election day, and the american people then will get an opportunity to make their decision on election day, because elections have consequences. and the election in 2008, clearly had a consequence that most americans disagree with. >> were you surprised at chief justice roberts became the swing vote with more liberal members of court on today's health care decision? >> i'm blessed that i'm not a lawyer. and so i -- it's not for me to decide. the court, while i'm disappointed in their decision, they same to a decision, i respect it. >> speaker bboehner, democrats say the fact that you're holding yet another vote to repeal this shows that republicans are sore losers. there are plenty of laws that republicans have passed over the years that they're not holding votes constantly to repeal. >> resolve. there's a lot of resolve amongst

our colleagues and amongst the american people to stop a law that's hurting our economy, driving up the cost of health care, and making it more difficult for employers to hire new workers. the american people want this bill, they want it repealed. what they really want are common sense steps that will empower them and their families to choose the doctor they want at lower cost. >> how do you think this is going to cut politically in the fall, and does governor ro romney's -- >> we'll let the american people -- the american people will make that evident on election day. >> well, you're a politician. do you think it's going to help motivate your course forward? >> what i'm concerned about is a law that's driving up the cost of health care and making it harder for employers to hire people. that's what i'm concerned about. >> giving the revenue bills originate in the house and this penalty for not having insurance

is a tax, would the house looking at trying to repeal that penalty or would future republican houses not put in penalty for failing to pay that penalty? >> we believe that repealing this entire law is the right thing to do. it will help our economy, help bring down health care costs. it will save medicare from being cut by $500 billion, and instead we can put in place common sense steps that really will help the american people have access to the quality care that they want. thanks, everybody. and more reaction now. we just saw speaker boehner and house republicans. house minority leader nancy pelosi with her reaction to today's u.s. supreme court decision, upholding the health care law.

>> good afternoon. pretty exciting day. the decision that was announced by the supreme court is a victory for america's families. it was a victory for america's families when we passed the affordable care act and the president signed it into law. since then, tens of millions of people in our country are already benefiting from the legislation. as you know, as the president said so eloquently, children can no longer be denied coverage due to pre-existing condition. young people, children, and students and young people can stay on their parents' policy until they're 26 years old. seniors are paying less for prescription drugs and have access to free wellness and preventative visits. when the bill comes into effect, being a woman will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition. it's a big victory for women.

it's about wellness. it's about prevention. it's about the health of america, not just the health care. it's pretty exciting. earlier this morning, i met with our caucus after the decision was announced. it was, as you know, no surprise to us. we knew -- thought that we were on solid grounds in terms of interstate commerce, solid grounds in terms of the constitution, it was just a question of what the vote would be. and with that confidence, we happily embraced the decision that came down. now we can move forward to the full implementation of the law and when that happens, for the american people, the best is yet to come. i want to say a word about senator kennedy. i spoke to vicki kennedy this morning and patrick kennedy before coming here, thanking them for the important role that

they played, for making health care a right, not a privilege in our country. he called it the great unfinished business of our country, of our society. i knew that when he left us, he would go to heaven and help pass the bill, and now i know he was busily at work until this decision came down, inspiring one way or another, and now he can rest in peace. his dream for america's families has become a reality. i'll be pleased to take any questions. >> madame, the president has said himself on numerous occasions that the individual mandate is not a tax. do you think the individual mandate in the health care law is a tax? >> the court has upheld the legislation. i think, and i'll have to see the specific language, that they identified with how we wrote the bill in the house as par of the

decision, their documentation for the decision. call it what you will, it is a step forward for america's faand, you know, what, take yes for an answer. this is a very good thing for the american people. what you'reg about here is washingto happening out ther children, families with a child with a pre-existing medical condition, which means for a nated against in terms of insurance -- not yre. same thing, same thing when the bill is fully implemented. that's what's really important to people. technical terms, that's for us here. what means something to the american people is what it the does to them. yes? >> now, the republicans have said that this decision raises the stakes for the election. it brings an opportunity for them. do you think that there are dangers for the demts the president if the health care debate is reopened in this

