who needs "esquire" when there's "esquirrel"? jeanne moos, cnn, new york. >> leave it to jeanne. thanks very much. i'm wolf blitzer in "the situation room." up next, lou dobbs tonight. lou? >> thank you. good evening, everybody, the white house is insisting tonight it's not sending mixed messages over the president's health care plan after days of shifting policy and language, the obama administration now says a government-run public option remains the cornerstone of the president's plan. the fight over the so-called public option has exposed obviously a deep rift within the president's party in congress. house democrats tonight are actually threatening to kill the legislation all together if there is no government option, and with all of the talk over health care and health care legislation, no one seems focused on the more than 30 million americans without a job. tonight, we will be focusing on

them, and the reasons for the high unemployment in this country, and the lack of a public policy solution. our special new segment on this show begins tonight, "jobs now! ". good evening, the obama administration today trying to end what has become an uproar that it caused over the president's health care plans. the president's spokesman, robert gibbs, insists the white house is not sending mixed messages on the issue of government-run health insurance, but the latest verbal maneuvering did nothing to end the backlash that the president is now feeling from even his most loyal supporters in congress. ed henry with our report. >> reporter: white house spokesman robert gibbs repeatedly said nothing has changed.

a public option is still the president's preferred choice. >> so when you say a public option is now the president's preferred choice, has been, is his preferred choice? >> i'm not saying that now. i said that repeatedly, the president has said that repeatedly. >> so is the public option an essential part of health reform? >> i think the president answered that on saturday. >> reporter: actually on saturday the president suggested the public option may no longer be his preferred or essential choice. >> all i'm saying is though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform. this is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it. >> reporter: the bottom line? gibbs now says the president prefers the public option, but it will not be a deal-breaker if it's dropped, which is different than earlier this summer, when the president didn't add that caveat. >> so, the public option is not your enemy. it is your friend, i believe. >> reporter: addressing the american medical association in june, the president made it seem

like a public option was not just his preference, it was essential. >> i believe one of these options needs to be a public option that will give people a broader range of choices and inject competition into the health care market, so that we can force wastes out of the system, and keep the insurance companies honest. >> reporter: mr. obama was just as adamant last month. >> that's why any plan i sign must include an insurance exchange, a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, costs, and track records of a variety of plans, including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest. >> now why all the dancing around on this one point? because the president is caught between conservative democrats in the senate, who suggest they can't support a bill that does have a public option in it, and liberal house democrats who say they can't support a bill that does not have a public option.

he's trying to navigate that right now, trying to show a little flexibility but it doesn't make his position entirely clear, lou. >> it does make it, as you reported here tonight, difficult to follow what the white house is thinking. and we have right now no score on the public option. we have no congressional budget office statement as to the exact cost of this. i mean, we are dealing with what is, well if the president were to have had his way a late stage of a national debate. others would suggest that it hasn't begun, but whatever, this is a vaporous, unshaped plan that is causing great consternation not only to critics of the opposition of the president but obviously to the president and his administration itself. >> reporter: well as you say we're pretty late in this debate and we still, as of this moment, this evening, do not have a "obama plan." instead, there have been principles that have been laid out, some of those at least the

emphasis of those principles have shifted as you can see over the last couple of months but they have shied away from having a specific plan, perhaps learning ace lesson from bill clinton in '93-'94, who had too detail of a plan. some critics say maybe they went too far in not putting any plan on the table, instead many different plans by democrats on the hill. it's amorphous and hard for the public to follow and it's unclear how much any of this costs or how it will work because there's no specific plan yet. it's still very amorphous. >> and by the way as one who covered the health security act of 1993 and these proceedings, i will say i think whatever failings the clinton plan had, it certainly was not a lack of detail, it may have been complexity, but there is no comparison between what this administration is putting forward, at least because there is no detail, and there is no complexity. there is very little initiative

