at least 75% or more believe the government does not operate with the consent of the people. that is a prerevolutionary moment. there is a difference between the current political structure -- wethe american people are dealing with an alternative universe. we are dealing with another alternate universe. people yearn for true reform. the resurgence of america. fix this political system which is so corrupt and

broken and serve the people in it, you will never deal with any of the problems you care about. the corruption has got to be rooted out because it is poisoning the country. we need to return to the dominant, true ideology of the american people which is common sense. .hat appeals across the board as a democrat or republican or independent, you can win doing the right thing. the political class and the media and those in the establishment who dominate the country -- there is a message, the people are coming and they are coming for you. are we going to have that in a positive way that gives a resurgence to our values in the country?

that moment is that hand. it comes every 40 years. this is as big a moment as it was prior to the civil war. the change we are looking at will be decisive. the people who live outside the beltway are ready to reclaim their country. thank you. [applause] >> wow, look at this. panel and these two guys were contestants, i would say that pat won. >> that is not right. >> you were very good, i don't

care what you say. you were great. let me say something about demographics and what these guys are going to talk about. if you live to be into your 40's, you will live in a socialist america. it ruins their living.

that line is not going to work. i don't think there is anybody in this room who believes that the reason that george w. bush won the hispanics was because he persuaded hispanics that the capitalist model is the best model. plenty of hispanics want to come to this country because they want the capitalist model. they do very well. that is true of asians, obviously. when you are looking at big numbers, not true. look at the way the vote has been going. what does that tell you? you will hear from the that if the republicans simply go out and appeal directly to hispanics and asians, the republicans will

bring them over. on what basis? already believe in self-reliance who are hispanic or asian, already feel that way. that is why they came here. others came here for a mixture of reasons, because they wanted opportunity, but they believe that this is a welfare state. does anybody here deny that this is a welfare state? i don't think so. where does this go? i would love to hear someone tell me realistically how the inevitable path of socialism can be stopped in our lifetime. do i see any hands? >> yes, right here. because what people want is exactly what many people who have wanted to come to america for centuries have wanted. they want an opportunity to succeed, to get a good

education, to better their lot, and socialism does not do that. socialism does not do that. it is the capitalism with free markets. it creates that opportunity. >> wire the voting democrats? >> because we haven't reached out to them enough. if people do not think they like you, they are not likely to vote for you. we want all kinds of people of different races, different creeds, different colors, different origins in our coalition, are center-right coalition. >> let me jump in here. you can never win them. this is the failure of the republican party. when you convince people that you are against them and you are not for them, they will not vote for you. when i talked about the overwhelminghe majority includes women, single women, black people, hispanics. people want the american dream.

if you cannot articulate the vision. when you have 94% of the american people who believe that the economic allah sees of both parties have failed under not deliver opportunities -- policies of both parties have failed and do not deliver opportunities, that is what they fear. when a party begins to speak to as people with passion, opposed to preserving arrangements, that is are you change it. the voters are going to vote for somebody who at least claims to be for them. [applause] want to agree with pat so desperately. lies with the republican party, not what the democrats. we already know where the democratic party is taking us. we know where the republican party says it wants to take us. every time a republican office ,older, a ted cruz a rand paul

stands up and does something for willing to gois down fighting, knowing that he , to explain toe the electorate what republican conservative capitalist principles are, the party unites against him, makes fun of him, says he is crazier she is crazy. the press says the same thing and everybody piles on and everybody believes that if the republican party stands up candidates like that will lose and take the party down with them. party is theican hope for the future and the leadership insists on demonizing, ridiculing fellow republicans who stand up for principle, then where is the future? socialism.

>> the republican party needs to reform itself or it is going the way of the whigs. i'm sorry. you have a republican party that laid down on the deck on the spending limits, did not even protect military pensions because they have decided that if we just lay down and surrender, we will win. the problem is that when i talk more than 60% of republicans are willing to leave their party immediately for a better alternative. it is not about parties, it is about your country. the political class in this town in this beltway hasn't gorged

itself by looting this country. country party ahead of they put politics ahead of principle, they put principle against patriotism. until you replace that, what party matters. [applause] >> i think hat has caught the -- pat has caught the temper of the room.in this i hope you have enjoyed this panel and learn something. [applause] goodbye. ♪

>> we will have more from sea in a couple of moments. this is a live picture from the white house briefing room. coming up, we will hear from white house spokesman jay carney. we are expecting questions on president obama's meeting with ukraine's new government. live coverage of the briefing starting shortly here on c-span. while we wait, we will show you more from the final day of cpac 's final day meeting. we will hear comments from ben

carson.

>> again, waiting for the start of the white house briefing with jay carney. now we will go back to the cpac winter meeting. [applause]

>> thank you very much. thank you. i want to introduce my wonderful wife of 39 years. [applause] thank you for that very warm welcome. i have a lot to say, so i will go pretty quickly. dreams.is the land of it has fulfilled the dreams of so many people from so many

places. as a child, i had the dream of becoming a physician. i loved anything that had to do with medicine. i even liked going to the doctor's office. [laughter] it tells you i was pretty weird. [laughter] what an incredible career it provided for me. if somebody had sat me in front of the keyboard and said, type out the career you want, i could not have come up with a better scenario. i had a mother who had no excuses and because i believed in god. [applause] i thought last year when i retired that i was going to learn to play the organ and learn some which is and play golf -- some and play golf.

i think the good lord had a different plan. [applause] i am not sure what the culmination of that plan is, but i am having a good time and candy is having a good time as we go all over the country, red states, blue states, north, south, east, west. crowds coming out. like they're saying, you mean there is somebody else with common sense? [applause] here is the good news. the majority of people in this country have common sense. the problem is that they have been beaten into submission. these police on all of people and people are afraid to speak up for what they believe. -- youthe principles thatthe majority believe

what is outdated is how they think and you of -- if you can co-opt the media and the process, you are far ahead of the game. it is time for people to proclaim what they believe in. stop being bullied. one of the most wonderful things -- people say don't you miss medicine? i miss what medicine used to be. i don't miss what it has become. patients.he it is a wonderful thing to be able to get involved in people's lives. the most important thing they have is their health care.