election? >> i think we all have to take a step back and say, why are we here? we here to do a job for the american people. we are here to act upon our beliefs. and a belief that we have many of us shared is that health care is a right, not a privilege in our country. we believe that a health care bill needed to be passed so that families would not be povertyized because they had a diagnosis or an accident. that heaped health care costs on them. we believe it is about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that people can now pursue their aspirations, depending on their talents with, and again their aspirations without being job locked because a child has a pre-existing condition or a fear of a diagnosis. they can be a writer, they can start a business, they can be

self-employed, they can change jobs. this is about a responsibility to reduce the deficit. if there were no other reason to pass the health care reform act than because of cost to individuals, cost to families, cost to businesses large and small, cost to our economy in terms of it being a competitiveness issue and cost to federal, state, and local budgets, then we would have had to do this. so the politics be damned. this is about what we came to do. and any time we want to waste time seeing it through a prism of what does it mean in terms of the election, we undermine our purpose in coming here and acting upon our beliefs. we're very, very excited about this day. this is stark. it ranks right up there when they passed social security and medicare and now being upheld by five justices of the supreme court.

>> chief justice john roberts on the medicaid expansion called it a gun to the head of states, that states had to comply unless -- or face losing all of their federal medicaid funding. why was it designed that way, do you think -- well, i'm not -- with all due respect to your characterization of it and his, here's what it does. and we wrote this very carefully, pause, again, we wanted to have balance in the legislation. we wanted it to have legitimate and be well received. and what it does is says that for three years, states will receive 100% of their medicaid funding for this bill without any matching funds. i don't think that's a gun to the head. i think that it is -- i think that further to that point, the

house language has more clarity that we wrote in our original bill and it addresses that particular concern. but 100% of the money without matching funds and medicaid has matching elements to it, but not as far as expansion medicaid in bill. i think that we're not bothered at all by the decision in regard to medicaid. and that most governors would probably accept 100% funding without matching funds. >> will you be walking out of the house chamber today? >> thank you for bringing up contempt of congress. i do have some things to say about that. it would be mischievous --

mischief -- mischievous -- what am i trying to say? you would think it was a matter of mischief if i said i don't think this is being taken up on the same day that the supreme court decision came down. it's just too much of a coincidence, especially when you think that the motion of contempt only was passed out of committee one week ago. what the republicans are doing with this motion on the floor today is contemptible, even for them, it's contemptible. the constitution tells the branches of government that they should work together and try to resolve differences without gaining an upper hand or showing strength, words to that effect. and so there was an obligation

on the part of the congress, the house of representatives, if it wanted to go forward with such a motion, to try to resolve it. try to resolve it is not sending a bill to the floor of the house, based on a false premise. this is not to truth that is on the floor today. a false premise and asking for a vote, tying it to guys, and politicizing it. you may recall that 4 1/2 years ago, we had a motion of contempt for two employees at the white house, josh bolten and harriette myers. because josh was the keeper of the president's papers. for over 200 years -- excuse me, 200 days, we tried to get information from the white house. they stonewalled it, nothing. but month in and month out, chairman of the committee and i and our leadership said, keep

trying. keep trying so we don't have to bring contempt to the floor, because we want to exhaust every remedy. but that's not what is being done here. this is something that makes a witch hunt look like a day at the beach. it is a railroading of a resolution. it is unsubstantiated by the facts, as i said, based on a false premise, coming to the floor of the house in less than two weeks, when we spent over 200 days trying to get word one from the bush administration, and these people have gotten thousands and thousands of pages of documentation. that documentation is exculpatory of the attorney general. they can't face that fact. >> will you be walking -- >> so i'm just saying, there's an attitude in our caucus that

we should not honor the process that is coming to the floor. i myself intend to stay long enough to vote no and i'll see what the will of many in our caucus think that we should do a complete walk off. you know, i honor the wish of my caucus. but i want to be there long enough to make sure that the record is straight on what is going on there. now, we are very honored by the work of elijah cummings and we want to be there to support him on the floor, and i want to be able to speak firsthand about what is said on the floor following this. as i said to you before, this isn't about anything other than, they're trying to undermine the chief legal officer of our country, the attorney general. is the first time in the history of america that a cabinet officer has had a contempt of

congress resolution on the floor against him or against her. i believe, as i said from the start, this is their attempt to tie the hands of the attorney general, to undermine his effectiveness and that of his department to address issues of voter presentation that are going on in our country. they have many other complaints. they don't like the fact that he did not, he is not moving forward to defend the doma act, the constitutionality of the doma act, which he didn't believe is constitutional. so, again, it's about a lot of things. and that's why i say it's contemptible. because it mixes misrepresentations, in some circles they would call them lies. i don't like to use words like that. misrepresentations, politics, and misuse and abuse of the power of the majority in the house on this subject.

