you do journalism. you should have done better than that. now, we're out of time. john fugelsang is going to host "viewpoint" for you. it's going to be terrific. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> john: good evening america i'm john fugelsang once again sitting in for eliot spitzer. this is "viewpoint." thank you so much for joining us this evening. this will impact anyone who ever need medical care and their family. the supreme court's pending ruling on the affordable care act better known to its friends and enemies as obama-care. it got a rousing defense from the president at a miami rally just last night. >> obama: i believe that health reform was the right thing to do. i believe it was right to make sure that over 3 million young people can stay on their

parents' health insurance plan. i believe it was right to make sure that everybody in this country gets decent healthcare and is not bankrupt when they get sick. that's what i believe but it's up to you you decide. >> john: actually, mr. president, they don't decide. for better or worse it is now up to the men and women of the supreme court. their decision is already in writing, just waiting to be released. tomorrow we'll find out if the justices decided, if they should have ruled on the case at all. whether the individual mandate to buy health insurance survived. if the mandate could be severed from the law allowing the rest to stand and whether the medicaid expansion that is part of the affordable care act is in fact, constitutional. now with the individual mandate considered especially vulnerable house republican leaders could barely contain their glee today even though they came up with the whole bad idea to begin with. >> the obama-care bill was a mistake. we would like to see the kind of healthcare that will allow

patients to make decisions not bureaucrats here in washington. >> if the court discuss not strike down the entire law, the house will move to repeal what what's left of it. >> john: let's hope the congressional socialized health plan covers that congressional spray tan booth. anyway they seem to have all the support they need. an "abc news" "washington post" poll finds that while less than 40% of the americans like the current healthcare system that we in this country the 56% who don't like our healthcare system even fewer americans 36% currently favor the affordable care act. which 52% of americans are rejecting. of course, americans might like the affordable care act more if they knew that it bans insurance companies were dropping sick patients coverage. stops insurance companies from discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions.

provides help for uninsured adults with pre-existing conditions. adds free preventive care under medicare and allows children to be covered through their 26th bird on their parents insurance which prompts many businesses to hire younger people, and bans lifetime coverage limits. the negative propaganda work. people liked everything about obama-care except that whole obama part. to break down just what the supreme court choices could mean we are joined by stan hupfeld, a former healthcare executive hospital ceo and author of " "political millions brass: how politicians made a mess of health reform." and by doctor mary o'brien a board member of physicians for national health program and primary care provider at columbia university where she also teaches school. welcome. >> thank you.

>> dr. o'brien. what is your view on what becomes obama-care? does it do enough or. >> it doesn't do enough. it tinkers around with a system that really is in crisis. for my patients i want guaranteed access to care, we control the costs of care and quality of care. this does not deal with that. part of the reason was part of the decision by obama and congress to keep it at the heart of this reform. it adds cost but no value. >> the most capitalistic soldierismisticsocialism that i've seen in my life. what did you think about the obama bill. >> i never thought it would be overturn: we started out in a discussion of covering the uninsured. we figured out that has no political traction. so we switched the conversation to insurance reform and that's

where it stays today. >> john: that leads to my biggest question. the greatest misstep that the government may have made is by calling it healthcare reform and not health insurance reform. do you think that would have helped sway public opinion much more? everyone likes their healthcare, not their insurance. >> i think so. what we missed was everybody likes medicare. their grandparents are on it. their parents are on it. most don't know it's a government program. if we said look, medicare works well, it's efficient. we're going to let everyone be on medicare, forget about the private insurance companies which most people don't like. it would be hard for republicans to go against because they never go against medicare. >> john: you're talking about single payer. >> that's right gentleman. >> john: what do you think? >> i've never been in favor of single payer. the problem is we're trying to convert what is strictly a payment system into insurance and it has never been about

insurance. >> john: what do you expect the courts are going to do tomorrow, sir? >> i don't expect they'll overturn it. parts of it maybe the individual mandate but i never felt that they'll let the whole bill go. >> john: doctor? >> i think they'll overturn the individual mandate. i don't think it will effect that many people. it's become a touch zone for people in terms of what it mines. we have 15 million uninsured. the new plan will cover less half of those. 17 million will be on medicaid. so we're left with 8 million who will be maybe under the mandate lots of them will have exemptions, and there are a lot of real administrative complexity in getting people on and off the insurance exchanges whether they're eligible for medicaid. does it go up 1% and now they're not eligible for medicaid? it will be an an an administrative