we needthe reason that to fight to make sure that that stays in their hands and not in the hands of the government. [applause] me orne prepared out-of-the-box thinking. it prepared me for a lot of controversy. i got involved in doing new procedures and there were people who did not like that very much. in medicine, we actually talked about it. we talked about the differences, the evidence, the facts. facts were shown, people made adjustments. unfortunately, that does not happen in the political world. they are dealing with ideologues. they believe what they believe

and they want to keep doubling down on it. the only people who can stop them our ross, the american people. [applause] as you know, i am not a fan of political correct mess. i hate political correctness. [applause] i will continue to defy the pc police who have tried, in many cases, to shut me up. i actually find them pretty amusing. [laughter] i still believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. [applause] you know, because i happen to mention that nobody gets to change the definition of marriage and mentioned some other categories, they said

carson said that gay marriage and bestie à la the art the same thing. that is preposterous. are not the same thing. anybody who believes that is a dummy. [laughter] believes that somebody said that is a dummy and that is the problem. [applause] of course gay people should have the same rights as everyone else , but they do not get extra rights, they do not get to redefine marriage. [applause] then i said that obamacare was the worst thing since slavery. let me tell you why i said that. said that carson said that slavery and obamacare are the same thing. of course they are not the same thing. slavery is much worse. [laughter]

bear in mind what happens with obamacare. the american people have put that program -- it has shifted the power that was given to us by the constitution and by the founders to the government. it is the most massive shift of power that has ever occurred. need toto redo it, we put the power back in the hands of the people, we need to make sure we keep it there. [applause] recently, i said that in nazi germany, people did not believe in what hitler was doing, most of them did not. but did they speak up? did they say anything? absolutely not and look at the atrocities that occurred. of course, they said that carson said that progressives are anz

nazis. of course that is not the case. they do.is what they repeat the lies because they cannot argue the actual facts. they do not want to talk about the real issues. [applause] it is important for the american people to understand the tactics of these people who simply sit around and try to demonize people, come straight out of the books. never have a conversation with your adversary because that will humanize them and your job is to demonize them -- that is why you see that all over -- intelligent people will understand that. i find that there are so many people who get intimidated so easily. i look atntimidated. somebody like dr. melanie

cooper. she is having a banquet a week from tonight in atlanta, new community horizons, victory over diabetes. she is a wonderful woman who is concerned for the welfare and the health and community. there are organizations there who are telling people to boycott her because i am coming to be the speaker. do not want him spewing his poison to the young people. i wonder what poison that would be? would that be the poisoning of self-reliance and self respect? [applause] would that be the poison of telling people in minority communities that they need to learn how to turn over the dollar a few times in the community before they send it out and that is how you create wealth and that you should reach back and pull others up with you? and if you do that you do not

have to depend on anybody else? [applause] the poison of talking about how education is the key and that you do not have to be a victim? it is a matter of your mind and what you decide to do and that the most important person when it comes to your future is you and the decisions that you make and the things that you decide to do? afternoon, everyone. thank you for being here. happy monday. i do not have an announcement at the top. the president has been making calls to foreign leaders about the situation in crimea. i'm wondering if he believes that there is still an opportunity to stop the referendum from going forward or if the focus is on getting the international community to delegitimize the result of that? the conversations the president has been having with

leaders across the world about the situation in ukraine and crimea have focused, not just on , which we do not view as legitimate under the ukrainian constitution and with hardly anyone else use as legitimate under the ukrainian constitution. on the broader effort to be united in calling for de-escalation and for a peaceful resolution to this crisis, we have been working with our partners to make it clear to the russians that there is an avenue available to them that would allow for an international ensureto monitor and that the rights of all ukrainians are protected, including ethnic russians. reasoning that military intervention was

necessary to protect the right of ethnic russians becomes defunct, even if it were ever valid, which it was not. those troops should go back to their bases. with theght to engage ukrainian government in dialogue with international participation and they should agree to a process whereby international ukraine ton go to monitor the situation, so that the rights of every ukrainian are protected. there are seven days until the referendum happens. are there any prospects of ,etting that, polling that back or is that going to go forward? >> i cannot predict the future. it will not be viewed by the united states as legitimate

because it is inconsistent with the ukrainian constitution, which makes clear that any change in the borders has to be decided by all of ukraine. clearcountries have made that they would view it as illegitimate as well. russia needs to avail itself of the opportunity here to work with international partners and the government of ukraine to resolve this issue diplomatically. >> one of the calls the president made was to the president of china. china frequently sides with to block initiatives by the west in the u.n. what is the president's goal in his conversation with china? i would say that among the calls the president has made, he did speak with president shi

and they agreed with upholding the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. there should be no argument that ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity were violated by russia. every leader the president has spoken to about this matter agrees that we need to take steps to resolve this that protects sovereignty and territorial integrity. >> i do not have a further readout of the conversation. china plays an important role in the security council and has an important relationship with russia. the principles are starkly

clear. there is no murky aspect to this. say thatt is fair to everyone the president spoke to this weekend, including uighurs -- leaders of the united kingdom and france and the baltic states, were in agreement that these principles are key and that we need to resolve this in a way that is peaceful and diplomatic. if the referendum goes forward, what will the u.s. reaction be? will there be new sanctions? that thed note executive order the president signed created authorities which are very flexible. it will allow for action to be taken that holds people for theble

transgressions listed in the executive order one it comes to violations of ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. leading up to now and into the future. -- thet have any executive order does not designate individuals and i do not have any updates on that. we are actively engaged in examining the way the authorities can be used and would have available to us that executive order in the flexibility it provides to take further action as events on the ground demand. outlined theent diplomatic structure that you put together -- are you getting anywhere with him on that? is he considering it? is it outright rejection?

clearis obviously very that we and many others profoundly disagree with statements from russian leaders about the facts on the ground, the assertions of lawlessness in eastern ukraine. other acts being perpetrated against ethnic russians in eastern ukraine or crimea. in fact, the only transgressions that have been documented have been once by russian military. there is that. when it comes to the conversations that the president has had an secretary kerry has had with his counterpart, we are that welear to moscow understand that russia has legitimate interests in ukraine,

not least of course the black sea fleet, but also concerns about ethnic russians. we recognize those concerns. we commend the ukrainian government for their responsible handling of this crisis and for the fact that they maintain a to protecting and observing the rights of all ukrainian citizens. we are happy to work with the to make surenment that there are monitors on the ground in crimea and other parts of ukraine to make sure that ethnic russians have their rights protected and that any violation of those rights would be reported internationally. that is the way to address the concerns if those are the concerns that motivated the russian government to take

action that is in violation of international law. >> the malaysian plane crash. are you in a position to rule out terrorism? unfortunately, we do not have enough information to comment on the causes of the incident. the united states government is in communication with agencies and with international partners to provide any appropriate assistance in the investigation. are and rude to the region to provide any necessary route to the region to provide any necessary assistance. the state department has said there were three american citizens on board and many more from around the world, especially china, taiwan, and malaysia. also, the department of defense said the seventh fleet has sent assets to assist in search

