9th, i have scheduled a total repeal of the health care law, and so that way we can clear the way to again try to focus on accomplishing a health care future that is premised on the patient-centered care, lowering cost and affording better access. >> today's decision by the supreme court did nothing to end the debate on health care in america. it only ep hannhanced. the decision -- you are listening to the house republican leadership, and mike mccarthy, and before that eric cantor and before that john

boehner. jessica, there is an echo in here, because we have passed this way before and both parties using the supreme court decision to jump off are back in place where they were two years ago arguing the arguments. >> that is right. i talked to republicans today who said this is still trying to spin it as a victory for them, because it at least puts the issue back in front of voters who consider this is a polarizing debate, and so now they will have a chance to continue to hammer away at the issue. and now, some republicans are insistent that they will focus on what is now quote a tax which is unpop ular. i can tell you, candy, have i talking points that the that various components of the democratic party have sent around to the surrogates, and people who speak for the president on tv shows and some of the things they are telling them to emphasize is that the obama health care plan included the largest health care tax cut in history.

they want to emphasize that there is a tax cut in it. if republicans argue that this health care law raises taxes then romney also raised taxes when he was a governor, because he also passed a mandate. you will see a huge debate over the tax issue, and the democrats including the president, because you heard it earlier how some of the more popular provisions within the health care bill expanding health insurance to kid kids under 26, and preventative care for free, and things like that, candy. >> thank you, jessica. i want to see if the massachusetts governor deval patrick got those talking points, because he is here now. and obviously, governor, you are a strong supporter of barack obama. you are in boston. >> how are you, candy. >> thank you for doing this. what i want to know is what is the argument now and as you say the political argument? what does the president have to

do and say out there, and how do you see the republicans pushing back? put on your analyst hat for a moment. >> well, candy, this is a real vick tory for people first and foremost and not just political reasons, and not mainly for political reasons, because it is true. here in massachusetts for the last six years using a model just like national health care reform, the affordable health care act we have reached 99.8% of children and 98% of the overall population with insurance, and we are healthier by any measure, and the cost of health care has come down on a per capita basis and not busted the budget. more employers are offering health insurance than ever before and the list of horrors that governor romney has talked about today and the congressional republicans have talked about were not reality here in massachusetts where we have tried that. those are important points to

make for the american public. >> sure. and the states are very different from the federal government, because it is a much, you know, there are many demographics that change a one-size-fits-all law which is what governor romney or former governor romney is arguing now. you are hearing him say that the initial reaction is that just becauseconstitutional and it is not meaning it is great law and from day one he will repeal it which is a slight exaggeration, because he can't repeal it alone. and what do you feel that putting in the romney care in massachusetts that you now praise, and what is your reaction toer haing him talking about undoing obama care. >> it is extraordinary to me that governor romney essentially tried to separate himself from something that has done so much good for so many people here at home. and it doesn't sound like to me that our leader is speaking when i hear it. frankly, i get the sense that if

national health care reform were polling differently, governor romney's expressions of support or opposition would be very different. the fact is that -- >> well, he is not polling all that well. what do you make of that? if it has -- and it does have wonderful things in it that people tend to like, and it does not poll that well? >> i know. it is a phenomenal that i have noticed here at home, and our own health care reform polls very, very strong, and somewhere 60% to 70% favorable, and national health care reform here in massachusetts polls about 50-50 and they are the same thing. so i think that this is a great opportunity for the president and his team and all responsible leaders to talk about all of the good components in the bill and the fact that 30 million people who had no insurance will have it, and the fact that medication and procedures will go down, and health care for small businesses

will be more affordable, and young people can stay on their parents' health care. >> well, allel of tho of those were true before the supreme court decision, and all of those things that you are mentioning as democrats look at it positive thing, but the democrats have not been out campaigning on it, so they must also believe it is not all that popular? >> well, i am agreeing with you. i believe that frankly, everybody has been a little squishy in how they have stepped up and talked about this, because folks were concerned whether the law will endure a constitutional challenge, and it has. that part is over. and what the court did and it is a victory for the constitutional system is look, this is not about whether you like it this way of dealing with a national challenge, but the question is whether the congress had the power to try to solve the problem this way. and the court has said that the congress had that power. now, let's get on with the

implementati implementation, and more to the point, bring the benefits to everyday families and everyday individuals. >> massachusetts governor deval patrick, thank you for your time today. >> thank you, candy. thanks for having me. >> we have to take a quick break, but on the other side fredricka whitfield has been out and about in georgia getting some reaction on the ground. ♪ [ male announcer ] for our families... our neighbors... and our communities... america's beverage companies

have created a wide range of new choices. developing smaller portion sizes and more low- & no-calorie beverages... adding clear calorie labels so you know exactly what you're choosing... and in schools, replacing full-calorie soft drinks with lower-calorie options. with more choices and fewer calories, america's beverage companies are delivering.

the supreme court decision to uphold obama care will impact all americans in how they get medicine and receive health care. grady hospital is one of the busiest hospitals in the united states, and we talked to the ceo. >> two of our local counties holton and dekalb county in atlanta support us in offset tig the cost of care, but it does not cover the cost and it does not cover the cost for all of the ininsured patients so now that the folks have a payment source, we will have payment for providing the services to the patient. >> i want to bring in fredricka whitfield and she is still outside of grady hospital, and we heard from the ceo, but what other reaction are you getting as you talk to people? >> well, while the president was talking about the 30 million americans who will by 2014 have access to affordable health

care, i talked to a number of parents outside of grady memorial hospital which is the state's largest safety net hospital which means it provides care to uninsured and underinsured patients, and i talked to the patients and mixed reviews about the supreme court ruling. >> i don't think it is the law should dictate whether you should have insurance or should not have insurance. >> but you wish you had insurance. >> i do wish i had insurance right now. >> and what is standing in the way of that is? >> the affordability of not being able to pay for the insurance without a job right now is basically the problem i have. >> i don't think it should be a penalty, but i feel like it should offer a mandate health care to the people who can't afford health care, because we have people who come into the hospital everyday that don't have insurance, but then turn around and they have to pay this high cost when they come out of