here behind the public option or the overall idea of reform. thank you very much. appreciate it. outstanding reporting, ed henry, from the white house. public opposition to the president's health care proposal is just one of the factors that is hurting his approval ratings. six months ago, when president obama first submitted his budget to congress, and asked for $600 billion for health care overhaul, he enjoyed what was then a 65% approval rating. today's gallup poll shows the president with a 52% approval rating. the number of people who say now they disapprove has doubled to 42%. more than 60,000 members of aarp have quit that organization over the group's support of so-called health care reform or overhaul, and aarp spokesman tells us they aren't surprised. he said it's not uncommon for large numbers of their members

to quit when the organization takes a position on a controversial issue. the aarp, however, has not officially taken a position, but does support so-called health care reform. aarp will be with us here tomorrow to join in a face-off debate on proposed health care plans. democrats today continuing their attacks on those who express opposition to the president's plans. congressman jerry nadler blasted americans who go to town hall meetings to air their viewses on the issues. he told the "huffing post," it is fascist, it is a fascist tactic. it's exactly what they did in weimar, germany, it is a fascist tactic not to disagree with you, or to say you are an idiot or whatever, but to shut you up." nadler's office says the congress wasn't calling the protesters fascists, he met

their tactics were fascists. co-ops are non-profit member-run groups usually on the local level. critics say the co-op isn't a practical option on the national level. dana bash has our report. >> i'm going to give you within of my cards. >> reporter: for dr. eric seiver, giving out his card is a more efficient card to health care. >> i do 150 e-mails a month with a patient. it saves them having to give them the card to come over here. >> reporter: the doctor says he can take time to e-mail patients because he's paid a flat salary, not per office visit and uses electronic records to collaborate with colleagues. >> we have primary care, specialty care, pharmacy, physical therapy, all of the home care, all of those services, and we are able to communicate and coordinate our care. >> reporter: this is group health, a cooperative in washington state, which supporters of a co-op approach to health care call a model.

group health is a not-for-profit health plan governed by its consumers, patients. its 11-member board is elected by co-op members. the co-op covers 600,000 people. a central question, will this co-op in washington state work nationwide? a key senate supporter says experts tell him yes. >> they think there would be 12 million members in very short order that it would become the third harnlargest insurer in th country and provide competition. >> reporter: do you believe that? >> no. >> reporter: why not? >> i can't imagine how that would happen. >> reporter: this health care expert says it would be tough to convince enough patients to enroll and enough doctors to participate. >> for all of the things that you'd have to do to start up an insurance company, are not the kind of things that just a group of people getting together at the diner on saturday morning and saying let's start a co-op can do. you just don't see it happening. >> reporter: what about another central goal, providing competition to insurance

companies that leads to lower costs? again, skepticism. >> i think it's going to be very unlikely that a co-op will get better rates out of providers than a commercial insured. >> reporter: back at the group health co-op they say streamline systems have led to reduced costs. the reality is it has taken 60 years for this co-op to build success. when it comes to policy and the politics of health care it's hard to imagine there would be patients to wait a couple of years, much less 60 for co-ops to get up and running nationally and be successful. in terms of cost to the taxpayer, that is, right now senate negotiators are talking about providing about $6 billion of seed money for co-ops but many experts think it would take a lot more than that. lou? >> so what's the answer? i'm just kidding. >> which question? >> i love the idea that this whole issue is being discussed as if it were to simple that it could be co-ops, a

government-run option, absolutely free enterprise entities, for-profit entities when there has been no public debate no, public discussion of the facts, the context, the environment, which are integral to whatever solution is provided. this has been one of the most remarkable moments in american history in the discussion of public policy, because there are so few facts, so little understanding of all that is involved, the environment, if you will, of the issue and its ultimate prescriptions for resolution. >> surely, as somebody who was standing outside of the negotiations that were going on before congress left for recess for basically months, and talking to senators coming out, we knew that this was on the table, that the public option in the senate was off in terms of these negotiators and they were talking about co-ops but right before they left, just trying to get some details about how this would be structured, you know, how this would be fashioned, it was hard to get and that's because even though they've been talking for months about it,

