to frame things. >> justice -- >> justice kennedy and chief justice roberts i think were following up on questions they're colleagues asked trying to drill down and make sure that they understood how those questions had been answered. wanting to make sure that they understood them clearly. >> you didn't see it as -- they didn't see that argument? >> no. i didn't think they were saying, think anything about how they asked the question or how they responded to the answers to their questions. indicating that they thought that that was a basis for upholding the individual mandate. i think they were trying to clarify the position of respective argument counsel. >> most americans are forced to buy car insurance, for instance, because it's a public safety issue, and people who are for the health care law say, well, this is no different, because if you don't have health insurance, taxpayers are picking up the tab for those with no health

insurance. 's so how the if different. >> like related to car insurance fwop responses. first it is states and not congress that requires people to buy automotive insurance. andta of course, different than federal power. james madison in federals 45 trying to convince the states to ratify the constitution explained that the powers of the federal government would be few and defined. those reserved for the states, numerous and indefinite. but as for the second point, that deals with car insurance, automotive insurance. you don't have to buy that. as a prerogative of being a living, greenibreathing human bn american soil. you may choose regardless what state you live in not to or not to parurchase a car. his saying of existing on american soil, you must under penalty of life purchase health

insurance. one of the arguments made by michael carvin i thought wasesp you're going to exercise that power through government, the government imposing that power, imposing that requirements needs to have what we call general police powers. states have general police powers. congress does not. >> then we've got to police -- >> okay. i've got to run down here for a second. thank you. >> thanks. >> thank you. and senator mike lee sps of. this is live coverage of the supreme court's arguments onla today was about the individual mandate and tomorrow the court will have two separate oral arguments in the morni the issue is severability, or if it's ruled unconstitutional,

does that mean the entire law is en in the afternoon they'll hear arguments whether the expansion of medicaid under the health care law is an unconstitutional intrusion on states? you can see the full schedule there on your screen. back to the supreme court. we want to continue to show what it's like outside that building right across the street from the u.s. capitol. while we take your calls and sean in claremont, florida, you're on c-span. what are your thoughts xwa. >> i'm so happy i was able to get in. this is my first time calling. i voted for -- in 2008, i ended up voting for president obama. not only did i vote for him, i went around and campaigned for him, signed up registered voters for him, and i'm so disappointed. especially everybody talks about how a number of the republicans, this mandate 20 years ago.

well, president obama in the primy against a mandate. you know, against hillary clinton's plan, because he said, well what are you going to do? force people to buy insurance? i'm so disappointed that, you know, instead of trying to figure out something where he could probably get us on to medicare buy in. he ended up mandate. how is it that nobody's asking, how much is this going to -- why don't they give an example of how much this is actually going to cost a person to let people know that it's going to be ay fordable? like, for instance, citizen y is 46 years old. the insurance is going to cost $100 or so a month for the premium. why aren't they doing this. how much of a subsidy is citizen y going to end up getting?

all they can do is say from the very beginning if you're under 26 you'll be covered under your parents' health insurance. you can't be you know, turned down for presifting conditions and that's all they sended up doing to sell it. so there's a lot of confusion out there, about how much is this really going to cost? i have an aging parent that's elder -- a senior citizen, and, you know, she's been healthy upping in 2011, and you know she was diagnosed with p.a.d. peripheral artery disease and had a number of procedures. >> sean, we have to wrap this up here. go ahead and make your concluding statement, if you wou would. >> caller: yeah. i'm really not for this mandate. >> we got the point. sean from claremont, florida. across the street from the supreme court on the capitol law, the republicans are olding -- republican senators are holding a press conference. so you a little of this.

there's senator jon corn 9:0zin. >> reporter: a board of bureaucrats will decide whether your medical care is worth it, or whether the federal government will simply choose not to pay for it because of the cost analysis of the bureaucrats, it simply isn't worth it. i turn it over to senator hutchison at this point. >> well, thank you. you know, i think that we've seen these early arguments. yesterday especially, where we were arguing, is it a tax or a mandate? and i thought justice roberts certainly said, well, of course, we all know if it's a tax, that that makes congress have the capability to do it. but he basically said, if it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. which means it's a mandate.

it is an unconstitutional mandate that will make this whole law unconstitutional. and i think that when you look at what it's doing, it's telling every business in america that they have to sub describe to a government-run health care plan, or they can't offer the premiums. it's -- it is a mandate that is unsustainable in the constitution, and i think the justices are beginning to get enough information that we hope they will come to the right decision. there's no question that two-thirds of the american people believe this is an encroachment on their freedom, and i hope that we can change it some day by law. but i hope we can start all over and have a good health plan for more access by americans to an insurance that they can afford and that they want.