the hospital. >> i don't feel like it is constitution constitutional, and we should all have the right to make that determination ourselves and for those who cannot afford health care and they have a family and they are unemployed and what are the consequences if they are unable to provide that source to for their family? >> and you notice, candy, regardleregard l regardless of the ruling 2 of the 3 patients i talked to uninsured still have questions about the effectiveness of the mandate and the believability of whether affordable health care will be indeed made available in their state. now, this hospital has incurred and continues to inkcur million of dollars in expenses as a result of the 40% of the patients who are uninsured or underinsured and that is why fund raising is still going to be vital to keep it up and running. lisa borders is the president of the grady health towndatiofoundd lisa, how might this act reduce the operating cost of the hospital in two years when it is

an individual mandate enforced when it means that everyone must have health insurance, some sort of affordable insurance in order to kopt to come to a hospital such as yours? >> certainly. fredricka, the only way that works in the state of georgia is if the state expands the medicare coverage. if it finances health care the way that the law provides. so if this state steps up, increases the amount that it pays and how it pays, it will work. otherwise, we are in the same situation that we are in today. >> who do you see as the winners in this equation? this supreme court ruling -- is it the patients who are the winners, because affordable health care as spelled out will be made available or the institutions such as yours that continue to incur rising health care costs? >> well, the primary beneficiary is always the patient. because those who do not have health care run the risk of coming to us in crisis. rather than annual exam, they

have a heart attack or stroke, and it is $2 million versus $200, so if we can prevent that, everybody wins. >> thank you, lisa borders. thank you, fredricka whitfield so much. guess what, we have dr. sanjay gupta in our version of the waiting room, and he is going to take your questions next. it isn't just your annual exam. it's your daughter's wedding. did you know with your health insurance you may now have some preventive benefits with no co-pays or out-of-pocket costs? it isn't just your cholesterol screening. it's all the tomorrows you're looking forward to. learn more at healthcare.gov.

i tell mike what i can spend. i do my best to make that work. we're driving safely. and sue saved money on brakes. now that's personal pricing. we want to know how you are reacting to the supreme court ruling upholding the health care law. our chief medical correspondent

dr. sanjay gupta is taking your questions through twitter and e-mail and everywhere. we want to get right to you. this is from deli in ohio who says i'm a diabetic who has been recently laid off from work. my cobra payment is $550 a month, and which is more than half of her unemployment. i am worried if i don't find a new job soon, i'm going to have to drop the cobra, because i need to pay her other bills. will i be able to get another plan even though i have a pre-existing condition? so the question is can you get on another plan even with pre-existing diabetes? >> well, not away, because some tof the plans will kick in 2014. in the interim she may qualify depending upon her overall health condition which is a high

risk pool. and it is people who are unable to get health care insurance and in 2014, they will no longer be discriminated against, but between now and then she may join one of the high risk pools under the affordable health care act. she said something interesting here that the health care premium is half of what she is taking in. and that is obviously a significant chunk. everyone has to have health care insurance, candy, but for the people who can't aftford it, there are two mechanisms that are going to sort of kick in. swun a fran -- one is a frank tax credit which is 100 to 400% poverty, but someone like this particular viewer, if she is making less than $14,000 a year, which is what it sounds like, because she says that $500 is half of the income per months, and that is less than $14,000. she could qualify for medicaid. medicaid is being expanded under the affordable health care act as well, so that is her best bet, but again, some of it kicks

in about a year and a half from now, but in the interim, she will qualify for a high risk pool. >> the medicaid does not kick in for another year and half, the expansion? >> yes. >> one from twitter, sanjay. this is level. >> one from twitter, sanjay. this is from noma2300. "i am one of the people getting a 39% rate increase -- aca put a stop to this." is it true that the law will now prevent insurance companies from hiking up prices for people who are sick. is that in place yet? >> i think the best a way to characterize it is that this person, this particular viewer, whatever their health conditions may be, will be treated no differently than anybody else sort of in their community, whether they're healthy or not. rate increases, premium increases may still happen. we've seen them over the last year, even, while this law was in effect. and come 2014, you may still see premium increases for all sorts

of different reasons. but i think the point is, a 39% increase, obviously, is a much higher than the average increase. so someone, regardless of their pre-existing health conditions, regardless of any illness that they may have, their increases should be no different than other people in their community. >> sanjay gupta, thanks for sticking with us today. appreciate it. >> you got it. how is the stock market reacting to the supreme court's decision to uphold the affordable care act? we're going live to the new york stock exchange. these people, huh? you know i've found that anger is the enemy of instruction. you don't know the egos that i have to deal with. you're probably right. thank you! whoever you are. i'm pretty sure that was phil jackson. he's quite famous... million championships... triangle offense innovator... [ male announcer ] the audi a8. named best large luxury sedan. nice wheels zen master. thank you...todd. ♪ ♪ i hear you...

♪ rocky mountain high ♪ rocky, rocky mountain high ♪ ♪ all my exes live in texas ♪ ♪ born on the bayou [ female announcer ] the perfect song for everywhere can be downloaded almost anywhere. ♪ i'm back, back in the new york groove ♪ [ male announcer ] the nation's largest 4g network. covering 2,000 more 4g cities and towns than verizon. rethink possible.

a quick review course now on the affordable care act, which has been upheld by the supreme court. first, it requires people to have health insurance. it will not let insurance companies deny pre-existing conditions. insurance companies can't charge sick people higher premiums. and they can't drop people who become sick. insurance companies cannot set lifetime limits on insurance and no co-pays on preventative care. it includes subsidies for millions of people to help them buy insurance and a state level plan comparison exchanges. employers with more than 50 employees have to provide insurance. young adults up to 26 can stay on their parents' plan. the prescription drug doughnut hole will be filled. and there are tax credits for individuals and small businesses. the country has been waiting all week for the supreme court decision on health care. wall street is no different.