they don't really have a lot of details yet. they're still working it out and that just goes to show how tough this is, but also what a long road they have ahead, especially on this issue. >> you're sure they were working, right? all right. >> that's what they say. >> dana, thanks a lot, dana bash from washington. up next, democrats in full revolt over the president's health care plan, at least some of them and the growing likelihood there will be no legislation at all this year. also lessons on state-run health care. tonight, we visit communist china. a system, by the way, that's sort of leaning towards private enterprise, but it is so corrupt, it would make almost anyone sick. and we introduce our new segment of special reports tonight, "jobs now." what is actually being done by this president, this congress, to begin to help millions, tens of millions of unemployed americans find work? why is no one paying attention? we are, next. (announcer) take your time to find the right time

with cialis for daily use... a clinically proven, low-dose tablet for erectile dysfunction you take every day so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. tell your doctor about your medical condition and all medications and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. don't drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache,

upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long term injury seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. (announcer) 36-hour cialis. or cialis for daily use. ask your doctor about cialis today, so when the moment is right, you can be ready.

tonight we're beginning a new series of special reports that we call "jobs now!" we'll be reporting each evening on what, if anything, our representatives in washington are doing to create quality jobs in this country. it is an issue that's being overlooked by the white house, the congress, the chamber of commer commerce, the business roundtable, almost every, every institution required to be involved and engaged in the creation of jobs. small business in this country creates more than two-thirds of all new jobs, but some small business owners say the federal economic stimulus package has done little to help them hire new workers. lisa sylvester has our report. >> reporter: president obama made a pledge, 3 to 4 million jobs created or saved by the end of next year. that goal seemingly a stretch

when you consider that the economy is still hemorrhaging jobs. 2.2 million jobs have been lost, since congress approved the $787 billion stimulus plan earlier this year. to find out why, you have to look at what's going on with small businesses. small businesses account for two-thirds of all new jobs created in the country, and those who advocate on behalf of small businesses say times are tough. >> i think it's two real problems. one is lost profits, which means business is just still slow, they don't have customers coming in the door, they have people buying less supplies, they have less contracts to sell and the other problem is uncertainty. >> reporter: a common complaint? small businesses feel they were left out of the stimulus package, less than $1 billion out of the $787 billion stimulus package was specifically earmarked for the small business administration, and adding to the economic uncertainty, health care reform. many small business owners say health care costs must be

lowered, but small business owners like jim henderson, who runs a missouri construction and industrial supply firm, are leery of new mandates that require employers to pay more for their employee's health coverage. >> i think any time you say you want to help small businesses but then you institute mandates that are, of course, unfunded, that eats up our revenue stream you're not helping small business. you're not freeing them up to be the economic engine to pull us out of recession. >> reporter: health care proponents point out those with payrolls of $500,000 or less would be exempt from the mandate. other businesses would qualify for tax credits. still, the national federation of independent businesses estimates that health care legislation could have the unintended consequence of a net job loss of a million more jobs. and the group says if small businesses have expensive, new mandates to spend more on health coverage, they may be forced to

not hire new workers or to let some of them go, and that would make it that much more likely that it will reach the president's goal of significant job growth by next year. >> significant job growth, the president, this administration bragging about having created or saved 150,000 jobs under that economic stimulus effort, lisa. when we look, as you report, $1 billion specifically earmarked, actually less than that for small business. how in the world is small business going to react, how is -- where is the chamber of commerce, the business roundtable, because effectively what has happened to this point with all of the focus on so-called health care reform, and a number of other issues, 30 million americans without work, and they've only put $100 billion into the $14 trillion economy of stimulus, that's half of the money they put into aig alone. >> yes, it is a remarkable

thing, because when you look at recessions and you look at history, it's the small businesses that are in the engine of growth. you want to create jobs. you got to do more for the small businesses but somehow that message has been lost. the u.s. chamber of commerce, they are for big business, oftentimes small businesses their needs, their wants and desires are forgotten in exchange for what the big businesses want in this country, and they have this real problem, which is a real problem for our country, and it's reflected in that 2.2 million jobs that have been lost since the stimulus package passed. >> well, we're going to be focusing on jobs and the creation of jobs in this country, because of the importance of the issue obviously, with more than 30 million americans feeling that pain, and lisa, we thank you very much, outstanding report. lisa sylvester from washington. well our economy is actually losing more than 400,000 jobs a month so far this year, and since this recession began, in december of 2007, our economy has lost more than 6.5 million