efforts. long-range search radar and communications capability. we are providing assistance and the malaysians have the lead in this investigation. i know that you announced over the weekend that prime minister yatsenyuk is coming to the white house on wednesday. what is the message and bringing him here? is it a message for president putin? we are making it clear to the new government of ukraine that we support them, that we support the responsible way in which ukrainian officials and the

parliament and the government have handled this crisis. and that we are working to provide direct assistance to ,kraine in this difficult time so that they can stabilize their economy and return to economic growth. that is the message we're sending. the president looks forward to the meeting. theink it will reinforce fact that the united states believes that the ukrainian government has responsibly filled the vacuum left by the sudden hasty and voluntary departure by president yanukovych. congress tong with provide assistance to the ukrainian government that would complement the imf package of assistance. we are working aggressively on

the diplomatic front to resolve this crisis. we are working directly with ukrainian officials, western officials, and all of the other leaders across europe that have been engaged in this effort, as well as elsewhere. you said, we will not budge a single centimeter on ukrainian land -- in reference to the referendum on crimea and attempts by russia to annex that land. is the administration concerned that things could unravel and get out of control after this referendum? there is no question that actions taken by russia have precipitated a crisis. is that of the matter it is up to the ukrainian people , through their representatives in government, to make decisions of anyhe disposition territory within the sovereign state of the ukraine.

it is certainly long since when borders of a nation can be redrawn above the head of democratically elected leaders by another state , working in concert with a region of the sovereign state. we have made our views on this very clear. we are far from alone in our views on this. our focus right now is on a diplomatic effort to encourage dialogue with international partners between the russian and ukrainian governments. moving back to the bases of all russian forces. and a process by which international monitors could monitor and evaluate the concerns expressed by russian officials over the circumstances of ethnic russians in parts of

ukraine, including crimea. >> is the president concerned that the europeans may not back him up? he has authorized sanctions. issuedte department has travel restrictions. if the europeans do not follow teethdon't you lack some and what you're trying to do? pleasedve been very with the international effort thus far. the cooperative effort that we have seen. the president has been leading and has been spending a great deal of time on the phone with leaders across the region and the world. europe has taken action already and with regard to the executive order that the president signed last week, we are evaluating actions that that authority allows us to take when it comes to sanctions.

the process will continue, depending on the situation on the ground. the presidentike has lined up a fair number of allies, a fair number of countries to support him. assured thate europe is going to be there when it comes to sanctions? >> i don't want to predict the future or speak for european governments are leaders. there has been a broad consensus when it comes to our shared views about what has happened in ukraine and crimea. the legality of the actions taken by russia, the fact that any referendum in crimea that might take place would not be legal under the ukrainian constitution and would not be recognized by the united states or our allies.

we are working aggressively on a diplomatic solution as well as on actions to hold people accountable for what has transpired. we are satisfied with that effort and we will continue to gauge engage aggressively with our partners. that rush up on economic tentacles of stretched further than to russia and the united states, to do if also fuels, oil, gas. what is the administration doing europedite eastern moving themselves away from russian natural gases and energy sources. has beens point, there

no interruption of oil or natural gas exports from russia to ukraine and europe. european gas inventories are well above normal lovers -- levels due to a milder than normal winter in europe. let's be clear. disruption to russia's energy shipments to ukraine and three ukraine to europe is a lose lose situation for everyone, most particularly for russia. russia is heavily dependent on europe and ukraine as export markets for its gas. when it comes to the other part of your question and what the u.s. can do, any actions the united states can take with our how that would

affect markets, that is a complicated process and more of a long-term proposition. we certainly take the energy security of our friends in europe very seriously and we will closely monitor the situation. on the question of exports, the department of energy has the authority over that. i would refer you to them over and details over that process, which is more of a long-term proposition. >> it sounds like you are saying that eastern europe can do without in the short term. is that thereying are additional reserves because of the warmer than usual winter in europe and there is an

enormous cost to any potential cut off or reduction in supply of russian gas to europe via araine because russia has substantial financial interest in maintaining those exports. let's look more broadly at the negative effect more broadly, on the ruble, on the willingness of international investors to look to make investments in russia. those kinds of investments depend on stability and reliability and rule of law. the kinds of actions we have seen taken by the russian government when it comes to onmea are hardly reassuring those fronts. the costs are substantial here for russia. senses white makes a much

for russia to work together with the international community and the ukrainian government to address russian concerns about russian interest in crimea. does the administration think this referendum is possibly a moment in which the situation could reach a turning point? if there is a referendum and it would incite some more fervor among ethnic russians, saying we have had a referendum, we have established our independence, is that something that needs to be averted to calm this crisis down? would you think the referendum itself will have a practical effect on the ground that could make this situation worse? >> i can't make those kinds of predictions. i would not attend to know the future. what i can say is that the actions that have been taken by the legislative body in crimea

and in the scheduling of the referendum, which would not be valid under the ukrainian constitution, certainly do not add to the effort to resolve. >> should it be headed off? is the administration trying to work in a way to head it off? to worke tying aggressively with our partners and the russian and ukrainian governments to resolve this diplomatically. it is not just to avert a referendum that would not be viewed as legitimate. but to resolve the entire situation and resolve the crisis atmosphere that has been created around it. point and i think it is reflected in some of the other questions. these actions certainly do not serve the cause of trying to resolve this crisis diplomatically and peacefully.

but our goal is not just to reverse a referendum, it is to resolve this for the long term. regardsignificant do you the call to president of china? moving thek it is chinese away from a position of equivocation? does that become a prelude for action for the security council in some formal way to try to take some action to condemn this? >> i am not going to games that out. the president has been trying to reach all of our partners and allies around the world to discuss the situation in ukraine, to discuss our views when it comes to the sanctity and inviolability of ukrainian sovereignty.

to discuss the steps that we, the international community, can take to help resolve this crisis diplomatically, working with russia and ukraine, to allow for international monitors to assess the situation on the ground when it comes to the rights of all ukrainians. those are the kind of conversations we are having. i think that nations across the world and leaders across the world recognize the need to put in place a process by which this can be resolved, that allows for to have its real interests taken seriously by the international community and the ukrainian government, but that averts a situation like you have now, where a nation, a sovereign integrityterritorial has been compromised.