now, i'll turn it over to senator mark o. rubio from florida. >> thank you tore the opportunity to talk to you for a few minutes. first of all i'm proud that florida took the lead on challenging the constitutionality of this law and hopeful the supreme court will see it as we do. this law violates simple principles particularly in terms of what role the federal government should play. we're hopeful will will turn out on the side of the constitution but we know this about it for sure. obamacare has been a disaster for americans and americans financially and no doubt our country that a health insurance crisis that needs confronted. this is the wrong way to confront it. it undermines and takes away the ability of our economy to grow and prot per. there are thousands of businesses afraid to grow or hire new people because they have impact them. we know for them it's a bad idea. other americans are beginning to lose their existing health care coverage, breaking a promise made by the advocates when they

finding sed this bill. difficulty accessing an existing insuranceplan ten result. we already know how obamacare is coming out a ve tt sets us back the hopes of arriving at a health solution in the united states. i hope i can be a part of an effort to not just vote to repeal obamacare but replace it. replace it with initiatives that embrace the private market, free enterprise, individual choice and at the same time allow us to policy issue we face when it comes to health insurance. [ speaking in foreign language ] [ speaking in foreign language ]

[ speaking in foreign language ] [ speaking in foreign language ] >> and now it's my honor to introduce our attorney general from florida who's done an phenomenal job leading this >> . we are blessed to have senator rubio and so many great members of congress here today to support us and stay here and continue to fight for us. we've been in the courtroom now two feel very confident. we feel very pleased with the questions that the justices have been asking, and as we have said from day one, this is

unconstitutional. this is a government overreach like we have never seen before in our history. and we have got to stop it. and that's why we're here this week and that's why we are in front of the united states supreme court. we feel very confident tomorrow we will hear two days -- another day of argument on the severability issue as well as the medicaid expanse but what we can tell you today, we felt very comfortable with the questions asked and firmly believe this is unconstitutional and as justices said, this would be such an overreach if the federal government can do this, they can force us to do anything.that's this with everything we've got. i'd now like to introduce my colleague, attorney general john bruni from south dakota and the next united states senator. >> thank you. >> well, first of all, i want to say, thank you to my colleague,

pam of florida and greg of texas and alan wilson, south carolina. we have a managing committee of litigation. we started as 13 states. across the country law professorers said -- >> later on c-span you'll be nt conference live. that was being held on the capitol grounds right across the street from the supreme court. you can see some ofaving, and b first street to the supreme court. i want to show you some of the sights and sounds that are happening there as well. as we continue to take your calls. now, the audio transcripts from today's two-hour hearing on the individual mandate should be released in about 40 -- 30 to 40 minutes or so, and we will bring those to you here on c-span as soon as they are released, so you'll be able to watch them in their inteernty. back to your phone calls. george from san antonio, texas, is our next call on our

republican line. hi, george. >> caller: how you doing, sir? >> i'm good. >> caller: fine. yes, i'm very interested in this case. i think it's very vital that all judges take into consideration what the right to americans' open to deciding what kind of insurance you're going to have. some people need health care insurance for chronic diseases. some have acuteitll has to focu type of person and that person should haveid what kind of insurance you have and not the government. some people are poor, some are rich and can't afford high premiums. i'm one of them. they asked me toay for a co-payment for a deductible for a medication i don't need but one time. it's not really fair. we should have the right to choose what kind of insurance we should have, and not let the government decide what insurance we show have and i think the

supreme court is doing a job of upholding the freedom of the american people. thank you, sir. >> larry, a democrat in san diego. larry, you're on c-span. what do you think about the activity outside the court and the issue? >> caller: one thing i don't understand. why do republicans care for the americans? obamacare is for americans. built the biggest airport in iraq, pays for all the iraqi health care. why can't american dos anything for america? we have all of these illegals in our country, and they go to the doctor. when they go, we pay. so let's make everybody pay. now, social security and medicare comes from your check. that's a mandate. so they've got to get over that other thing. as far as the private markets, private market, they want to do the same thing with the post office. so, you know, the republicans are constantly fighting the american people. and they have all of these people from florida.