jobs. the pain has been widespread. it has been profound. every county in the country has been hard-hit. take a look at this. the areas of the country experiencing the highest foreclosure rates and the most populated areas of the country, the darkest areas on the map, by the way, looking at unemployment and ten double-digit unemployment rates, florida, michigan, nevada, california, suffering some of the worst job losses, unemployment has roughly tripled in construction and maintenance jobs but what hasn't been reported is almost half of those jobs lost are white collar jobs, and this is very likely the first time since the great depression that that's occurred. roughly 1.7 million management jobs lost, some 1.3 million sales and office jobs have been lost. economists estimate the loss of those 6.5 million jobs since december of 2007 have cost the

economy $1.3 trillion in lost income, which is almost as much as the cost of the president's health care proposal, which the congressional budget office put at $1.5 trillion over ten years, and if there were to be, in fact, the discussion about 46 million to 47 million uninsured, most estimates put that somewhere between eight and at the outside 30 million. that would be $50,000 in this health care reform initiative, $50,000 cost per person uninsured over the next ten years. coming up next, we continue our reporting on health care systems, public health care systems across the world. tonight, we report on health care, in communist china, and you won't believe what you're about to see. also tonight, it's democrat against democrat, the partly deeply divided over health care legislation, the topic of one of our face-off debates here

tonight. and hurricane bill gaining strength in the atlantic, headed west. winds already over 100 miles an hour, a lot more straight ahead, stay with us. introducing the all new chevy equinox. with an epa estimated 32 miles per gallon. and up to 600 miles between fill ups. it's the most fuel efficient crossover on the highway. better than honda cr-v, toyota rav4 and even the ford escape hybrid. the all new chevy equinox.

♪ strength on its own can be impressive. when consistency is added, that's when it becomes real. ♪ at northwestern mutual, we've been able to deliver real strength... for over 150 years. northwestern mutual. consistency counts. put our strength to work for you. learn how at northwesternmutual.com.

tonight we're continuing our coverage of the health care systems being used in countries all around the world, and tonight we're going to report on the quality of care in communist china. we thought it would be interesting, given all of the discussion that surrounds and the focus and the interest in china, even though it is not a developed nation, to focus on what passes for health care in the nation's most, in the world's most populous nation. consumer section in china, the words almost don't go together, do they, but it hasn't been widely measured as you might expect. one 2009 study reporting the public satisfaction with china's health care system is low. the system is rife with corruption. life expectly is 73 years. china is struggling to reform its public health care system. we thought we might learn something just by looking in on them. kitty pilgrim with our report. >> reporter: for a chinese

citizen, get sick and you will also likely get fleeced. chinese public hospitals and clinics charge patients as much as they can, in out-of-pocket fees. william chau studied the system for 20 years. >> it's like a cash machine on the backs of the patients, trying to generate as much revenue as they can for the hospital, and that's divided up between the hospital and the physicians and other staff in the hospital. they try to do as much as they can, order the most expensive drugs, overprescribe drugs order more tests than necessary, keep the patients in there longer, so they can generate this revenue. >> reporter: nine out of ten chinese have some kind of government-run health insurance, but it doesn't cover much, at least 60% of health care expenses are still paid out-of-pocket. the quality of care is uneven, many doctors don't have the sort of training required in western

countries. according to drew tmpson, director of china studies at the nixon center. >> only about a third of medical practitioners who are called doctors have a four-year degree. that means two-third have essentially community college-type, two-year education or just a high school education or something technical training. a lot of guys wearing white coats but i wouldn't want my family to see them. >> reporter: public dissatisfaction has led to violence. a 2008 study by the chinese ministry of health that recorded 9,800 attacks on doctors in hospitals, resulting in $26 million in damages. nay chang, a nation health care expert agrees there is conflict over health care. >> basically, the patient/doctor relations is pretty tense, and i think that you know, it can be explained by the fact that the out-of-pocket spend something very, very high, and people are