>> how interested is the president having -- and having an alternative g7 summit? we, like our partners, have agreed to halt preparation for a g*. -- g8. i am not going to get ahead of a process that is focused on -- i do not dispute that. what i can tell you is that no right preparing for a g8 now because of the actions that

russia has taken and it just so happens that russia is meant to host this year. we will see how this transpires, but it is hard to imagine it happening. >> climate change. senate democrats are having in l-nighter to talk about this. does the white house think this is a good idea? is there some expectation by the president that by the end of the talk there will be some sort of a vote, some sort of inaction on climate change this year? >> we absolutely support the actions taken to focus attention on the challenges posed by and the impacts that climate change is having on and on ourment emergency ability to respond to emergencies.

it is a very important subject, as you know. he has a climate action plan dedicated to addressing. he has taken steps in his first term in second term to both reduce our carbon emissions and to make sure that we are more prepared for the effects and impacts of severe weather, for example, a byproduct of the climate change we have seen. >>. you announced --. health care. plan -- notd a new taking issue with new moms. people voted for the president and large numbers, women. why are you still struggling to get women involved who seem to support the president to sign up

for this law? >> we are not. we are calling on moms to reach -- to their dull children adult children, get them off the couch and on the computer to enroll and make sure they have quality, affordable health insurance. a lot of young folks, because they are young and healthy today , think they are invincible and are not fully aware of the need to have quality, affordable health insurance because they are an accident away or an illness away from needing it very much. around therevolves unique authority that mothers membersh their family to help carry the message. a union out in nevada which

represents over 200,000 service workers put together a memo about the president's health care law and they are worried that one of the biggest challenges in making income is they worse president's health care law. thatrepublicans make allegation, you push back. are you going to listen when a union says this is going to make income inequality worse? we have addressed this issue and the fact is that the departmentsue -- , but thesee administration encouraged multi-employer plans -- to offer through the marketplace to bring

affordable options to all americans. that is what the effort is all about. we are making that clear. unions are saying that premiums for the workers are going up and wages are going down. give you moreto information on this, i have addressed it many times. >> why do they keep saying it? these are the unions, not the republicans? >> a view from the ground in crimea and knowing that resident putin knows the white house as it does -- do you agree with your former head of the department bob gates when he says that there is no visible way that putin would return? >> it is up to the people of ukraine to decide their future.

for any kind of decision to be made about the status of a , only thethe ukraine people of ukraine and their representatives can have that discussion and make that decision. is that theell you actions taken thus far are in violation of international law. this referendum, if it were to its resultsut, would not be recognized by the united states or most nations across the country. as the executive order signed by the president makes clear, we have put in place authorities to take action via sanctions against those who are viewed as responsible for the violation of ukrainian territorial integrity and sovereignty. there are costs that the president made clear very early to those responsible. more broadly, as i was talking

about earlier, to russia economically for pursuing this path. i do not have a crystal ball, i am not going to read into the future, especially when it comes to into the actions that president putin or russia might take. there is a broad consensus internationally about the andciples of sovereignty territorial integrity, about the need to resolve this diplomatically and peacefully and by the rule of law. there is a path here that is available for russia that would allow for their , legitimate interests to be recognized and taken seriously, for the concerns they have to be assessed and addressed. we very much encourage russia to avail itself of that opportunity. the previously unmarked line

between crimea and ukraine, according to western independent journalists -- there appears to be a fence or even the landmines on the ground there going to .eparate crimea from ukraine does the white house have any comment on that? of the eventsall quite closely as you expect. this is 2014. we are long past the days when borders can be redrawn over the ,eads of elected governments over the heads of the people and their elected officials. we will not and do not recognize as legal, the actions that have been taken or might be taken with this referendum. are,is why we are where we that is why we are engaged in the aggressive diplomatic efforts we are engaged in, working with our european partners and other partners. here. russia has a way

they have an off ramp here. it respects the facts that they have legitimate interests in ukraine, it acknowledges that there are ethnic russians about whom russia has concerns. there is an opportunity here to that non-partial international observers are on the ground monitoring the situation so that the rights of all ukrainians are respected and protected. >> obviously the desire in terms of the negotiations taking place behind the international monitors is to look out for the safety as the russians suggest of ethnic russians. that ethnic report russians have been attacking the

pro-ukrainian supporters. what can be done to support those people? >> as i was noting, the international monitors would be in place. they would be in place to protect all ukrainians, not just ethnic russians. that is the reason that russia has taken the action it has taken in violation of international law, that is why we are emphasizing the point about ethnic russians. we are also, as we talked about , working directly with the government in ukraine to help support the government of ukraine. andugh bilateral assistance through our efforts to complement a package of assistance to the imf. in terms of strengthening the ukrainian state and its ability to handle its own affairs, we are actively engaged in that effort as well. >> russian troops are there

because they say they need to protect the ethnic russians. he was there to support the people who support ukraine? ukraine has its own local national and security forces. well you are talking about in crimea. i do not disagree. i do not know about all of the individual reports. any violation of the rights of ukrainian citizens, especially russianuraged by military forces is obviously a concern. >> what has the president done for alex sink? >> the president supports democratic candidates across the country. the president has been engaged then effort to support ,emocratic national committee the senatorial committee, and the congressional committee. i'm not sure i understand the question.

>> the election is tomorrow, so what has the president done to help his campaign? the would say that president is focused on agenda is to expand opportunities and rewards hard work. candidates across the country who support that agenda are taking their message to their constituents or would be constituents and arguing that that is a better way forward than the alternative. the president has laid out an agenda that democrats have supported and the broadly speaking addresses the concerns of most americans say they put at the top of the list. they want to continue the economic opportunities and make sure their hard work is rewarded and their kids are being educated and prepared for the jobs of the future. that's what the president is focused on. he knows and believes the democrats a country join them in

that effort. >> i have a follow-up to that. does he think that the presidential election is a referendum? >> i have not spoken to him about individual congressional elections. i continue there is a pretty clear demarcation that republicans have highlighted by saying they want to go back to a repeal to a world where the insurance companies decide that you pay twice what your twin brother would pay for the same insurance because you're a woman. to a world where anybody with could being conditions booted off their plan or could find out in the fine print that their condition, the very situation that requires them to need health care is not covered in the plan they have.

that is the world that exists through repeal. candidates out there who are supportingthat is the world thas affordable quality health insurance to millions of americans including those who had not have in the past, we think they have a clear case to make against the argument for appeal which is basically an argument in favor of empowering the insurance companies at the expense of individuals, and argument ironically in favor of exploding the deficit because of savingslong-term obamacare has provided. the higher cost of health care great -- growth rates. we have had the lowest levels of health care costs since the affordable care act was signed into law. that is their pitch.