industries directly impacted by the health care law are making some huge moves today. alison kosik is at the new york stock exchange. alison, who's up? >> all right. so hospital shares, candy, they are climbing across the board. and the reason why you're seeing that because what's going to happen is once this really goes into effect, the hospital groups are really going to have more customers, more people are going to be forced to buy insurance, who wouldn't have otherwise bought insurance. so that will bring extra money, coming in for these hospitals. and the people who visit these hospitals will actually be able to pay their bills, their hospital bills, when they get care. so today we are watching shares of, let's say, community health systems and hhca, they're up. and health care providers are also up. the reason why, about 1,500 people are more likely to be shifted into medicaid. also, states are going to be getting tax credits for the incoming medicaid recipients. so we are watching shares of

amerigroup and molina, they're up 6.5%. experts said many big health care companies wanted to see the law upheld, because they'd worked so hard to actually adapt to it. candy? >> alison, who are the losers today? >> we're definitely seeing insurance companies losing ground, that's despite an influx of new members who are going to be paying premiums, meaning more money for the insurance companies. but the reason why investors aren't buying into insurance companies today is because it's the insurance companies that are also going to be forced to ensure those riskier patients. so what it amounts to is that costs are going to go up. so we're watching shares of wellpoint, losing 7%. united health, cigna, and aetna, they're all down as well. now, many of these companies are also heavily exposed to medicaid. health care reform actually cut their medicare reimbursements. and what it also did was institute a situation where these insurers have spend more of their premium money on actual medical claims. candy? >> alison kosik on wall street for us, thank you very much.

>> sure. coming up, more reaction to the supreme court's big decision today on your health care. people with a machine.

what ? customers didn't like it. so why do banks do it ? hello ? hello ?! if your bank doesn't let you talk to a real person 24/7, you need an ally. hello ? ally bank. no nonsense. just people sense.

we're getting reaction from the medical community to the landmark decision by the supreme court, upholding president obama's health care law. the american medical association, the ama, had this to say. "we are pleased that this decision means millions of americans can look forward to the coverage they need to get healthy and stay healthy."

and the american cancer society had this to say. "the ruling is a victory for people with cancer and their families nationwide, who for decades have been denied health coverage, charged far more than they can afford for life-saving care, and forced to spend their life savings on necessary treatment, simply because they have a pre-existing condition." big thumbs up wit, at least fro that part of the medical community. that's it for us. "cnn newsroom" continues right now with brooke baldwin. >> candy, thank you so much. hello to all of you. i'm brooke baldwin. what a day. a huge day of news and a lot happening live during this hour. first, this historic ruling from the united states supreme court today. the health care law championed by president obama is deemed constitutional. and this is really widely seen as the biggest supreme court decision in more than a decade. it could be a defining moment in the campaign for president, as with we look toward november. we're going to have the political back and forth from president obama and the presumptive republican nominee here, mitt romney. both of them spoke today. but i want to get straight to the nation's highest court, to

kate balduan, who's been covering this, really, since it broke this morning, and kate, i want to break down the vote here in just a moment. but first, just the nuts and bolts. how did they rule? >> this was a 5-4 split decision, as our viewers and you well know. this was a bombshell case, a very complex opinion and a very interesting journey in getting there. essentially, the chief justice in writing the opinion for the majority, chief justice john roberts, in the first part of the opinion, he says that under the commerce claw, which was a lot of where the argument was, and what a lot of people kind of based their reasoning for the individual mandate that we've talked so much about, and the first part of the opinion says, under the commerce claw, brooke, the individual mandate is actually unconstitutional. but later on, a surprise to many court watchers when the chief justice says that the individual mandate can be upheld and is constitutional under the taxing clause. and as you read through the opinion, it appears that the chief justice himself was alone in that reasoning.

i want to read this key quote to you that really explains it all for you. the chief justice writes, "the federal government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance. the mandate would therefore be unconstitutional if read as a command." he's talk about the commerce clause there. he goes on to say, "the federal government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance. the mandate is therefore constitutional because it can reasonably be read as a tax." very interesting, a very complex ruling. but as we now know, the chief justice was joined to form the majority in their opinion. the dissenting justices, though, made very clear they supported throwing out the law in its entirety, invalidating the law, but we now know where it stands today. >> and quickly to underscore your point, this is the huge surprise today. we had talked, on the cover of "time" magazine, the decider was justice kennedy, in fact, it was the chief justice appointed by a republican president who in fact leaned more towards the liberal-leaning justices on this

one. >> reporter: this is also a surprise, when you look at the vote breakdown. so it was a 5-4 ruling, as we said. the chief justice was joined by the four more liberal-leaning justices on the court, justice ginsberg, breyer, sotomayor, and kagan. on the other side, many people call the traditional swing vote justice kennedy, joined with the other more conservative-leaning justices, scalia, thomas, and alito. so the vote breakdown in and of itself was a surprise for many watching this today. but as we say, the ruling here is final, but as we can tell from the reaction and the conversation s in the political realm and the fallout, what happens after today is far from over. >> kate balduan, appreciate it. no doubt that the bombshell here out of this morning's supreme court ruling is that chief justice john roberts supported the constitutionality of really the crux of this legislation, the individual mandate. but the chief justice might have tipped his hand during the oral arguments back in march.