just desperate. they're driven to desperation. >> reporter: the government spends 4.5% of gdp on health care, compared to 16% in the united states, but china is spending $125 billion over the next three years on new hospitals and providing far greater access to health care, especially in rural areas. now under recently-announced reforms, the chinese government says it wants to cover 90% of the population with significant health care insurance over the next two years. china's also trying to move away from the current payment system, but the government is meeting resistance from the doctors and the hospitals that benefit from the fee structure as it stands now. lou? >> i have to say most people are surprised at your report, expecting perhaps quite a different result, when we talk about communist china, compare it to cuba's medical system, it's a health care system which is absolutely stellar. >> it is kind of a surprise.

you expect a paternalistic sort of communist system and it's anything but. >> all right, i'm not sure what we're going to learn from that or from some of the others, but it's a fascinating glimpse into what other people are thinking and doing and perhaps it will be ultimately cumulatively important in our debate and discussion on health care legislation in this country, should it ever actually come to legislation. thank you kitty pilgrim. we continue our coverage of health care systems all around the world. tomorrow we focus on the health care system in sweden, one of the world's most advanced. later this week, greece and iceland. up next, hurricane bill is strengthening in the atlantic. forecasters say it could become a major hurricane. it is already a hurricane. also where do republicans in congress stand on the issue of health care? public or competitive or private or what are they doing? are they working on solutions or are they angry people who want to kill any bill at all costs?

or are we talking about the protesters or the democrats or the republicans? what's going on? is this any way to conduct a public debate? and democrats themselves divided over the president's health care proposals, will the so-called public option, will it be a deal-breaker? will it still be an option? our face-off debate is next.

the disagreement among democrats, it's really, it's a fight among democrats over the so-called public option in the president's health care plan, and it's created a division within the party, a deep division, and it is the subject of our face-off debate tonight. joining me will marshall, who is the president of the progressive policy institute, who says the public option was never central to the health care plan, and should not be an obstacle to health care reform, and bob borsage, codirector of the campaign for america's future, who says there is no health care reform without a public health insurance plan. good to have you both with us. let's begin with the issue that

started this division, if i may, gentlemen. let's listen in. >> all i'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform. this is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it. and by the way, the' both -- >> well marshall sounds like the president there agrees with you. does he? >> i think the president has kept the public option in the right perspective, lou. he said it's important, he'd like to get it but he has never said that it's the crux of health care reform and he's defined repeatedly what he thinks are the key elements of a successful reform package and that's never been the center of it. others in the democratic party have elevated the public hopgs to a much higher place in their thinks, and they're not happy with them because they think he's ready to --

>> bob, doesn't sound like -- respond to that, is will talking about you? >> well, i think take the president. the president's always been consistent, i think. he's always said he is for a public option. he's argued for it. he's made the case for it and he's always said that he's prepared to negotiate every part of the health care deal as long as you came out with a plan that worked, and it's pretty hard to imagine how you come out with a plan now that works without a robust public option, so i think that position's pretty consistent. >> what do you think, will? >> well, there's the disagreement. president obama has consistently laid out three broad goals for reform, first, let's make sure that we end the disgrace of 45 million to 57 million americans who don't have coverage and get affordable health care, that's much more important than the question about means, how you get there, and let's not confuse means and ends here. the public option is about the means, not the end. the second obama goal is to bend the curve, to get the medical cost inflation down so that it doesn't wreck our overall

economy and the third is to do this all in a deficit neutral way, add not penny to the staggering budget deficits we're facing. >> bob, do you agree with that analysis of what the president has been consistently about on the issue of health care reform? >> yeah, i think that's true. those are the broad principles and to get affordable health care for this 47 million americans, what he set up is a public option that will give people a choice and also as he says keep the insurance companies honest. you can't get the insurance companies 47 million new customers and not have any controls on prices. they're going to lift those prices pretty high so this particularly in a concentrated insurance market, so the public option is the option that gives you competition, and choice and helps make it affordable. >> what is the public option? >> think about it as medicare, an extension of medicare for basically lower wage working