so i vote no as many times as i possibly can today on what they are doing and i will make my decisions about one way or another. but i support the walk off, whether my role is -- would i add more on the floor or on the walk off, i'll make a judgment when that time comes. >> what is your message to republican house members who already are scheduling a vote to repeal, to go forward with this idea of repealing the health care bill the week after the july 4th break. >> first of all, i haven't heard their hearings. have they had hearings on this legislation that they're going to come back a few days after -- really. they're going to have a vote to say, if you're a child and have a pre-existing medical condition, and you can no longer be discriminated against, we're going to overturn that. if you're a senior and you're paying less for your prescription drugs and you're getting free preventative checkups and the rest, we're

going to overturn that. if you're of 26 years old and under and you're on your parent's policy, pull the plug on that as well. they make their own decisions. i think it clearly points out that even with a law signed by the president and upheld by the supreme court, they're still fighting a fight that we have always been and will continue to always be the handmaidens of the special interests in our country. they take a loyalty oath to not bring in revenue rather than honor and protect and defend the constitution. they fight for the health insurance industry over and over again, at the cost to the taxpayer and consumers. so this is just more of the same. no surprise about it. it will be interesting to hear their arguments. but if it's anything like mitt romney said this morning, you can't have it both ways.

he get s up there and says, you won't be able to discriminate against you on pre-existing condition. he's for overturning the bill, as the supreme court in dissent did, four in dissent said they would be for overturning the entire bill. he said he supports that. and yet, i don't know, maybe he's going to pay for it out of his own pocket that he's going to cover the pre-existing conditions cost of people who have children -- children who have pre-existing conditions. you cannot have it both ways. and i think this offers us an opportunity for clarity as to what the bill is actually about, where instead of being at the mercy of the $200 million negative campaign of misrepresentations, some would call them other things, that they put out there that created such a screen of confusion that it's very hard to talk about what the bill does. but now that we have a decision and they're talking about

overturning it, we can say with clarity, this is what the bill does, this is what they want to take away from you, this is how they want to increase your costs and let the public decide. thank you all very much. thank you. and here on c-span3 today, we've been looking at and listening to reactions to the u.s. supreme court decision on the affordable care act. earlier today the supreme court upheld most of president obama's health care overhaul law, saying that it was authorized by congress' power to levy taxes. that's how chief justice roberts in his opinion described the mandate. the vote was 5-4 with the chief

justice's joining the court's four more liberal members. the court did limit a piece of the law, one that expanded medicaid. we've been bringing you details on the u.s. supreme court decision throughout the day, with reaction from the white house congress and a statement by presidential candidate mitt romney. and you can view any of today's coverage on our website at c-span.org. and with the ruling today, we are also looking for your comments and feedback. you can go to our facebook page to post your thoughts and share your opinion. the post will remain atop the page for the remainder of the day. now back to some of the day's events. we'll begin with the statement from president obama. he spoke at the white house. >> good afternoon.

earlier today the supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the affordable care act. the name of the health care reform we passed two years ago. 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 whose lives will be more secure because of this law and the supreme court's decision to uphold it. and because this law has a direct impact on so many americans, i want to take this opportunity to talk about exactly what it means for you. first, if you're one of the more than 250 million americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.