we did some digging and guess what we have found? a little exchange between chief justice roberts and the attorney representing the national federation of independent business. and in it, you can hear roberts seems to scoff at the idea that the mandate is not a tax. take a listen. >> the whole point of the suit is to prevent the collection of bounties. >> of taxes, mr. chief justice. >> el, prevent the collection of taxes. but the idea that the mandate is something separate, whether you want to call it a penalty or a tax, just doesn't seem to make much sense. >> it's entirely separate. and let me explain to you why -- >> it's a command. the mandate is a command. now, if there's nothing behind the command, a sort of, what happens if you don't follow the mandate, and the answer is nothing, it seems very artificial to separate the punishment from the crime. >> well, i'm not sure the answer is nothing. congress then separated out

mandate exceptions from penalty exceptions. it defined one category of people not subject to the mandate. one would think those are the category of people as to whom congress is saying, you need not follow this law. it then defined a separate category of people, not subject to the penalty, but subject to the mandate. i don't know what that could mean, other than -- >> well, why would you have a requirement that is completely toothless? you know, buy insurance or else. or else what? or else nothing. >> huh. cnn senior legal analyst, jeffrey toobin is here. jeffrey, i remember you and i talking back in march, and you said, you have to pay very close attention to the questions back and forth here, because it could foreshadow this ultimate ruling, and it kind of did. >> it did. but i don't want to claim that i knew this was coming. >> you don't know everything? >> believe me, no, this is quite apparent that i don't know everything. chief justice roberts, during

the oral argument, at times was more sympathetic to the government's argument than justice kennedy, who was thought to be the swing vote. it is -- but it is also true that chief justice roberts said a lot of very critical things about the government's argument during the argument back in march. it is -- it is surprising. i mean, look, we can -- it's always easy to say, we knew it all along. but the fact that roberts turned out to be the swing vote rather than kennedy, and kennedy wrote this very stirring, almost angry dissent. so his vote was obviously quite locked in stone. and it was really roberts who was the only one in play. >> okay, no monday morning quarterbacking. i'm going to look ahead, because i know our viewers are integritintegrit intelligent. they've heard it now, the individual mandate not constitutional, but okay to tax. so how does this work? come 2014 when americans must buy health insurance, do i pay

an insurance company? if i opt out, that's a tax? who takes my tax? walk me through that. >> believe me, there will be a lot of implementation instructions. but it actually seems pretty clear. there will be a box, actually, chief justice roberts said this in court today. there's going to be a box on your 1040. do you have health insurance or do you not? if you do, end of story. you don't have to pay anything. if you don't have health insurance and you don't fit certain narrow exceptions, you have to pay a penalty. but it really is that simple. most people, this will have no impact on. because most of us get our health insurance through our jobs. >> but if we don't -- >> well, if they don't, they are the people that the law is aimed at. those people will either have to buy it on their own, or if they can't afford it, they'll get some subsidy for some portion of that insurance. those are the people this law is

directed at, and those are the people that will either have to get health insurance or pay this penalty. >> and we'll talk dollars and cents. we have this whole graph prepared in a couple of minutes from now in terms of what you will be paying, if you are taxed, if you on the out. but, jeff, how does the government enforce this? >> the same way they enforce the tax laws, that you have to pay your taxes. there is some question about whether there could be criminal penalties. there does not appear to be a criminal sanction if you don't pay the health insurance penalty. but the government can come after you, just like, you know, anyone who has had painful exchange with the irs. if they think you owe more taxes than you do -- >> they're going to find you. >> you get audited and send you letters and it can get very ugly. that will also apply to this payment penalty if you don't have health insurance. but you can always avoid this by simply just getting the health insurance. >> and check the box saying, yep, i paid.

i just wanted to explain to our viewers saying, how exactly this will work come 2014. final question, bigger picture question, and as i ask you, i want to show this poll. we found this poll in terms of how americans approve, how they disapprove of the supreme court and how they're doing their job. you see that 50% approve. so not exactly stellar, stellar numbers. an effort for perhaps chief justice roberts to appeal to more americans? maybe appear more conciliatory? what do you think? >> you know, one of the great things about the supreme court is they are insulated from these public pressures. and certainly, the justices know that they are public figures and they want to be respected. but the reason they have life tenure, the reason they don't stand for the polls, stand at elections is that they are supposed to enforce the constitution, regardless of whether it's popular or not. >> that's their job. >> a lot of democrats were very angry after bush v. gore. a lot of democrats were angry after citizens united. a lot of democrats are happy

about this decision. that's generally how it's been over the course of the history of the supreme court. if you like the decisions, you like the court. >> okay. jeff toobin, thank you. i know, you know, you've written the book "the nine," but i want to tell our viewers, this quick note about what it really takes to be a justice on the supreme court. the constitution has no qualifications on who can be a justice, which means to fill a seat on the highest court in the land, you don't have to be a lawyer and you can be any age. the reaction to this historic news, obviously, it's pouring in, including from two men who want your vote in november. make no mistake, president obama just scored a huge victory with today's health care ruling. but the republicans say this isn't over. we're going to hear from both sides. i'm brooke baldwin. the news is now. forget calling your doctor about how this ruling impacts you. cnn's sanjay gupta answers your questions live. plus, some hospitals and

doctors are offering a discount if you pay in cash. i'll speak with someone who says the industry's biggest problem is that we just accept the price. and for the first time in history, possibly during this show, an attorney general could be held in contempt. we're monitoring the fight on capitol hill. all energy development comes with some risk, but proven technologies allow natural gas producers to supply affordable, cleaner energy, while protecting our environment. across america, these technologies protect air - by monitoring air quality and reducing emissions... ...protect water - through conservation and self-contained recycling systems... ... and protect land - by reducing our footprint and respecting wildlife. america's natural gas... domestic, abundant, clean energy to power our lives... that's smarter power today.

[ creaking ] [ male announcer ] trophies and awards lift you up. but they can also hold you back. unless you ask, what's next? [ zapping ] [ clang ] this is the next level of performance. the next level of innovation. the next rx. the all-new f sport. this is the pursuit of perfection.