a hitch that focuses on providing benefits to the american people, a pitch that does what we have done at the administration level which is to make fixes that are necessary to help smooth the transition to the affordable care act and the implementation that that is a far better argument for the american people than one that says let's go back to a time when insurance company got to decide whether you get coverage or not. >> a follow-up on that? >> let me get to some of my regular issues. >> on the ukrainian aid, the guaranteeed a loan and the senate is working on a draft that gives additional money. does the white house have a preferred path on this legislation? ?s there a preferred way >> we strongly support passing

reform legislation. we're not talking about additional funding. we are talking about reform legislation that the president supports. he believes it is vital to our national security interest and to the ukraine. the imf provides the expertise and financing needed to restore the ukrainian economy. the u.s. has used its leadership position to ensure that the imf is forward leaning it in this -- in its responsive ukraine but we need to pass the imf reform to maintain our leadership on things like this one. we need to bolster the imf and its capacity to lend to ukraine. while the united states will not increase our total financial commitment to the imf i approving the 2010 reforms, it is important to note that for every dollar the united states contributes to the imf, other countries provide for dollars more.

we strongly support the passage of this quota reform. is there any kind of tentative deadline? >> is there any kind of tentative deadline? >> i don't have a specific deadline. the sooner the better, april. >> [indiscernible] >> that's a good question in light of the unfortunate choice made by the senators want to came to the nomination of an enormously qualified individual to that position. i don't have information for you. i would note that senator reed took action that would allow for bringing up that nomination again. as far as a personnel matter related to that post, i don't have anything new for you. >> are people on the waiting for

it the word to push this through? [indiscernible] >> it got out of committee. the first time or. idon't want to speak for him would say that senator reed as a leader voted no who so he could recommit an output of the terminology right and this nomination could be foot -- could be put forward again. more important is what we said very strongly about our profound disappointment with the actions taken by the senate, the decision that says essentially lawyers have to be held accountable for the clients they create a which would new standard when it comes to nominations to positions like this and to the bench.

i don't have -- when it comes to steps forward on this, i don't have any new information for you. over the weekend, [indiscernible] does the united states intends to follow suit [indiscernible] the united states has not designated the muslim brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization. on the broader issue, we are following recent decisions made by saudi arabia, the uae and bahrain but our policy has not changed and that issue. >> is very national security reason for it. ? >> we encourage these countries

to resolve their differences as soon as possible for the benefit of regional cohesion as soon as possible. it seems the russian federation after the referendum acted to take responsibility for the economic well-being of the people in crimea but united states that we would not recognize that. with the international aid that goes to ukraine still benefit the people of crimea? provideusly, the aid we to ukraine and how it's used -- i don't know the industry sees -- i don't know the ink is the -- the intricacies and how that would work. it is a provision of assistance to ukraine. as i said last week, crimea is part of the sovereign state of ukraine but how that aid would be utilized, i cannot predict. president have an

official or personal reaction to the death of the vice president of afghanistan over the weekend? >> i don't but our thoughts and prayers are with his family but i don't have an official reaction. >> earlier, when you talked about the crimean referendum, you said it will not be viewed as legitimate. is there an official vehicle for the united states to express that? is there a u.s.-united nations resolution? is there anyway that can be expressed or will this just be something that is set from the state department? when we express our views on something, we do it from the air through top officials like the president and secretary of state. we are not alone in having that view. it is our understanding a violation of the ukrainian constitution. we would not be alone.

are taking are not focused on the referendum. thise focused on resolving in a way that is diplomatic and peaceful so that the concerns russia has said motivated to take the action is taken. >> which is a nonbinding u.s. resolution -- u.n. resolution? >> i'm not saying what action might be taken along those lines. i think the world will have spoken pretty clearly and loudly and already has when it comes to views about the violation of ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity. no one will doubt what our view is or what the view of other countries is. lgbt caucus and jeff merkley are circulating a letter on capitol hill.

see the white house want to continuation of that support? >> our view is that congress should pass the nondiscrimination act. i don't have any updates on possible executive orders. we are focused on a legislative remedy that would be more comprehensive and has already seen progress in congress. i don't have of you to express on the particular issue. >> the interdiction of the ship carrying arms [indiscernible] >> i was asked this last week. about ourry clear views on the ship that was weerdicted and the fact that

condemn in the strongest terms iran's efforts to supply terrorist organizations operating in the region with weapons. the shipment of advanced weapons was believed to have been for militant groups and posed a direct threat to the security of israel. the israeli government on loaded the seized vessel this weekend and into stem the vessel contained rockets, mortars, and nearly 400,000 ak-47 shells. the united states strongly condemn this violation of united nations security resolution. it is important to make clear that even as we continue efforts to resolve our concerns over the iranian nuclear program through diplomacy, we will continue with our allies to push back against iranian support for terrorism, threats against our friends and partners in violations of human rights. goal pursue an important

which is a resolution of the by the iranian nuclear program and its pursuit of nuclear weapons, we are not holding back at all and the steps we take in the views we hold about the continued support of iran with terrorists. beene prisoner has released from american jail. have you had any contact with [indiscernible] gross has been unjustly imprisoned for four years. he is a 64-year-old husband, father, and dedicated professional with a long history of providing aid to underserved communities in more than 50 countries. for therate our call peaking government to release him. his to tension remains an impediment to more constructive relations to train the united

states and cuba. thank you all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] i wanted to follow-up on the affordable care act. there is a pitch to repeal the bill. i wanted to ask you about the reasons. the last question i asked, you did not really answer. >> go ahead. >> when the law was first debated and passed, the affordable care act, the polls showed a majority of people were not in favor. so yet it was pushed through in terms of this pitch, the

democrats continue to pitch to get it passed using statements like you can keep your plan and i know that's not true because my wife lost her insurance because of the affordable care act. >> what is your question? oftendon't get here very from the middle country. the president's pitch was that you can keep your plan and your costs will go down and i know that's not true. my question is -- will the president accedes to the greater majority of americans now who want it repealed? you obviously have not seen the data because the majority of americans do not want to repeal. the majority supports fixing it and improving it, not repealing it. the president made that pitch.

republicans in congress fought it tooth and nail and it went to the supreme court. the supreme court upheld it. it was that principal argument in the election. the president won reelection. republicans are free to make the repeal argument. my point was simply that when you go to individuals and asked them if you want quality affordable health insurance or do you want the insurance company to tell you you will not get coverage for that condition you have because the fine print says you can't -- we will charge her sister and double evil and though you have identical medical histories. >> i am getting charged hubbell now. >> i don't know the circumstances with your wife. the affordable care act provides affordable insurance to millions of people. >> more people have lost their insurance because of the act right now them have been -- then did not have insurance. that is a fact. >> you're entitled to your fax.

