let's shift to the politics of policy. joining us is mick mulvaney. we know you have been making your rounds and it's an important discussion. what is your take on the cbo scoring? >> good morning from washington, and according to the cbo it's sunny and 75 degrees this morning. i had to, it's too easy. what we saw is what we expected to see. you used damage control so much and that's not right. the cbo is terrible in counting coverage. 14 million people will lose care in year one, and let's go quickly to what happens in year one. the mandate goes away. that's it. none of the new policies kick in, and that means the cbo is telling you that somebody on the day after the republican plan

goes into affect will drop off of medicaid they are getting for free and replace it with nothing. the cbo is assuming once the mandate is gone you will give up your free medicaid and have nothing. the cbo doesn't do a very good job -- >> that seems to asaousume they would intentionally make mistakes, and they are clear the amount of time and unknowns built into this would create vague analyses, and they are transparent about going into it. according to politico you had your own estimate when you were getting ready for the cbo and it was more than what the cbo came up with in terms of how many people would be uninsured? >> somebody mentioned that on

the drive over here through the snow, and thanks for mentioning it. the office of management and budget when i know fairly well, we admit we don't know how to count coverage. if there is a cbo report that has coverage in it, the only thing we would have been able to use as base data was the cbo, and we simply don't have the ability to do that. >> so politico says that they looked at a document on monday, in which you had your own internal analysis, and the pushback they got was this was not an analysis of the bill it's just omb trying to project what cbo was going to predict using their methodology. >> i don't know if the document exists because i have not seen it, and if it exists you just confirmed what i said, which is we don't have the ability to do

it independently at omb, and if there's a document it would have used the cbo numbers because they are the only ones around and we think they are deeply flawed. so you can't put too much credit on that document. >> i get it, and let's unpack that for a second. we use the it's a little tortured logically, but you are the head of omb. do you know whether or not this document exists because it's supposedly an omb document that was reviewed by political, because sean spicer is saying it's false and not real. is that true, is there no such document? >> two things. you said it's tortured logic. it's sound logic if what you are trying to do is see what the cbo is coming out with it.

>> i get you want to anticipate what they are doing, but it's a little tortured in terms of doing it. >> go to your second point about the political story which i just found out about this morning, i don't know if there's an omb document or not, and i have not seen one and did not ask for one to be done, and it's previous there was one done under the previous administration, and all i know is omb knows we don't count coverage. >> how with the previous administration have done an analysis about a plan they didn't know about yet? >> they did, and back in january -- >> you mean in january, not back during the obama administration? you are saying -- >> there was a cbo report out in january that scored repeal with no replace. and it showed 20 pimillion peop uncovered and so forth, and nobody was offering a bill, and it may be that document is the foundation of the document you mentioned. >> i am just saying as the head of omb you are a good guy to

ask, and sean spicer says it's fake, and you are a good guy to ask because politico has it up on its website right now. >> we heard republican after republican say it's hard to sell something to the american people that includes many millions not getting insurance. do you agree with that and how do you address it? >> the democrats did it for years. the democrats sold obamacare for years even though it didn't provide people with coverage -- excuse me, health care. this is really what counts. one of the reasons i guess they ask me to do these shows, i was on obamacare, and as a member of the house i was on obamacare, and my premiums were between $12,000 and 15,000, and that was the exact same program as many millions that made a lot less than i did, and obamacare gave them a card that said they had insurance but they could not go

to the doctor because they could not afford to pay for the services, and the democrats were concerned about coverage, and you still couldn't afford to go to the doctor. that's what we are trying to fix. i have news for you, that's something we can sell. >> the question becomes whom are you fixing it for, right. there are pockets of people that it seems by your projections are going to wind up doing better here, and that's an absolute in any health care scenario, but if you take money out of the system, especially in medicaid whether it's phased in over several years or right away, those who don't have means and don't benefit from a health care savings account they are not going to have better ability to get coverage they are going to have less ability, and isn't that something you have to own? >> that's the way we looked at health care in this country for so long because the government has been so involved in our health care, and everything else you have on your person today, your phone, watch, whatever, is

a of a higher quality and cheaper cost than years ago, and why can't we get medicare like that, and we can, and we can do it through the way the republicans are proposing now by giving states more control. when i was in the state legislature we used to beg the federal government to give us more control over the medicaid dollars because we could do it more efficiently, and this bill gives the states the chance to do that so it's entirely consistent to say the quality care can go up and the cost can go down because it happens in every part of our economy. >> so can you say today, as a guarantee to the american people, don't worry, if you are getting your care through medicaid and one of the states with the expansion, or you are one of the elderly who are at a certain price point, the cbo is wrong, you are not going to lose your coverage? >> we're not pulling the rug out

from anybody. you heard us say that again and again and again. the bill is specifically tailored to do that, and anybody else who had an insurance card under obamacare, and they looked at the deductible and they couldn't go to the doctor, i can say this will be better. >> even those elderly, when they have the $14,000 deductible? >> again, they have programs now that they can't get to the doctor with. you are talking about coverage, and i many talking about care, and that's the fundamental disconnect here, but folks will be available -- capable of going to the doctor again. >> one last question, and different topic. you have a second? >> sure. >> the white house has -- >> i am sitting here in a room all by myself and talking to a camera. >> you are making the rounds and i appreciate it. and the cutting budgets for u.n., and the dramatic cuts

which include a 37% or about $20 billion in a cut of funding for the state department and the u.s. agency for international development, as you know it is met with resistance by the men and women who have to keep america safe, and they say it's not the kind of priority to cut abroad because it may increase our military involvement because of the lack of diplomatic and programmatic involvement. are you worried about that? >> a couple different things. i think the numbers have you seen are not accurate. we will be rolling out the final version of our budget on thursday and have a chance to talk about that in more detail if you would like, but let's be perfectly clear about what the budget does. it takes the policies donald trump laid out on the campaign trail and turns them into numbers. that's it. what did he say on the campaign trail? i will spend more money in defense and the border and enforcing laws on the books and i am going to spend less money

giving money to folks overseas, and that's what the budget is, and that will become the main question. >> when you figure out the final number, you make the case on how it's going to affect american