all right. make no mistake about it. today's supreme court decision is a major victory for the president that many political watchers say will help his chances for another victory re-election come november. but the president's first response to his win today in the

nation's highest court wasn't about the politics, but the people. >> in doing so, they've reaffirmed a fundamental principle. that here in america, in the wealthiest nation on earth, no illness or accident should lead to any family's financial ruin. i know there will be a lot of discussion today about the politics of all this, about who won and who lost. that's how these things tend to be viewed here in washington. but that discussion completely misses the point. whatever the politics, today's decision was a victory for people all over this country. >> well, now to the president's rival in november, mitt romney, emphasized that the one thing that came out of today's ruling, the justices have interpreted one part of the president's health care reform, the individual mandate, as a tax. >> let's make clear that we understand what the course did and did not do. what the court did today was say that obama care does not violate the constitution. what they did not do was say

that obama care is good law or that it's good policy. obama care was bad policy yesterday, it's bad policy today. obama care was bad law yesterday, it's bad law today. let me tell you why i say that. obama care raises taxes on the american people by approximately $500 billion. >> let's go to national political correspondent jim acosta, following mitt romney today. and really, his reaction is repeal, repeal, repeal. >> that's right, brooke. and it's funny that you played that quote, because i went back and looked at mitt romney's speech and what he said there just outside the capital. he used the term "obama care" 18 times during those remarks. and those remarks only lasted about five minutes. so i think what the romney campaign has decided to do here is realize while, yes, this is a legal victory for the president and history does remember the winners, they do know that the polling shows that the

president's law is still unpopular. and the president acknowledged that in his remarks just after mitt romney spoke. so the romney campaign will continue to go after how they feel that this law is unpopular. one thing we heard from mitt romney today, he basically said, look, i am the last exit on the obama care highway. what the supreme court did not do today, i will do in my first day of office. so what he's saying to voters right now is, look, if you want this law gone, i'm your last chance. >> and couldn't this, jim, be perceived as a victory for team romney, because it could galvanize conservatives to get them out of november. you know -- >> oh, it does. >> -- get obama out of office. >> that's right. one of the things that the romney campaign was doing all morning long. and by the way, they were very hush/hush about this event they had right outside the capital. but once they confirmed and once they got their messaging going, they were starting to put out on twitter the #fullrepeal. not just the people inside the

romney campaign, but the rnc. they were both sort of coordinated in that messaging response. the other thing they were tweeting out to everybody, brooke, and it was hard not to catch this, is the fact that they were fund-raising. basically, they were seeing a bounce in the fund-raising after the ruling came down. andrea sol, the spokeswoman for the romney campaign has been tweeting that out all day long, and the last time she tweeted this out, she said that they were over $1 million, that they had raised today just since the ruling came down. so, yes, this is galvanizing republicans, it is uniting republicans behind mitt romney, and it's sort of the ultimate irony. because the democrats were going out and even some republicans pointed this out during the campaign. mitt romney is the father, many of them say, of obama care, and now he's the last guy that can stop it, according to the romney campaign. brooke? >> jim acosta, thank. big day in washington. because, also, let me tell you, at this hour, a huge debate over the fast and furious scandal. lawmakers speaking out as to

whether or not attorney general eric holder should be held in contempt of congress, which would be the very first time in history for an attorney general. a vote is expected live during this show. stay right here. stiffness from psoriatic arthritis hit, even the smallest things became difficult. i finally understood what serious joint pain is like. i talked to my rheumatologist and he prescribed enbrel. enbrel can help relieve pain, stiffness, and stop joint damage. because enbrel, etanercept, suppresses your immune system, it may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, and nervous system and blood disorders have occurred. before starting enbrel, your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if, while on enbrel, you experience persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. [ phil ] get back to the things that matter most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biolog medicine

prescribed by rheumatologists.

the supreme court's health care ruling today, not the only big news coming out of washington this hour. the house of representatives expected to vote any moment here on contempt of congress charges against attorney general eric holder. republicans held hearings, they pushed for this, really, it's an unprecedented vote, after the white house refused to turn over documents on the fast and furious weapons crackdown. so today's vote caps off a long feud between these two sparring side. i want to go to capitol hill, to joe johns. and so, joe, if i'm hearing this correctly, we could get a vote

on these charges some time in the course of the next two hours. what are we looking at? >> reporter: well, the house republican leadership moving forward with this over the bitter objections of democrats. the house democratic leader nancy pelosi just a little while ago saying here at the capital that this makes a witch hunt look like a day at the beach. democrat heath shuler saying, this is the kind of thing -- this is the reason why he's stepping down from the united states congress. an ever-growing number of democrats threatened to walk out at some point on this vote. first, it was the congressional black caucus. we're also hearing about members of the asian pacific caucus, members of the hispanic caucus. members of the progressive caucus. all talking about walking out at some point, though many are being encouraged to at least get a vote in on this criminal contempt citation that's coming up on the house floor. really an uproar here on capitol hill, brooke. >> so if those different groups

walk out, then what? do they still hold a vote? and secondarily, explain to me the difference here. i know they're going to be voting on civil contempt and criminal con tempt. what's the difference? >> reporter: republicans have the ability to pass this thing, if they want to. they're also expecting to get some votes from certain democrats who come from districts that are impacted by the national rifle association. that could be 20 or 30 democrats joining the republicans in all likelihood to be able to push a contempt citation over the finish line, if you will. now, the question about civil versus criminal. a criminal contempt citation cites the attorney general for civil contempt of congress. that's an employee of the attorney general, eric holder. the speculation there that if it follows past precedent, that

referral really doesn't go anywhere. the other thing, the civil contempt essentially empowers the congress and the oversight committee to go into civil court and to sue for the release of certain documents. that, of course, is probably a more promising route for them. nonetheless, they still, potentially, have big problems, and it could certainly take months and months to be resolved. so, a very tough row to hoe, either way they go, after they leave the house floor today, brooke. >> okay, so let's say they vote yes in terms of civil contempt. it does go into the courtroom, however many months down the line. we know the president used his executive privilege here. does that not supersede either outcome of either vote? >> reporter: that's a question a judge would be asked to answer, whether the president made appropriate use of his executive privilege in this case. and i've certainly heard it

argued both ways, but that is part of what a judge would be asked to decide, if there isn't some negotiated solution before that, and there still could be. >> okay. and for months, cnn and other news organizations, even the department of justice themselves, they have referred to fast and furious as this the botched operation, but there is this new, dare i say, explosive investigation, really, by "fortune" magazine, saying that is not the case. tell me about these new claims. >> all right, right. the central premise of this story in "fortune" magazine that's really making the rounds here on capitol hill is we've been led to believe over the months and months that this gun running operation called fast and furious was done so that guns were intentionally trafficked. well, this article suggests there was no intent. that the only reason guns may have gotten somewhere they weren't supposed to go was because of lax gun laws or because of prosecutorial interference or politics or other factors.