you and others who want to campaign on repeal are welcome to. i'm saying that repeal for millions of americans is not a the reasonsfor all i enumerated. thank you all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> this afternoon, president obama is hosting base jewel for ncaaen's and women's champions. he will travel to new york tomorrow and wednesday he will meet with the ukrainian prime minister. the announcement of that meeting

came last weekend as russia increased its military residence in crimea and of next weekend's vote on whether to break away from ukraine and join russia. this afternoon, we will bring remarks in the pennsylvania member of thesey, senate foreign relations committee and will comment on afghanistan next month's presidential election. live coverage from the center for american progress gets underway at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. the house and senate are in this week the house returns for a brief pro forma session at 2 p.m. eastern. legislative business will resume tomorrow with sanctions on russia. watch the house live on c-span. the senate is in today at 4:00 with a vote on final passage of legislation dealing with sexual assault in the military. also, the senate is planning an all-night sessions and i to increase congressional focus and action on climate change. watch the senate live on c-span two. entityore than one

manages the key identifiers of the internet, then by nature, the internet will a longer be one net. at the heart of the domain name system is the root services system. in order to resolve things on the -- names on the internet, there is a root system that makes that work for the entire system. all names are resolved to make sure that when you type www. cspan.org or any other website, you go to the exact site that c-span wants you to go with to all the time, every time, for the last decades. internetad of the corporation for assigned names and numbers on the role it plays on assigning new internet domain tonight.

>> a discussion now on how president obama's budget will affect the nation's health care law from today's "washington journal." guest: host: if you are one of these folks who had their insurance plan canceled and then found yourself in a situation where you could renew it after all, you'll be able to stay on that plan for at least two more years, perhaps as long as into 2017. what was the reasoning behind that? guest: the administration says it wants to give as much flexibility to consumers as possible through the exchanges and plans you may already have, through work or however you can get coverage. it's worth noting there's also a

congressional election in november and these plans would have been coming up are either renewal or cancellation again around october/november when people were going to the polls. host: you think this could be a lift for democrats? guest: i'm sure the administration hopes it will be. name checked about a dozen democrats facing pretty competitive elections and said these folks have given them plenty of assistance. host: here are a couple of comments. he said the administration cannot run fast enough awayguesm roca and promises.

guest: the administration says they are trying to be as pragmatic as possible. they want to address this law as quickly as they can a set of waiting for congress to not do anything. upton complaints are not unusual. some say the administration is stepping out of bounds in the things they are doing and there is a question as to why they are extending these plans or if it is legal. there are other lawyers in the country who say there is not really any persuasive justification for doing this.

let's listen to what gary cohen had to say. people as to give many options as they could to make sure they stay in coverage. been a lot ofhas discussion about the fact there have been people who have health insurance who were feeling the cost of moving into a new plan would be prohibitive to them. transitionprovide a and are making changes in the market all at once and we want -- the lastweek thing we want is anybody who have health insurance not to have it. we've done everything we can to provide options so those people can move into a planter the marketplace of they are eligible for a tax credit. they may find it's less expensive than what they had. host: as i understand it, he is

planning on stepping down? guest: he is resigning at the end of march and says that has nothing to do with the problem's of obamacare. a wrenchingthis is change to the health care system, the biggest overhaul of u.s. health care since the creation of medicare and medicaid in the 1960's. to administration is trying roll with the changes, to be flexible when these very difficult in large adjustments to the way people get coverage are made. host: the first call comes from new orleans. this is our line from independence. caller: good morning. it's to my chagrin that i have bull abouto this the affordable care act.

i have talked in the past year -- i'm not exaggerating -- at professionals,al doctors, nurses, you name it, i have yet to run into one, a single one that is in favor of the affordable health care act. down andlly broke cried who had been a nurse for 23 years and the affordable care act is going to kill more people then it's going to help ever. it goes on and on. this entire thing was set up not to give us health care. i am getting details every day from health-care professionals about death panels to partner care. getting ready five dollars to deliver a baby? this is destroying -- it's true

-- this is destroying the entire health care industry. beg this so-called journalist to go ahead and try to find one single health care professional that's in favor of it. have a good day. guest: i don't know what to say to that. the health profession, there are a lot of doctors who are opposed to the health care law. there is no such thing as death panels. they don't exist. i don't believe that doctors are being paid $35 to deliver babies. when we hear people talk about noncompliant plans, what do they mean? people gotplans that last fall, they might not have complied with certain requirements under the affordable care act such as covering all 10 categories of essential benefits that the law requires including maternity

care, prescription drugs, hospitalization. the plan does not cover maternity care and it would not be in compliance. from next caller is nebraska on our line for republicans. you?caller: how are i am a nurse and work in health care. straightened this law out there for the ever introduced to the country, we would not have all the drama and political moves to do waivers for unions and on and on. it's all politically motivated now and it's ridiculous. there is no health care available. it's just health insurance. thanks. law had an infamously strange route to passage. only democrats supported it in congress and they had to do a

maneuver at the end to dodge the republican senator scott brown who joined the senate in january before the law ever became final. that iticism is fair was kind of a work in progress and they have law had to do a lot of creative regulation to get the law and off the ground. host: let's go to west virginia on the line for democrats. good morning, i would like to go off the subject a little bit. this has to do with -- are you aware that the medicare supplement insurance program has pre-existing conditions and it and it's been there for years? it's in the underwriting. since the affordable care act did away with pre-existing conditions but it's still in medicare and nobody is bringing that up or doing anything to fix that problem.

are you aware of that? guest: i think the caller is plans thatut medigap covers things the traditional medicare program does not pay for. i'm not the milieu with that program but i don't think it is medically underwritten. i've gotten this: c-span before. i don't believe it's underwritten. the president is looking to make some real changes to mdeigap to require people to pay more for if they get first dollar coverse where medigap all your cost outside the traditional program. host: what does the announcement last week mean for states opening their own exchanges? another change they made in the law last week as they will let states have until the end of june to decide if they want to create their own insurance exchange. that fits better with the legislative calendar in states.

the previous deadline was end of january. they want to take over the help insurance exchange starting in november. they would have to be doing some work now to make that happen. i don't know of any states that are actually planning to join the exchange system or take over the exchange themselves. host: our line for republicans, and dixon, illinois. caller: i just have a question regarding the affordable act. it seems that if you cannot afford an affordable act insurance and most likely you will go back to medicare because of the subsidies and that might end up being more expensive than if you took the affordable act. there is a lot of people that cannot afford the affordable act. insurance policy. general, it will go back to

medicare anyway. i just had a question about that and thank you for taking my call. be talkingmight about medicaid, the program that covers low income americans. that is being expanded and about 26 states now to cover folks earning higher incomes just above the poverty line. is a pretty clear demarcation in the law between eligibility for medicare and eligibility for the affordable care act exchanges. if you are not eligible for medicaid and are eligible for the insurance exchanges

been in the obama budget for the last four years and it does not appear that re- importation is anything in the