nightmare. >> john: i think you might be right, especially what is governor oh romney is going to do. mr. hupfeld, let me can ask you what do you think will happen if the individual mandate is struck down. >> the problem was that many people including physicians were supportive of the bill. many times people who would show up at emergency rooms without a source of payment would now have a source of payment. the only offset we were going to have is that people now have insurance through the individual mandate. >> john: even people who don't like the concept of a mandate obama did run against the concept of a mandate it does speak to the republican ethos of pay your own way. we're tired of people without insurance clogging up our

emergency rooms and we're paying for you. that became the red flag for everybody. >> i think a better way of having hospitals having a reliable source of income is to guarantee that everyone has health insurance. the only way to do that is through a single fayer system where you're automatically part of it. you eliminate the loss of $.30 per dollar for administrative overhead and you go down to 32% like with medicare. that would be much more efficient. many of these plans on the insurance exchange like the bonds plan which many people will buy only covers 60% of your costs. if go to the hospital, there are a lot of bills that won't get paid. there is a lot of tinkering with it, and we still have unaffordable health insurance and people have less access to care because they have detectables and inadequate coverage and co-pays. many people don't use healthcare even if they have insurance.

theythey don't have access, but they have insurance. >> john: what do you say mr. hupfeld, what kind of system could america hope to implement that would help many americans. >> i outline many alternatives. we need to change the whole insurance industry into not for profit. one-fourth of every healthcare dollar goes to collecting bills. it does nothing for patient care. we're taking an adjudication process, comparing it to a benefit package and paying the claim and we're pretending that that's insurance. we do have to reform that. >> john: exactly. what you would you both say would be the impact on patients and the system if the entire bill is thrown out tomorrow. >> i hope if the entire bill is thrown out and we can't be mandated by private insurance we might then be told why don't we go to a not-for-profit public

healthcare like every other country does. in a way it might be paradoxal response for the republicans that it moves us closer to a public program. >> john: i think we would see the insurance companies open up their wallets for governor romney's campaign. >> they already have. >> john: that's a good argument. >> i'm not optimistic if the whole bill were overturned. i think there would be a period of destabilization as we try to figure out and we would have a lot of conversation about a market-based solution. in my years as a hospital executive i've never seen anything that healthcare is market driven lie a refrigerator or a car. >> john: it is very discouraging and scary to think about the ramifications. i'm grateful to have the intelligence and expertise of both of to you help us walk through it. stan hupfeld and dr. mary

o'brien. thank you both for being on the program tonight. coming up next, fast and furious, is it all that it's cracked down to be? stick around for more "viewpoint." >>it's the place where democracy is supposed to be the great equalizer, where your vote is worth just as much as donald trump's.

>> john: welcome back to "viewpoint." our number of the day may seem like an awful lot but in this case it isn't.

it's $450 million! that's how much barclays bank and it's subsidiaryies greed to agreed to pay to avoid litigation. now first off if this sounds exactly like the same thing we talked about the show last night, it's not. this is another case of banks running an interest rate fixing racket. and if it sounds so incredibly boring you automatically want to switch over and watch reality shows about washed up celebritied a dicks marrying kardashians in hot tubs? that's what the banks are counting on. trillions of dollars of financial deals between banks and other institutions. meanwhile our good friends at barclays makes 10s of billions

of profit, and they've been fined all of $450 million. bob diamond what a guy. he has agreed not to take a bonus this year. slap on the wrist? my friends, that's not even a time out. look if you get caught speeding you pay a fine. does that mean you're never going to speed again? of course not. you just make sure that you're not caught speeding next time. you'll notice while these guys knowingly committed fraud for profit no one is going to jail. that's because you don't go to prison for wall street crime. you only go to prison if you're with occupy wall street protesting wall street crime. if we crackdown on bank crime as ferociously as park no zoning laws, there would be no need for occupy wall street.

>>it's the place where democracy is supposed to be the great equalizer, where your vote is worth just as much as donald trump's. tt it's go time! >>every weeknight cenk uygur calls out the mainstream media. >>overwhelming majority of the county says: "tax the rich don't go to war." >> john: not so fast and furious, my friends. to hear house oversight committee chairman darrell don't google my criminal record issa tell us, agents intentionally allowed illegal guns to walk across the border. but that's a pure fiction according to a six-month

investigation by catherine ebin. it's a fascinating article. you got to read it. law enforcement agents with direct knowledge of this case told the magazine, this is "fortune," that left-wing rag said agents ceased firearms when they could. in one incident, they received an e-mail from an atf colleague in texas after they confiscated 80 guns. it read, quote, are you all planning to stop some of these guys any time soon? that's a lot of guns. are you just letting these guns walk? to which the response through the skin of his teeth, have i offended you in some way? because i'm very offended by your e-mail. define walk? without probable cause and concurs from the usao, it's highway oh robbery if we take someone's property. okay joining me now is ryan j reilly reporter for talking