so, it's a fascinating article, and interviews with certain atf agents who were on the ground in operation fast and furious. of course, the problem is, if you believe that, then you also have to believe that the justice department, even the white house and a bunch of people here on capitol hill either lied or ignored the truth, because presumably, they would have had much more information coming to them, that's been circulated generally. so bottom line on this, we will get an answer that's much closer to the truth. that is called an investigation by the inspector general of the justice department, looking into all of this. and when that report comes out, that will probably the closest version of the truth for all of us. >> we will look for that truth and we will also be looking for these votes there in the house. joe johns, we'll follow it right along with you. thank you, sir, from capitol hill. the supreme court's decision on health care is an historic ruling today, both on the law

and on paper. more than 1,000 pages. >> reporter: as you can see, this is very thick and we're reading through it. it's very legally dense. going right back to it to find out about the rest of it. >> i haven't had a chance to sit down with my protractor and magic 8 ball to figure that out. because you have to go section by section. that's going to be a while before we figure that out. >> reporter: then we get into even more complicated language on the spending clause. >> okay. so a lot of pieces of paper. sanjay's got some paper as well. i know sanjay read there this legislation. we have questions, you have questions. dr. sanjay gupta is standing by and he's going to answer your questions live. [ male announcer ] eligible for medicare? that's a good thing,

but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp,

an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you.

president obama today called this health care decision a, quote, victory, for people all over this country. so i want to go to the people, get your questions, and by the looks of it, they have a lot of them. chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta has been fielding them, and sanjay, my friend, take it away. >> well, we've been getting lots of questions, brooke, as you're mentioning, getting questions from people out there in the field, also coming in on social media. i believe we have a couple of questions, i'm going to check here, but if not, we'll go to twitter. jaleel, can you hear me? >> go to twitter, sanjay. >> we have a couple of twitter questions. i've been getting them all morning long. i have this one here, specifically, it's from someone who says they had knee replacement surgery early because they didn't want the government deciding they were too hold, and they were specifically asking questions about these, what they call the death panels with, the death

squads, specifically, brooke. you remember that conversation from several months ago. first of all, a couple of points about this. he says he got his knee surgery early. you know, the conversations about getting an operation are obviously always between patient and doctor and hopefully a doctor would give a patient an operation at the time that they needed it. but what i think he's specifically asking about was this provision in the original bill that said that people would have conversations who are in medicaid recipients would have conversations with their doctors about end-of-life care, like how they wanted to be treated around the end of life. and that's what sort of started this entire death panels discussion. saying, is this going to be a panel to basically decide who lives and who dies? that particular provision is no longer as part of this law. although it was really mainly just counseling of people near the end of life. what there is is something known as the independent payment advisory board. so this is a board that basically gets together and decides exactly how much certain

procedures will be reimbursed under medicaid. so if you're getting a knee replacement like this particular gentleman did, how much would doctors be reimbursed for that. that's something that really happens already. medicare already decides these things, but what the law specifically is talking about is a board now that's going to convene doctors from different specialties and determine exactly how much reimbursement for various different procedures. >> okay. >> i don't know if we have our guests yet. >> let me ask you this one. here's one from a viewer. when will the health care laws provisions actually go into effect? it's not for some time, they ask? >> yeah, that's a good point. because people think there's a big ruling today, so what happens tomorrow? and the reality is that many of the provisions, or at least many of the major ones that we've been talking about don't go into effect until january of 2014. specifically now, this mandate, and again, brooke, what that means is that for everybody who can afford to buy health care

insurance, and they don't have it, they have to buy it now. that's the mandate or face a penalty. if they don't have enough money to purchase it, depending on how much money they earn every year, they may be eligible for tax credits or they may be eligible for medicaid, which is being expanded under this as well. all of that's in january of 2014. the biggest thing, i think for a lot of people, and we get a lot of questions about this specifically, is this idea that people can no longer be discriminated against based on pre-existing conditions. so if you have an illness with, you may have had a hard time getting insurance, you may not have been able to get insurance at all, you may have been denied coverage, you may have been dropped from your policy after becoming ill, that all goes away. it so will be much easier for people who are ill and who need health care insurance to get it, brooke. >> okay. sanjay, thank you. folks, keep the questions rolling in. i have a lot, you can tweet me @brookebcnn or @sanjay.

meanwhile, congressional members are speaking out about today's ruling. >> i'm happy and pleased to see the supreme court rule that the affordable care act is constitutional. sf >> there's only one way to truly fix obama care, only one way. and that's a full repeal. >> this is a green light with an exclamation point. what this says is let's go forward now at full speed. >> this is clearly unconstitutional. there is no basis in the constitution for the government to have this level of history-making expansion of power. >> no shortage of opinions today. we're going to ask one republican senator what he thinks, chief justice john roberts, after he sided with the obama administration. that's next. [ growls ] lucky for me, your friends showed up with this awesome bone. hey! you guys are great. and if you got your home insurance where you got your cut rate car insurance, it might not replace all this. [ electricity crackling ] [ gasping ] so get allstate.

you could save money and be better protected from mayhem like me. [ dennis ] mayhem is everywhere. so get an allstate agent. are you in good hands? [ male announcer ] we began with the rx. ♪ then we turned the page, creating the rx hybrid. ♪ now we've turned the page again with the all-new rx f sport. ♪ this is the next chapter for the rx. this is the next chapter for lexus. this is the pursuit of perfection.