this law will only make it more secure and more affordable. insurance companies can no longer impose lifetime limits on the amount of care you receive. they can no longer discriminate against children with pre-existing conditions. they can no longer drop your coverage if you get sick. they can no longer jack up your premiums without reason. they are required to provide free preventative care like checkups and mammograms, a provision that's already helped 54 million americans with private insurance. and by this august, nearly 13 million of you will receive a rebate from your insurance company, because it spent too much on things like administrative costs and ceo bonuses and not enough on your health care. there's more. because of the affordable care act, young adults under the age of 26 are able to stay on their parents' health care plans, a provision that's already helped 6 million young americans. and because of the affordable care act, seniors receive a discount on their prescription

drugs, a discount that's already saved more than 5 million seniors on medicare about $600 each. all of this is happening because of the affordable care act. these provisions provide common sense protections for middle class families and they enjoy broad popular support. and thanks to today's decision, all of these benefits and protections will continue for americans who already have health insurance. now, if you're one of the 30 million americans who don't yet have health insurance, starting in 2014, this law will offer you an array of quality, affordable, private health insurance plans to choose from. each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options. and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that too. and i've asked congress to help speed up that process and give states that flexibility in year one. once states set up these health

insurance market places, known as exchanges, insurance companies will no longer be able to discriminate against any american with a pre-existing health condition. they won't be able to charge you more just because you're a woman. they won't be able to bill you into bankruptcy. if you're sick, you'll finally have the same chance to get quality, affordable health care as everyone else. and if you can't afford the premiums, you'll receive a credit that helps pay for it. today the supreme court also upheld the principle that people who can afford health insurance should take the responsibility to buy health insurance. this is important for two reasons. first, when uninsured people who can afford coverage get sick and show up at the emergency room for care, the rest of us end up paying for their care in the form of higher premiums. and second, if you ask insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions, but don't require people who can afford it to buy their own insurance, some folks might wait

until they're sick to buy the care they need, which would also drive up everybody else's premiums. that's why even though i knew it wouldn't be politically popular, and resisted the idea when i ran for this office, we ultimately included a provision in the affordable care act that people who can afford to buy health insurance should take the responsibility to do so. in fact, this idea has enjoyed support from members of both parties, including the current republican nominee for president. still, i know the debate over this law has been divisive. i respect the very real concerns that millions of americans have shared. and i know a lot of coverage through this health care debate has focused on what it means politically. well, it should be pretty clear by now that i didn't do this because it was good politics. i did it because i believed it was good for the country. i did it because i believed it was good for the american people. you know, there's a framed letter that hangs in my office

right now. it was sent to me during the health care debate by a woman named natoma canfield. for years and years, natoma did everything right. she bought health insurance, she paid her premiums on time. but 18 years ago, natoma was diagnosed with cancer. and even though she'd been cancer free for more than a decade, her insurance company kept jacking up her rates, year after year. and despite her desire to keep her coverage, despite her fears that she would get sick again, she had to surrender her health insurance and was forced to hang her fortunes on chance. i carried natoma's story with me every day in the fight to pass this law. it reminded me of all the americans, all across the country, who have had to worry not only about getting sick, but about the cost of getting with well. natoma is well today, and because of this law, there are other americans, other sons daughters, other brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers who

will not have to hang their fortunes on chance. these are the americans for whom we pass this law. the highest court in the land has now spoken. we will continue to implement this law. and we'll work together to improve on it where we can. but what we won't do, what the country can't afford to do, is refight the political battles of two years ago or go back to the way things were. with today's announcement, it's time for us to move forward. to implement and where necessary improve on this law. now's the time to keep our focus on the most urgent challenge of our time, putting people back to work, paying down our debt, and building an economy where people can have confidence that if they work hard, they can get ahead. but today, i'm as confident as ever that when we look back five years from now or ten years from now or twenty years from now, we'll be better off because we

had the courage to pass this law and keep moving forward. thank you. god bless you and god bless america. >> and before president obama spoke today, presidential candidate mitt romney came to the microphones and gave his thoughts on the u.s. supreme court decision. here's what he had to say. >> as you might imagine, i 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. let's make clear that we understand 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'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. obama care cuts medicare, cuts medicare, by approximately $500 billion. and even with those cuts, and tax increases, obama care adds trillions to our deficits and to our national debt, and pushes those obligations on to coming generations. obama care also means that for up to 20 million americans, they will lose the insurance they currently have, the insurance that they like and they want to keep. obama care is a job