administration is considering now. is a march 31 deadline sign up for the aca, how are things going there? guest: they had 4 million people signed up for plot -- for private plans under the aca by late february. i think we will find out this weekend many people of actually signed up by the end of february. they are hoping to get 6 million by the end of the first open enrollment and they will probably get a couple more million throughout the course of the year as people change coverage or lose their job or get divorced or events in their life that require them to change the insurance coverage. they can join after march 31. they are hoping to have about 6 million and rolled in private plans but end of march. host: how does the president's budget deal with the affordable care act? guest: there was not much in their proposing to change the affordable care act. wereof his budget policies aimed toward medicare and

medicaid. he wants to cut spending under those programs to scale back the growing costs. call let's take another from kentucky on our line for republicans. caller: thank you. share my experience here in henderson, kentucky. the husband's employer receives a letter in october that explained to us that because we are turning 65 this year our prescription drug plan with the insurance company is non-creditable coverage. i had no idea what that meant. as a retired librarian, i did my homework. the social security website and the medicare website and the medicaid and medicare website. i have called the insurance

company and the human resources person at his employer. i think i'm getting there with answers but i have spent hours on this question and i think i know right now that you just cannot buy p[art d on medicare, you have to take the whole package. what it boils down to is now that we know that his prescription drug coverage is non-creditable, we have to dump our beautiful plan with the employer and go on to medicare. we could stay on until he retired at 66 but we are not going to be able to do it. thing ishat one little going to affect a lot of baby boomers who are paying for their own health insurance.

this small requirement will have these baby boomers dumped into medicare whether they want to or not. that's all i wanted to share with you, thank you. guest: i think my parents were facing a similar situation a couple of years ago. that does not have anything to do with the affordable care act. seniors have faced this issue for a long time when they turn 65 whether to join medicare immediately or try to stay on their employer plan. it has never been smooth. the affordable care act is not make the health care system and easier to understand, unfortunately. host: let's look at the cost of the affordable care act. kathleen sibelius talk recently about how it would be funded next year. listen to what she had to say. [video clip] >> if congress funds the president's budget which is written to the targets agreed upon by senator murray and representative ryan, this would fully fund the ongoing

implementation of the affordable care act. we start with that proposal and hope that they indeed will fund it. a lot of the $1.8 billion that we have suggested is the appropriate target for implementation and that is covered by user fees. two of the $1.8 billion is our projected user fee income for 2015. if congress fails to pass a budget and fails to implement the president's budget, then we will look at other sources of funding for the full implementation. host: what is your take? guest: the administration has never had much luck getting money from congress since republicans took over the house to implement the affordable care act. $1ave been asking for billion or more every year since 2010 to help implement this law

and congress has already -- has always refused. the administration blames them for some of the problems of the rollout. in this case, the administration is asking for $1.8 billion next year starting in october. they will not get that money but they will have 1.2 ilion dollars they will collect directly from insurers for fees. annex call comes from cleveland, mississippi on the line for independents. there? i want to know why they are trying to cut out medicaid or medical help. in mississippi, it's hard for folks to get on these programs. jobs is allwith screwed up. people need help in the south.

people should come down here and see how it goes down here. people them here need that kind of help. i don't think it's too much help. mississippi is one of 24 states where the governor or the state legislature has said they are not going to expand medicaid to cover more americans. you can blame that pretty squarely on your local state officials. they say this medicaid expansion would simply cost the taxpayers of mississippi too much money. that is where the blame for that lies. squarely on your local state officials. without that expansion, the caller is right, it's difficult to qualify for medicaid. host: let's go to chicago on the line for democrats. caller: hello, i want him to

people whya lot of the insurance policies of people were canceled. it's easy to say because of the affordable care act but is it because they could not -- they were going to cancel them anyway? the guy called him and talked about $500 -- he probably doesn't know 500 people. i go to the doctor and asked my doctor and a real doctor wants people to get help. they want them not to be sick. i love that people come in who are not sick. what about the people who don't have insurance and don't have health care? who wants a sick country? what's wrong with these people? thank you. guest: before the affordable care act began on january 1, the

caller is right, the individual was a prettyket tricky market. in order to get coverage in the first place if you are buying insurance on your own, you generally had to be pretty healthy and if you had any sort of health condition like high blood pressure for example, an insurance company could deny you coverage or charge you more than your neighbor who is healthy. it was a pretty messy market to begin with and there was always a lot of turnover. some of these policies that were canceled would have been canceled anyway which is part of the routine workings of the individual insurance market before the affordable care act. some of them were canceled because they did not comply with some of the new expanded benefits required under the affordable care act or some of the requirements that limit cost-sharing and insurance plans, what you pay out-of-pocket. is innext caller

louisville, kentucky on the line for democrats. caller: yes, i would like you to comment about the negative about the health insurance companies that have done against the act. i am a firefighter and emergency medical technician in a large city. there is no more sick people than there were before or know more people getting injured. the difference now is that more of them have insurance or more ofthere is no more sick people than there were them are at lead through medicaid. in the past, the just called 911 and it was a greater expense for taxpayers and hospitals to pass on in terms of higher insurance premiums. guest: if you see more

insured people on your job, that's what the president hoped for when he passed the affordable care act. from our sin washington, we cannot really tell if the insurance expansions happening are all that broad. that's what's happening. i don't know about insurance companies advertising against the law. many insurance companies have grudgingly embraced the law. lou crossed blue shield plans especially around the country are heavily invested in the insurance exchanges and are doing a lot of advertising in favor of the law. talking about the changes announced last week, how are the insurance companies reacting ? guest: they are not real happy. they are tired of getting yanked around and told two things they did not expect to do. the extended plans create a problem for the health insurance exchanges. opened,he exchanges

insurance companies propose rates for the plans and they are not allowed to change those. that alles assumed these presumably young and generally healthy people who are on these legacy insurance plans would have been forced to sign up for new affordable care plans. to plans would have liked have price their rates a little bit higher if they had known these old plans would be extended. host: the next caller is from michigan on our line for republicans. since you're an expert on this obamacare, number one, obama is taking money out of medicare advantage. number two, maybe you can tell the viewers how a law that has become the law of the land, how he can just change everything anytime he wants without taking it to congress? guest: the caller raises two good points. on law depends for financing

some pretty big custom the medicare advantage program which is a program in which private insurers provide benefits to elderly folks in medicare instead of those people staying untraditional medicare programs. out that before the law was passed, government agencies in washington said his medicare advantage plans were overpaid compared to what' the traditional plans cost and were created by republicans back in 2003. democrats in this administration have said they wanted to scale back what these pent plans were paid to help address the budget deficit. you are right the law to take , money out of those plans. it is a difficult question to answer if what the president is doing is legal. there are lawyers that are not republicans or partisan who question whether the changes the president has made are within the bounds of what the president