i mean, look at the laws in florida. the trevor martin caylee anthony. and i think we ought to leave florida and texas alone. theyhut rublicans are killing america. >> and we'll leave it there, larry. a couple of tweets. this is from doug edmans whoseh tech. saying divided health care arguments, great resource including audiofrom day one. yes. at c-span.org/healthcare, will you find a pretty vast resource of health care issues that includes the audiofrom yesterday. it will include the audio from today when released. when he expect that in 20, 30 minutes or po. but it also goes back to 1993, 1994 when health care was an issue in this country as well.

find all of that at c-span.org. next call from bob in cedar rapids, iowa and we move on to paul in haysville, kansas. democrat. hi, paul. >> caller: hi. i'm listening to mike lee talk here just a little ago, and i've heard some of the other republican officials talk about the unelected officials making that for you. we already have that. called insurance executives. seems to me either they're not aware how it works or just don't want to talk about that, but the bigger the risk pool, the cheap are the price. obviously, you can't have all sick people. you've got to guard against condition in an insurance where you have more sick people than well people. or where you have more terrible drivers than good one, in contrast. the other thing is, i keep

hearing, i used to hear from the republicans about responsibility. pay your own way. pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. well, that's what this law does. he eveni you either way your own way or pay a penalty. i certainly don't get the opposition. especially when you look at the heritage foundation website and this was a lot of their idea in the first place. even before romney came up with it. so -- that's my only comment, and i thank you for the air time. >> that was paul in kansas. another tweet. this is from aaron who says at the very least, c-span should televise. we presume he means televising the hearing. if we could we would. the supreme court la not allowed us inside the supreme court with our cameras's interest toingly, earlier this month we took a poll and show you the results. about the supreme court and health care arguments. 95% of those surveyed were

interested in the proceedings. 54 planned to listen to the audio releases of the oral arguments, and 86% believe that the supreme court should have allowed cameras into the court for these oral arguments, and further, 74% think the supreme court should always allow cameras in the courtroom. this was a poll of 1,000 adults taken march 21st and 22nd. back to your calls as we continue our live coverage outside the supreme court. linda in rita, florida, on our independent line. go ahead, linda. >> caller: actually from jacksonville, florida. >> go ahead. >> caller: i am against the health care law. first of all, there's no one dying because of lack of insurance. today anyone, citizen or not of the united states can go into any hospital, receive medical care. i would -- read the bill in its entirety for our congress people to say we have to pass the ball and not know what's in it is absurd. it oversteps, and contains

numerous hidden taxes throughout. it takes millions from the medicare program, which does not bode well for the elderly. there's millions seti side to d educate doctors and nurses, advised by a panel of financial-driven government individuals and the fact that these very individuals too passed this law exempted themselves from it sends a clear message to the american people that we are in fact losing our freedoms. thank you for your time. >> rita in jacksonville. chuck in woodbridge, new jersey, on our republican line. you're on c-span, chuck. >> caller: yes. i retired, and i have two issues with this health care. first of ale, the federal government runs the v.a. hospitals. at least i'm pretty sure they do, and i can't see why they talk about the 30 million people that are uninsured that something could not be done through the v.a. hospitals where they increase the hospitals, and

take some of these people in to take the load off of the other hospitals. of the other hospita. second issue is i'm retired and part of my retirement was either i take a buy out which means i don't get health care, i pay my own, but i strip my local of a lot of money which i didn't want to do because i would rather take part of my -- i would rather just take my retirement from the local and by health care that way. and i feel that if this continues to go through, what happens to me if they take that away? and i'm forced into something that i would have never, you know, had my choice. my choice was to be fair and to retire with a retirement without stripping the local of all the funds. i don't think that they're looking at many, many issues of this. i thank you for your time.

>> john, lakeland, florida, on our democrats line. john, what do you think about all this argument going on? >> caller: hello, peter. i don't want like none of it. you got this bill, republicans had this back in '92 now obama's got it and they're against it. everything that obama's got they're against. everything they had before they're for. they're flip-flopping. now they -- i don't know what the people -- they'd better get their head examined and start thinking right because if they don't get this here, if this fails, they're going to go buy their own insurance. and this is going to kick in in 2012 or 2014 this is going to kick in. this be the same insurance as the senate and the house got. if they -- take this down and don't get it, i think they ought to take the insurance away from the senate and the house, too.