obama care lives. republicans did everything they could to chip away at the law in the two years since it was passed, and many were confident the court would strike down the individual mandate. so for them, today's ruling kind of has to sting. senator roy blunt is one of those republicans who was rooting for obama care to fall. senator, welcome. you lost in 2010 when this law was passed. you lost again today. yet you are still pushing for the repeal of this law. doesn't that make you look kind of like a sore loser? >> well, brooke, i'm having a little bit of a hard time hearing here for some reason -- >> let me try again, senator blunt. >> i always thought there was just three questions that need

to be answered. one, is it a good idea and three, can we afford it. the court answered one of those questions today, but that answers the question, they are the court. and i think the bigger debate goes on to, is it a good idea and can we afford it? and people in the country appear to have decided that it's not a good idea and we can't afford it and it's going to be a big discussion between now and november. >> senator blunt, i want to make sure we're having a two-way conversation. can you hear me now? >> i can barely hear. >> okay. i'm going to speak as loud and clearly as i possibly can. i want to begin with chief justice john roberts, a man appointed by president george w. bush, sided with the liberal-leaning justices on this. does that make you take a step back when you realize that a conservative justice, chief justice, was the swing vote here? >> well, they're going to be a lot of things to look at as we look at this decision. one will be the fact that they told the states, the court did, that you don't have to put the

25 or 26 million people on medicaid -- >> but, sir, i just asked about the chief justice specifically. forgive me for interrupting, but the chief justice specifically, does that make you step back and worry about this supposed, you know, conservative chief justice? >> no, it doesn't. i'm not a lawyer. as i said, there are three issues. you can do lots of things that aren't a good idea that are constitutional. now with we go to the other two questions. i thought it was interesting that the court decided that even though the administration said during the whole debate, this isn't a tax, as soon as they got to court, they said, no, it's a tax. so it's not about interstate commerce, it's about the power to tax. so now we've involved taxing and actually a tax that will be levied on the people that could afford to pay it the least, the people that for whatever reason don't have insurance. there's a lot of this debate still to be had. we're just not going to have the constitutional debate anymore. now we go to, is it a good idea? can we afford it? >> on the affordability, on the dollars and cents that americans will be facing come 2014, you

know, the cbo director does say that because of the size and the scope of this law, certain cost projections, looking ahead, it's impossible to really tell right now. so isn't it misleading for your republican colleagues to cry financial doom over this today? >> well, we know for sure that they're going to -- that they intended to cut $500 billion from medicare to fund this new program, so you could have the whole "could we afford it" debate on that one issue alone. why would you take a program that's about to have significant financial challenges anyway and use it as a big pay-for for a new government takeover of more of the health care plan? this debate now really gets started. the constitutional thing, while narrowly decided, is set aside. and now we get to, do you think this is a good idea? aren't there better things to do to make the health care system work better? and my side of this debate is, let's repeal this and let's start over again and try to produce a system where people

get more competition to provide services to them and they and their doctors make decisions, not some regulating board out of some far-away place. >> i know mitt romney said, day one, if he is elected, he used the same word, he will repeal obama care. you are romney's congressional liaison. his campaign says it raised $1 million since the ruling. i want to just listen to some of romney's comments on this. >> as you might imagine, i zbroo disagree with the supreme court's decision and i agree with the dissent. what the court did not do on its last day in session, i will do on my first day if elected president of the united states. and that is, i will act to repeal obama care. >> you yourself said, you know, the law is the law. now that the nation's highest court has ruled this is constitutional. doesn't it hurt romney's rhetoric in the long run? >> oh, no. i think we can constantly look at laws that have been passed,

particularly laws that haven't gone into effect fully yet, and still ask that question, is americans should have the right to do at every election, is this really what we want to do, or is this really what we want to keep doing? and like it or not, this will now be a big issue. two-thirds of the people in the country say they'd rather see this law not go into effect, and they have a chance on election day to express that opinion plus others they'll have about jobs and the economy. >> i believe some of the polling was around 50%, not exactly pleased with the law, but some of that, some 13% was more, this wasn't liberal enough. so i think it kind of depends on what numbers you're looking at. i do want to end on this. i want to read something you said on monday. "i could get in lots of trouble in the currently environment saying i think we should have more compromise. but what i've said about this is what i believe -- compromise is the price for living in a democracy." compromise, senator. will more of your republican colleagues have to learn the meaning of compromise after

today? >> well, i think that understanding that in a democracy, it's always the choice between the perfect and the possible, it's a choice between the possible and not moving forward. this was a case, look at the votes on this, no republican votes in the house, no republican votes in the senate. clearly, there was no effort to compromise and find bipartisan solutions on this or you would have found them, after the senate, after the democrats lost the 60th vote in the senate, they would have gone back and said, okay, we can't pass the bill we wanted to pass anymore. let's really be sure we carefully craft a bill. and we'll see what the american people think. i think i know what their answer is to the last two questions. is it a good idea? can we afford it? i think we're going to say no, no, let's see if we can't do a better job. >> we'll see. senator roy blunt, i appreciate you live in washington for me. next hour, we're going to be talking with the house democratic whip, steny hoyer. he'll join me at 3:45. don't misthat.

♪ how are things on the west coast? ♪ ♪ i hear you...

♪ rocky mountain high ♪ rocky, rocky mountain high ♪ ♪ all my exes live in texas ♪ ♪ born on the bayou [ female announcer ] the perfect song for everywhere can be downloaded almost anywhere. ♪ i'm back, back in the new york groove ♪ [ male announcer ] the nation's largest 4g network. covering 2,000 more 4g cities and towns than verizon. rethink possible.

i tell mike what i can spend. i do my best to make that work. we're driving safely. and sue saved money on brakes. now that's personal pricing. in addition to the surprise ruling on health care today, a surprise swing vote and it comes from the unlikely chief justice. >> strike it down! >> reporter: it was the latest twist of many surrounding the affordable care act. a close 5-4 vote of the supreme court justices with the majority voting to uphold a cornerstone of obama's presidency. the surprising swing vote, no,

not justice anthony kennedy, but chief justice john roberts, something of a surprise considering roberts' history and reputation. a conservative justice, he was nominated to the court by president george w. bush in 2005, confirmed by the u.s. senate, but then democratic senator barack obama voted against that nomination. but when it came to obama's signature legislation, chief justice roberts sided with the majority. those regarded as the court's four liberal justices, yes, roberts agreed with his fellow conservative justices, including kennedy, that under the commerce clause, the individual mandate would be unconstitutional. but he argued that it was constitutional and justified as a tax and ultimately it was the roberts' court, roberts' swing vote, that handed a democratic president his landmark victory. >> earlier today -- >> so you go to your doctor, your sent in for a test, your

insurance pays. but then you find out if you had paid in cash, it could have cost you much less. wait until you hear this. te cer? oh, you're good! hey, did you know that honey nut cheerios is... oh you too! ooh, hey america's favorite cereal is... honey nut cheerios ok then off to iceland!