points memo. mr. reilly. thank you so much for joining us to make sense of this latest chapter in the theater that is fast and furious. good evening to you. >> thanks for having me. >> john: thank you. now the oversight committee pushed back and called the article a fantasy made up almost entirely from the accounts of individuals involved in the reckless tactics that took place in operation fast and furious. they're saying don't trust these first-hand accounts of guys who were there. listen to us now, is that right? >> that's about right, but it's tough to take their word for it give the outrageous allegations issa gave at the beginning of this allegation. that attorney general eric holder had knowledge of these tactics, and now he said that he doesn't have a strong issues any longer that holder knew about the tactics but is interested in these documents that was sent after the congressional investigation was launched,

which would be communications internally from the justice department of how to handle this congressional inquiry but would not answer who started the tactics. >> john: is there no changing of darrell issa's mind any any of this? they decided what the outcome is before the investigation carries through? >> well, i think there certainly were allegations made that haven't turned out to be true. i think even issa would admit that. you know this is really something that is interesting because of the way that the nra has been pushing this issue and has also asserted that holder knew something about it, and it may cause many to switch their votes to the republican side to keep their 100% nra record if they're in certain swing issues.

it will be interesting. >> john: you hit the nail on the head. those 30 democrats will cross over and vote this way because they depend on the n ra endorsement. >> the nra endorsement? yeah, they could be very worried how that would effect them in their individual districts. there is a potential tomorrow that some democrats are going to walk out during the vote as boehner did when he was in the minority a few years back when democrats were bringing contempt charges against members of the bush administration. right now the congressional black caucus has signed on and others are expected to as well. >> john: is this about a sinister program designed by democrats to introduce more guns into a crime-ridden area in the interest of getting less guns in america as issa seems to be

indicating? >> that's what many have signed on to. it's extremely bizarre theory that did not supported by any of the,it's very clear that they didn't know about the tactics being used and actually when they the first allegations were made by congress denied that the allegations were true because they were not aware of these tactics being used at all. it's interesting to see how it's played out and it's a irresponsible conspiracy theory that is being tossed around like its nothing. >> john: as someone who subscribe to nra mailings i've been seeing for three years a lot of information about how eric holder's job is to take my guns away. and it's always followed by donate to the nra here to keep your guns from being stolen from eric holder. we've been hearing this so long despite the fact that the democratic party did not make an

nra issue since diddy was was still puffy. >> the nra's bottom line is very dependent upon making sure that it's members are worried that political officials could take away their gun rights. here they have a long-standing conflict with the obama administration, calling him gun grabbing obama before he was elected. >> john: exactly. >> and holders actions, he has not done anything. in fact, gun control groups are upset with the administration for failing to do anything in regards to gun control even after representative giffords was shot, there was no movement on the effort. they gave a failing grade for the administration for gun violence. it's a bizarre theory that people are subscribing to. >> john: i want to repeat what you just said. gun control organizations are giving failing grades to the obama administration and

attorney general holder because they have not done enough about gun control. thank you for bringing that up. democrats are bringing up the bush administration and the entire project gunrunner began with operation wide receiver under president bush. the argument that the conservatives throwback is, sure, bush always let the mexican government know what was going on and holder didn't. is that a fair argument, in your opinion? >> you know, some of the details still have to be worked out. what is clear is is that attorney general had more knowledge of gun walking tactics than eric holder did. there was a memo a few days into his administration after the controversial resignation of gonzalez that there was a briefing on this, a failed transfer of weapons from the u.s. to mexico and that that effort had failed. the guns had gone into mexico, and this didn't work but they would try this tactic again in

the future. the knowledge there far exceeds what holder knew. when holder--when the first indications that holder knew that these tactics were being used he was within under a month launched the investigation, which really what most neutral observers are expecting to be the most comprehensive investigation of what actually happen rather than issa's investigation which is a bunch of allegations and then filling in to see where we could find the facts. >> john: then holder began to investigate the guns. i appreciate your expertise on this. i appreciate it. have a great night. >> thanks for having me. >> john: lebron james was on letterman. and the question y'all have been dying to ask if y'all are from ohio. up next on viewfinder.