people and working families that will be in the exchanges to get individualized health care. >> you said good-bye to medicare? >> no, not good-bye, an extension of medicare. >> well, that is one definition, but in fact, there is no public option. it's a kind of a placeholder for something to follow. there is no obama plan, so the president doesn't have a public option plan. he's just said, yes, i can see an argument for this in the broader architecture of health care reform. what i'm trying to say, lou, we shouldn't make a fetish of something that is basically as the president said not essential to the key goals of health care reform, because in the end, this president's got to have room to maneuver, got to have room to force a deal -- >> he's got room to maneuver here. there is no plan. there's nothing you could mark up or score and call it the obama plan, yet we've got poll after poll in the obama plan, it doesn't even exist. >> exactly. >> we've reached to me at least,

it is a surreal sort of solemnistic point in this discussion in which we have new parameters for discussion or debate and for all the world looks to some, i'm sure, as if this president wanted congress to pass, you know, a blank sheet of paper which could be filled in at his whim at some point shortly after signing. what in the world are we doing here? >> no, i don't think so that's true. look, we're going to have a plan that comes out of the house that will include a public option, full financing for the bill t will cover everyone, it will do deep insurance reform that keeps people with their insurance, covers people with pre-existing conditions a lows insurance people to move and has dramatic effects on people and then it will go to the senate and we already have a committee in the senate that's got a bill passed that has a public option in it, so i think we're pretty close to an agreement here.

>> say that again, we've got what in the senate? >> a bill coming out of the house, the senate committee, the health committee. >> we don't even have a bill close to coming out of committee. >> out of the health committee we've got a bill that will pass and that will have a public option in it. >> that will, okay, now you're -- >> i'm saying, we've got about 85% of this solved and we've got an enormous wind at our backs in terms of the public option. we've got a real good shot at having comprehensive health care reform. >> well, will, what do you think? bob feels a tremendous wind at his back. there's no question there's pressure back there. i just don't know if that's wind. >> bob is right, that the president is not jumping prematurely into this action. he's going to let the house and senate do its work and the key point here is the reconciliation. it's the conference committee, that's where all the deals will be cut, that's where this thing will come together or not come together. >> you just articulated the biggest fear on the part of the critics and opponents of this legislation. >> this is the way democracy works. >> excuse me, sorry?

>> this is the way democracy works. >> it's not the way democracy works, it's the way this congress works and others when people choose to make it work that way, but let's be honest, making the legislation in conference committee is exactly what has people right now, more people in the latest gallup poll, more people opposed to this plan than support it. >> we're going into the stretch drive here, we're a long way from finish. what this president needs is not to have people coming at him from his left with nonnegotiable demands, either you put in this public option or we're not going to be with you in the end. what he needs is flexibility, he needs people who will follow his strong leadership which i'm confident we'll get when the congress has done its work and he steps in to help produce the final package. >> bob, are you messing up the president? >> no, i think what we've got is strong support for a public option. the president supports it. we're pushing his plan, and -- >> so will's the problem? >> i don't think you can get a plan out of the house without a public option in it so we've got to find a way to get through

this. >> well, you know, gentlemen, i thank you for being with us and i appreciate you shedding some light on this. it's quite an interesting issue, given that you both obviously feel your perspective is the correct one. we'll see how this unfolds. thank you very much. will marshall, who is the president of the progressive policy student and bob borosage, codirector of the american campaign for the future. >> thank you. lisa sylvester with an update on other important stories we're following tonight. >> hurricane bill is gaining strength in the atlantic tonight. the storm is now a category 2, centered near the leeward islands east of puerto rico. it is heading west with winds of 110 miles per hour. forecasters predict the storm will become a powerful category 3 storm by tomorrow and could even become a category 4. forecasters say bill is not a threat to the united states if it maintains its current course. a date has finally been set