i'm going to let you in on a little secret in the health care business. most people don't know this, but it can save you a lot of money, especially if you don't have health insurance or if your insurance has a huge deductible. a lot of doctors and hospitals actually offer big discounts if

you pay them up-front in cash. and the savings, we've done some calculating, it can be huge. take a look at this. this is from an article in the "los angeles times." so, for example, the list price for an abdominal cat scan, more than 4,400. the discount one big insurance company negotiated with the hospital, you see, brings it down to $2,400. then the "l.a. times" called the hospital, they asked for a cash price, look at this -- look at this compared to the initial price. $250 in cash. teri savage writes about money for "the chicago sun-times." teri, i want to get the ins and the outs here and the big gotcha of these cash discounts. but before we do, have to ask you about today's big supreme court ruling, upholding obama care. what's it mean for everyone's wallets come 2014? >> it's going to be very interesting to see, each state will set up an insurance exchange and will have five or six different plans mandates so

everyone gets a basic plan and you can buy the higher end plan and that will be determined in 2014, as you said. in the meantime, you've added 30 million people to the insurance rolls. if they can't pay for these plans, then the federal government will subsidize them, based on their income, or fine them if they don't have a plan -- or tax them, i should say. but the fact is, that's going to mean so many more people on the insurance rolls. what happens to the prices of services? because that's what the story you just gave is all about and what the impact of this new law will be. when you have insurance, you just go to your doctor and he says, well, you need this test. and you say, well, it's covered by my insurance, isn't it? oh, yeah. okay, well, fine, where do i go? well, people that don't have insurance or have very high deductible plans, who want to be insured for catastrophic instances, but don't want full insurance, those people are starting to ask. it's no surprise there are

different prices for the same services. think about a car. >> power to the patient, right? >> pardon me? >> it's really the power to the patient to ask. >> right, if your incentive is to ask because it's your money. if you go into an all dealer, you don't pay the sticker price. you do some research and get the lowest price or go to the place where you get the lowest price. >> come 2014 everyone has to buy insurance, how do you, you know, finagle the best deal? >> well, these insurance -- well, you know, you can online to an insurance exchange that exists today if you don't have individual health insurance. you can go to ehealthinsurance.com, put in your state, where you live, you will be present with lots of different options, high deductibles wi deductibles, low co-pays, and that will be set up by 2014 so you'll be able to pick a plan that works for you, and if you can't afford it with, the

government will subsidize it. you know, today's ruling, everyone knows someone who has an ill child or has a pre-existing condition, women who get divorced or lose their jobs before they qualify for medicare, all those people need insurance. so this whole obama care thing so attractive. but just like when we had mortgage subsidies through freddie and fannie or student loan subsidies through fannie mae back then, and the benefits seem so great until you have to pay for it. and without incentives to control health care costs, without people checking around to get prices, and you should do that, without that, costs are going to spiral out of control and one day we're going to have some kind of rationing or government decision making about who gets what. that's the great fear here. not that this isn't a great idea, but where are the costs going to be taken care of. >> to find your best deal in terms of insurance,

ehealthinsurance.com. we made a graphic, if you check the pbox and opt out, saying, nope, i'm not buying health insurance, there is a penalty. from 2014, the penalty will be $285 per family or 1% of income, whichever is greater. fast forward two years, it goes up to $2,085 per family or 2.5% of that income. let me move on to this, though. in terms of wangling a deal with your doctor, why can't i ask for a deal and then submit it to my insurance company? >> you can't do that. what you're going to see in the future about paying cash to your doctor is something that's happening now called concierge medicine. if you're in your 60s, listen up to this. you want a younger doctor. by the time you go on medicare,

and your doctor, part of this is being paid in cuts by medicaid reimbursement to doctors and hospitals. so one day doctors are going to say, either i can't make enough money, i'm retiring, or i'm not taking new medicare patients. so have a relationship with a younger doctor so when you get older and get on medicaid, the doctor won't give you up. many doctors are saying, pay me $1,500 or $2,500 to cover my basic costs before i will even accept you as a patient. that's a kind of rationing we don't want, rationing care who can most afford to get the best doctors by paying a side fee. but it happens in england and in canada. you have a government-controlled health care system and doctors don't make enough and there isn't enough reimbursement for hospitals, and right away, you have -- we have problems distributing health care. so that does lead to rationing or people not getting the care, because doctors won't take them. >> that is so important that people get the care they need, get the care they deserve. teri savage with the "chicago sun-times," teri, thank you.

the network morning anchor leaves the show with a tearful good-bye. ann considurry in her own words today. plus, just in. surprising news about iran, its oil, and punishments from america.

the promise from the united states that it will take action against any country that continues to buy large amounts of oil from iran doesn't pertain to china.

a source in the office of democratic senator robert menendez tells cnn the obama administration will exempt china and singapore from those sanctions. those sanctions are set to go into effect today. after a flurry of rumors all week long, ann curry tearfully announced this morning she is stepping away from her anchor position on the "today" show. >> this is not easy to say, but today is going to be my last morning as a regular co-host of "today." i will still be part of the "today" show family, but i will have a new title and a new role. but this is not as i expected to ever leave this couch after 15 years, but i am so grateful, especially to all of you who watch. >> can we just say, it's not good-bye, not by a long shot. we'll continue to put you on planes, maybe ask you to jump out of one or two in the near future, and you'll be with us at the olympics, which we're looking forward to. but most importantly, you've made us better, and we thank you from the bottom of our hearts. >> thank you so much. thank you. thank yoso