if we can't get it, they shouldn't have it. we're the ones paying for their insurance. why should we pay for their insurance when we can't have it ourself? >> that was john in lakeland, florida, larry, we have live from the supreme court. and larry in south portland, maine, on our republican line, what are your thoughts, larry? >> caller: i've got two thoughts. number one, i watched the senate try to pass this bill and down in florida nelson's a democrat so they took the medicare advantage plan and gave it to nelson for the elderly people. mccain is a republican in arizona, but his retired people that's on medicaid can't have the advantage plan. the way they pushed this thing through and the way they come around to beat the house out is unbelievable. reid does not want any bills coming out of the house to come across his desk. that's why we're not getting along. they wrote the bill. they need to repeal this so they could tweak it.

you could not add or take anything for this health care bill when they put it into place. that's what the problem is. we've got to repeal it. start over again and get it cleaned up. i'm sick and tired of everybody saying poor obama. they took bush and done everything but burn him at the stake. i'm sick of listening to poor obama. i'm sick of it. have a great day. >> you can see there's still some folks out in front of the supreme court. some of the more active protesters have calmed down. they're usually there many morning. some interested folks are out there. they probably already lined up for day three of the hearings. that line comes around the south side of the supreme court. you can see folks sitting in line and get one of the 66 or so seats that are available to citizens inside the supreme court. on our democrats line the mary joe from fort washington, maryland. >> caller: hi. how are you doing?

>> good. >> caller: i'm for the argument about this. i don't necessarily like a mandate, but our lives are mandated by everything we do. we get mandated with car insurance. you can't even get tags. you get mandated with medicare. you don't sign up for part b you get a penalty. the insurance companies mandate our health care. and that's what this health care law is about. we need t out of the way between me doctor. and we need insurance affordable. this is a case in time for single payer health care. i would love to see american have what they hadfrce. if it can be something that we can have in this country, why not? why not goght w health insuranc ridiculous. it's going -- it's so unaffordable that more and more people will not be onpla thank god that president obama did do this. and it was a lot of republicans

it was the romney plan in the beginning and now he other republicans are back tracking like they always do. it's a to try to make president obama unelectable. avor and going to work. put the mandate up for everyone to read you would see that it's not really, really a mandate. no one's any ridiculous amount of money. no one's going to jail. the mandate doesn't start until changed and i think we'll have single payer health care. that's what we need. thank you. >> thank you, mary joe. about an hour ago michael car vin one of the lawyers with the national federation of independent business he came out after the oral arguments wereni spoke to reporters on the steps of the sueme court. here's michael carven. >> carven.

any questions? we'rryterest in the case. they obviously have deeply explored the issues. i feel that we got our chance to make our case and since our case s'm hopeful that the court will do the right thing and strike down the individual mandate. anything else? >> how did you feel about the arguments today? >> as i said, i think obviously all the justices were very informed and very active. i think their questions went right to t matter. since i think we've got basic and better first principal responses. i'm hoping that that will carry the day when they write the opinion. >> did they surprise you? >> no. i think both sides pretty much staked out their positions in the briefing and the prior arguments. obviously the new level of sophistication by the individual justices. but i think the issues were squarely presented before and i think they were adequately addressed in the argument.

>> any thoughts one way or another? >> i never make predictions. >> i wanted to also introduce to you, i'm karen, i run nfib's small business legal center. plaintiffs in the la owner from virginia. please step up to the mic. >> anybody have any questions? i was real happy with the way things went in there. it seemed to -- it seemed to stay simple and there was a lot of conversation. it seemed likeve well. we're real pleased with it. >> why was it important for you to challenge the law? >> pardon me? >> why was it important if you to challenge the law? >> it directly affects we're a sole proprietorship in a small community, it would put an added tax that would put us out of

business. >> could you expand on that. >> >> pardon me? >> could you expand on that. >> we run a retail flooring store in a community with a population of 383. there's not a whole lot of revenue to spend on things that we don't deem necessary. >> my auto insurance covers me for that. as far as medical goes, i don't go -- i'm covered. i built an emergency fund and i have other resources to pay for it. i made provisions to take care of my health. i go to the dentist three times a year, i see to doctor when i need it, i go to the doctor when i need to, i just take my

checkbook with me. >> why is it bad for america aside from your own positions? >> really what it comes down is to what america do you want? a socialized one or a free one? >> is it that simple? >> it is in my view. thank you, all. >> it's michael carvin. he's from jones day. >> that short press conference took place about an hour ago. we are back live waiting on the release of the audio transcripts from today's individual mandate argument in the supreme court. as soon as that happens we will bring those to you right here on c-span3. robert in independence, missouri, we want to hear your views on all this going on. what do you think, robert? >> caller: i,