for michael jackson's burial. the entertainer will be buried saturday, august 29th on what would have been his 51st birthday. jackson died union 25th of cardiac arrest. jackson's personal physician, dr. conrad murray, is under investigation for allegedly giving him a powerful drug that may have killed him. the private burial will take place at the forest lawn memorial park in glendale, california. we now know the identity of the artist who created the image portraying president obama as the joker from batman. 20-year-old fa rack al kativ, a college student from chicago used photo shop software to create a new "time" magazine cover with the obama joker image. but al kativ did not add the word "socialism" and did not put up the ost posters that appeared in several cities. he says he was not trying to make a political statement with that artwork. and those are some of the stories we're following tonight.

lou? >> to be clear, he is in point of fact 20 years old, illinois college student. he is supporter of dennis kucinich and apparently, unlike what a number of national news organizations reported, he is neither white nor racist. up next, where are the republicans in the health care debate? >> who is the president negotiating against? i don't see my republican friends in congress saying okay if you make this tweak or this change, we'll come aboard and help with you bipartisan health care reform. they're basically saying no to everything. >> we're going to meet a couple of those folks saying no to everything as he just put it. are those republicans trying to sabotage health care legislation? and where are those republicans? that's the topic of our second "face-off" debate here next. during the lexus golden opportunity sales event, you can do both. special lease offers now available on the 2009 es 350.

well supporters of the president's health care plan are accusing, well, some of them at least, accusing some republicans of attacking the plan without providing real alternatives. so what are republicans doing? are they really engaged in this health care debate or is it simply the party of no? that is the subject of our face-off debate tonight. joining me, ryan ansalam, author of the grand new party and fellow at the new american foundation who says republicans are deemphasizing solutions and it will hurt the party. and ron kristy, former adviser

to president bush, vice president cheney who says republicans have offered solutions but they've been shut out of the process. on cnn's "american morning" this is what congressman anthony weiner had to say, if you would all listen. >> the political question that i'm curious about is who is the president negotiating against? i don't see my republican friends in congress saying if you make this tweak or change we'll come aboard and help with you bipartisan health care reform. that's not happening. they're basically saying no to everything so we might as well get the best possible bill since they're going to be in opposition anyway. >> what do you think of the congressman's analysis, ron? >> i think it's inaccurate. there are a number of republicans in both the house and the senate that have worked very constructively in a bipartisan manner, not just to talk about how to reform health care but introduce legislation and say this is an american problem and it's our elected responsibility as members of the house and senate to come one a solution, let's put our bills in, have the debate and have the discussion but instead what you found is that speaker pelosi and

the majority leader, steny hoyer cut off the debate for the republicans and the same has taken place in the senator. >> your reaction? >> i disagree slightly. when you're looking at republicans like paul ryan and senator bennett from utah, they have come up with good, workable solutions and as ron suggests they haven't pushed the margins of the debate. on the other hand, i also think that republicans are doing something dangerous, capitalizing on the public's status quo bias, their fear of any reform, any change. that will make it harder for republicans in the future the next time there's a republican president or republican congress to make the kind of long-term structural reforms that we need to make for the system so yes, there's some republicans who are reformers doing good work but a lot of others content to see obama's plan fail. >> that's interesting, you're talking long-term structural issues we could address. which of the long-term structural issues has, does the president's initiative address? which are those? >> i think the big one is the cost of medicare over the

long-term and i'm not saying that the president's plan is the ideal solution to the problem but i think he has a couple of constructive ideas, and those are areas where i would like to see republicans acknowledge that while we dislike these parts of the plan we like this, and we want to encourage them on that front. >> so you're saying that they have trillion-dollar reduction in medicare, which has not been officially proposed by the president but seemingly embraced, is a meaningful, long-term solution that you'd like republicans to embrace? is that what you just said? >> well, i don't think that they should embrace his exact approach, but i think if you look at the idea of -- >> i was just going to what you said about structural changes, trying to find out because for the life of me, i've missed any reference to a structural change here, whether, you know, whether it comes out of the house, the senate, the republicans or the democrats. >> there is a big change being proposed that is giving the executive more authority on how medicare should work. >> ah, that is a major change.