[ male announcer ] don't miss red lobster's four course seafood feast, just $14.99. start with soup, salad and cheddar bay biscuits

then choose one of 7 entrees plus dessert! four perfect courses just $14.99. come into red lobster and sea food differently. what makes hershey's s'mores special? pure chocolate goodness that brings people together. hershey's makes it a s'more... you make it special. pure hershey's.

the real world and politics collide on "the gavin newsom show."

for elon musk what could possibly be next? watch "the gavin newsom show." >> john: still to come. congressman raul grijalva on our rights to know who is buying political influence and swaying our votes. but first bieber on c-span beck and me on the street talking with my new friend glen. when it doesn't fit anywhere else, we put it in the viewfinder. >> john: how do you feel about governor mitt romney. >> he's bum. >> john: do you have anything bad to say about him? >> he's just a bum. >> john: sue have anything negative to say about the governor? >> 's just a bum. >> this is mitt romney being on facebook. >> pro, he changes his status every five minutes. con, mostly in the section

titled political views. >> it's easy, 50 states. 50 immigration policies. every state gets it's own word, right? george can say yes to the brown thrasher. why can't south california say no to the south guatemalan. >> she would feel more at home in her adopted country. i'm sorry i'm not a trained arizona official. i some how got that backwards. actually ms. gomez of texas has helped mr. bieber of canada to learn about his adopted country. justin, when you perform in phoenix, bring your papers. >> it was a 5-3 decision with kagan recusing herself and sonia sotomayor being allowed to vote own after she showed her papers.

>> the forward roll, only two of them. where did that come from. >> now that you got this out of your system are you ready to go back to cleveland and play some ball? >> whoa, whoa, whoa. >> they all come back for real news every night. >> i know. >> it's almost like we're infecting the mother ship. >> john: do you believe in god? >> yes. >> john: do you believe in ufos. >> no. >> john: do you believe lee harry oswald acted alone is. >> yeah, he did. >> john: visit the "viewpoint" web at www.current.com. money is effecting those who will not identify themselves. raul grijalva wants them

identified. he's up next. building >>it's the place where democracy is supposed to be the great equalizer, where your vote is worth just as much as donald trump's. we must save the country. it starts with you. and who doesn't want 50% more cash? ugh, the baby. huh! and then the baby bear said "i want 50% more cash in my bed!" phhht! 50% more cash is good ri... what's that. ♪ ♪ you can spell. [ male announcer ] the capital one cash rewards card. the card for people who want 50% more cash. what's in your wallet? ha ha. ♪ ♪

if you have copd like i do you know how hard it can be to breathe and what that feels like. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva helps control my copd symptoms by keeping my airways open a full 24 hours. plus, it reduces copd flare-ups. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that does both. and it's steroid-free. spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate

medical help if your breathing suddenly worsens your throat or tongue swells you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passing urine. other side effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. does breathing with copd weigh you down? ask your doctor if spiriva can help. >> john: earlier this year it was reported that outside conservative groups were planning on spending over $1 billion on the 2012 election. that's billion with a "b." this is money not only for attacks on the president and we can't wait for those but also for so called issue ads in which a pleasant voice tells but an issue and what you should urgently think about it. the problem is these ads are usually created by shadow front groups who are not required to disclose who paid for them. let's say that you think that

billionaires pay too much in taxes and we should defund the school system, drill national parks and defund medicare, you could join a group for truth freedom and not clubbing baby seals, you could. these ads out. it's something that some in congress are looking to change. >> i'm challenging front groups put up or shut up. tell us who is funding you and what you really want. it's four months and a little more time before america elects congress and a president. let the voters died. >> john: joining me now is the man you just saw tell the groups to stop fronting. congressman raul grijalva. thank you for your time today congressman. appreciate it. >> thank you very much. >> john: let me just start with a hypothetical. if i believe that the taxes on millionaires are a bad thing and i want to drill in national

parks and end the public school system what is wrong with creating an organization because we have free speech to push an issue ad trumpeting how bad taxes for millionaires are. >> well, it insults the intelligence of the american people, and it insults the intelligence of the american voter. you could have a variety of schemes to avert disclosure and keep the money in the dark and keep it hidden. at the very minimum if that were to occur at the very minimum who is paying for it, who are the people behind it, and what are the names associated with it. then the intelligence of the american people can work its magic and begin to connect the dots and understand that the people behind those ads trumping all these things are exactly the people who are benefiting from defeating that candidate or the president in this instance.