can do. it would be settled if someone were to sue the administration over what they have done and it would be difficult to get into court. host: deborah in ohio on our line for independents. caller: i have a comment. i have two adult grandchildren who are in their mid 20's. one is in college. the other one is still in college and the other is in the real world and both of them refuse to buy anything that has anything to do with the aca. i understand that is a big problem with the affordable care act. young people being unwilling to buy insurance through the exchanges. and another -- the question i

wanted to ask is, since this first kicked in in november or over the last several months, president obama has just changed whatever he wanted to change whenever he wants to change it, which the previous caller made a comment on that. i would like to know, and i am an independent -- does the president think that since the midterms are coming up that the american people are just blinded and don't realize that all of these recent changes are to strengthen the democrats who are running for reelection? does president obama not understand we see through the smoke screen? i just wanted to hear your comment on that. guest: i cannot tell you what

the president thinks. after getting bolder about how the politics is portrayed, the press release that announced these changes last week mentioned by name 12 or 13 democratic lawmakers and said these people have help the administration in devising these policies. this was a message aimed toward the 2014 elections. i think they are aware that people believe there is a political motive behind some of these changes. i think that motive is becoming more transparent. host: what are you hearing from some lawmakers as these changes come out? guest: landrieu was named. they are supportive. they want any sort of change they can get. that will buffer any criticism they get in the fall for voting for the affordable care act and being held responsible for the

changes because of it. host: deborah is on the line for independents. caller: hello. i was calling to see his opinion on this going through. it is dependent on healthy people and all. do you think if they do not get the amount of people they need that this will be directed toward the single-payer system? guest: hmm. that is an interesting question. the state of vermont is the only place that is contemplating a single-payer system. the administration has not said anything they plan to support going to a single-payer system. i do not think that is the motive. until 2017, it probably doesn't matter a whole lot how many young and healthy people sign up for coverage under the

affordable care act because of some provisions of the law that are designed to prevent insurers from losing a lot of money in the exchanges. if they get an older population, they are going to raise premiums that they won't have to raise him very much until 2017 when a couple of these programs begin to expire. host: quick question from twitter. host: quick question from twitter.guest: well, health care united states has always been rationed. it is not a new phenomenon. if you had insurance, you had health care. if you didn't have health care, you are restricted. you could go to the emergency room when you felt sick and got presented with a large hospital bill. i do not think rationing has

changing under the affordable care act united states has always been resources are directed in different ways under the affordable care act. the president would say it is a more equitable division of health care resources now. host: judy is on the line for independents. you are on with alex wayne of bloomberg news. caller: we did have a high risk pool in north carolina. because of the affordable care act, that went away january 1. we did actually in north carolina have going for people that were at risk to get insurance. i went on the website in october

when it went up. i was 64 and a half at that time and i was informed that because of my age, i would not be able to subscribe to the affordable care act. within six months i would be 65 and automatically go one to medicare, which i did. i have a question. i have a son who is 24 years old. the affordable care act says that children up to 26 stay on their parent's plan. that is not going to apply to make as i am going on to medicare. the penalty, the tax that people will be paying, is that 24-year-old responsible for paying that tax because he does not have insurance, or are the parents going to be held

accountable for that additional tax? there again is the burden on the middle class and that is my question. guest: in your case your son will be responsible for paying that tax which ranges from $95 up to 1% of his income. for younger children, the parents are liable for the tax if they do not include the child on their plan. host: louise is on the line from indiana. caller: hello? host: you are on with alex wayne of bloomberg news. caller: i want to say something about the insurance. this is way before president obama became president. at the time i had two blue cross, blue shields. plus i had medicare. during that time, i had the two blue cross, blue shields, i had

to let one go and keep the other. at that time i could not understand what was going on. this is before all the other insurance, all the other hell raising about insurance. i can tell you some of the young kids here, some of the young adults that did not have insurance and had problems and could not go to the doctor or hospital. they are glad to get this insurance. they are glad to have it. guest: thanks for the call. i do not know exactly what happened with your insurance plan and your interaction with medicare. young people get sick and get hurt. they have skiing or biking accidents. they're not as invulnerable as they think they are. that is one message of the administration is trying to take

to young people to get them to sign up. they will be doing messaging around basketball games. announcements on radios featuring pop stars trying to encourage young people specifically to sign up for insurance they may think they do not need. host: lisa is on the line for democrats. are you there? let's try one more time. we are going to move on to mary from omaha, nebraska. caller: what these delays mean -- republicans control the house. they have never wanted care for the poor or uninsured and do not now. thank you.

guest: republicans in the house have proposed some alternative plans to try to cover more low income, uninsured people. they are not as expansive or as copper hands of as the affordable care act. republicans would say that is because the country cannot afford it. host: we will go back to lisa in fort washington, maryland. are you able to hear us now? lisa, are you with us? we will move on to our next call. kathy in florida on the line for independents. caller: hi. host: you are on with alex wayne of bloomberg news. caller: i think you're guest is doing a wonderful job of speaking objectively, and i do appreciate that. i was wondering about the cost of medicaid. i know there is criticism about particular states not choosing

to expand medicaid so that people can get this -- i would not call it affordable. don't they realize it is the states that is going to have to incur that expense? the states already have some expense in taxing. that seems to be something that some people do not understand. they do not realize who is going to fund medicaid? guest: medicaid is not free and cost a lot of money. in some states it is the second or third largest item. the federal government said it would pay for 100% of the cost of the expansion. for the first three years, states would not be on the hook for any of the cost of the medicaid expansion. after that the cost gets shifted to the states a little bit. the states' share never cost more than 10% of the total.

24 states have said the 10% cost is simply too much for their budgets. host: last caller is nancy from chicago on our line for independents. caller: hi. host: hi, nancy. caller: i had a comment. i hear the term death panel. i looked up the exact name. the death panel is not in the affordable care act. it is funded through the stimulus program. i had to look up the exact name. that is where it was set up. unfunded through the stimulus. is that true?

guest: there is a lot of debate about what exactly is meant by death panels. sarah palin invented the term. it wouldn't have required the doctors to do anything or the patient's to do anything. it would have given the doctors some money for talking about it. the caller is talking about the patient centered outcomes and research institute which is supposed to do studies of what they call comparative effectiveness, looking at different drugs and determining which ones work better at perhaps which are more cost-effective. the health-care law was specific that the organization cannot recommend any specific drug or device or surgery method simply because it was more cost effective.

>> thanks to bring with us, as always. >> you can see "washington a.m. eastern.at 7 the house is about to gavel them for a pro forma session. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., march 10, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable andy harris to act as speaker pro tempore on this day, signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us