>> and for the president to have that power. >> i take your point. ron, have you tried to talk to any -- first of all, where the heck have the republicans gone? they seem to have evaporated. the ones in congress. >> i think it's the annalogy if the tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, did the tree fall. >> i always wanted to get that into some discussion. >> i just did it. i think there's been an obsession with what the president's been doing, there's a lack of attention on what the republicans have been doing. you have the bennett-wyden bill, bennett from utah, joined on 14 cosponsors of the bill. >> i want to hear your description of ron wyden. >> he is a liberal member of the senate from oregon but the definite sill in the details. five republicans on the by, a companion bill introduced by anna eschew. >> how much does it cost?

>> that's deficit neutral over ten years. >> it's been scored by the cbo. >> scored by the cbo and no one wants to talk about it because it's deficit neutral. >> no the president says very clearly, it's the only kind of bill he will sign. >> he's not interested in that because, of course, it doesn't -- >> help us out here. >> well, here's the thing about that proposal, though. that proposal is a proposal that will actually switch us, will move us from an employer-based system to a different system and i think it actually is a proposal that's very admirable in many respects, but i think the problem is when republicans have been arguing against obama-care, they've been focusing on fear, what people will lose. but if we move toward some other system that's going to be more sustainable over the long-term, we're going to have to change what we have. and i think people aren't willing to face up to that. >> and amongst those not facing up to it, is there any possibility that that would include both the democratic and republican parties? >> yeah, i definitely think so. i think that you have

republicans who are willing to capitalize on the short-term politically and you have democrats who are not squaring, they're not telling people exactly what needs to happen to really solve this health care problem. and of course people are cynical about it. >> and of course, republicans really are trying to make the difference, lou, they've been shut out. republicans have an obligation to be part of this debate. >> did you just say the republicans are wonderful human beings at the end of this? >> we are, warm fuzzy people, lou. >> thank you very much, ron, as always, ryan, thank you very much, appreciate it, gentlemen. up next here, another obama administration czar. this one in charge of, well, wants to be, of what you see and you hear on the air. we'll explain all of this in just a moment. it's worth your while. please stay with us. 

a new u.s. intelligence report says venezuela's president hugo chavez is silencing opposition media. chavez recently shut down 32 private radio stations and two regional television channels. chavez said those frequencies would be "given to the people." the government is reviewing another 200 private radio stations. by some estimates chavez now controls six television channels, two national radio networks and more than 800 smaller radio and tv stations all across the country. meanwhile, in the united states, the obama administration has appointed mark lloyd as the new chief "diversity officer" for the federal communications commission. lloyd is best known for authoring a book in which he suggested forcing private broadcasters to subsidize their public competition. he held a similar position in a report he co-authored for the

liberal think tank. he wants commercial radio stations that aren't local or diverse enough to pay penalty. and those fees would total $250 million. how he arrives at what that would amount to is unclear, but that money, should it reach $250 million would then go to public broadcasters. well, i'll have a few thoughts about that and other issues. join me on the radio monday through fridays for "the lou dobbs show" on wor 710 radio in new york, go to loudobbs.com for the local listings in your area. and subscribe to our daily pod cast. on today's broadcast, author brian jennings weighed in on what the president's diversities are could mean to the future of free speech on the air waves. you can hear that entire interview, a lot more subscribing to our podcast at loudobbs.com. and follow me at loudobbsnews@twitter.com. and we continue in one moment. stay with us.

political columnist long time cnn host bob novak died today after a yearlong battle with cancer. he was 78. the conservative novak was a columnist for the "chicago sun times" for more than 25 years. novak was dubbed the prince of darkness, he said the nickname reflected his unsmiling pessimism about western civilization. in 2003, novak was at the center of the valerie plame cia scandal, the first to publish her name. he received harsh criticism for the column. columnist robert novak dead at the age of 78. thanks for beingit