>> john: well put. you know we hear a lot of politicians complaining about this dark money in politics, but why isn't anything being done about it? why are you one of the few voices out there the wilderness railing against this, and why are others not wanting to disclose their donors? >> we made an attempt. one example, the federation of independent businesses that got $3.7 million from karl rove front group, they have been instrumental in the litigation that the supreme court will decide tomorrow in opposition to the health reform. huge donors, no disclosures of who they are on their financial disclosure forms, just the amount of money. the consequence of that is very complex, expensive legal issue who paid for it? who paid for this initiative? i doubt very seriously that

people with small donations funded this level of litigation that has occurred around this act. so that's one good example. rather than deal with the question they say that they are engaging in a smear against businesses. on the contrary, be up front and tell us who you are. why isn't there more human cry? i think the issues are retribution. the fear that the sights would then be set on those members that push back. we know that. i felt it my last campaign, but all we're asking for is a level playing field. let the voters make that decision. i think they'll make the right decision in this election. with this money clouding and masquerading under other issues, it's not only about confusion. it's about suppressing votes and creating such misinformation that voters become disgusted or

confused. >> john: you're taking the radical idea that americans should know who is trying to persuade them and get their votes. my question is how do we persuade our republican brothers and sisters that this dark money is bad for them as well? >> we're all elected to congress and elected under a wonderful democratic system. that let's people decide. we all came here by the same means. the con sit constituents elected us and sent us here. if you want to protect that value, that level of democracy, republican or democrat, you better understand that this dark money not only corrupt, you night have a momentary victory but the inevitability is that it's about those interests. they don't care about the politics. they don't care about the party. inevitably that kind of corruption turns on whoever is playing around with it. it's to their best interest to

defend the democracy and in doing so let the chips fall. >> john: indeed. there is a new poll that says 58% of americans think that the federal government actually encourages illegal immigration into the country. now granted this is rasmussen and that's a poll for people to who think fox news is non-fiction. how could people think this? is this because the government did not endorse racial profiling? >> i think the justice department did what is right. what remains to be done is i think a really serious dialogue as a supreme court admonishing congress, do your job and have a honest dialogue with the american people. we need to do that. part of what we're dealing with are stereotypes. part of what we're dealing with is fear mongering and hate

vocabulary over the past few years, and even this poll that i find suspect says 50%--i thought it would be worse given the rhetoric and the what the debate has been. it's been about race and it has been ugly. hopefully the american people will see after the dream act that we got to solve this problem and we can't perpetuate it over and over again. >> john: indeed, i don't want to be too technical but this poll is what we call a bit screwy. why do you think people in america would actually believe that the federal government wants illegal immigrants crossing the border other than believing what sean hannity tells them. >> it's skewed and skewed to a response. the obama administration above all other administrations in this country is leading in deportation, leading in detention, leading in

enforcement, number of border patrols on the board. the enforcement side of it has been very robust. some of us think robust at the expense of really doing something else. the fact remains this president has tried to do something comprehensive. so we're now in the situation where the american people have also stated in a poll, 64% of them support the dream act. and 64% of them said if a person is here undocumented, has not gotten in trouble with the law paying taxes good, hard-working family they should be given the opportunity to legalize their status. so i think there's still a very, very deep level of decency in the american people. that's what congress should appeal to, and not the worst fears. >> john: congressman raul grijalva, it's a pleasure. and i thank you for all you've done to get corrupt money out of politics. it's not being against business to get corruption out of

politics. >> thank you for your time. >> john: senator ran paul is so pro-life he's willing to threaten the lives of flood victims over it. sound crazy? it is. more view point aming up next. george prescott bush. >> no, he was jeb bush's son. >> oh, that one. >> the ricky martin look-alike yeah. >> going in another direction. the direction away from his father. get irresistibly clean and fresh carpets in your home with resolve deep clean powder. the moist powder removes three times more dirt than vacuuming alone while neutralizing odors for a clean you can see, smell and really enjoy. don't just vacuum clean. resolve clean. desk top, lab top, ipad. iphone. >> pleasant your hearts.

>> the big one. >> stephanie: all i know, the little flower is there and it means go to meeting. i love go to meeting.

>> david: the g.o.p. wants to repeal the 1965 voting rights act even though their platform can't spell it. we'll tackle that with james white because how can we take that seriously. but first let's head west with governor granholm. >> we're going to pick up where you left off in fast and furious. our focus will be on the nra the national rifle agency and it's immense influence in washington. and then we'll see how it's playing out in congress on this eve of the contempt vote for attorney general holder. we have representative adam

schiff. he has specific opinions about that, and we'll discuss that. and then we'll go to "the war room" jeff danielss, a michigan guy and a good friend, and we're going to talk to him what it's like to be playing one of us. it will be a great night in "the war room"." >> john: brilliant. schiff is a brilliant guy and i like "the newsroom." >> i love it. >> john: more "viewpoint" coming up next.