number one thing to watch tomorrow could be the market itself. we're wondering whether today's loss of over 200 points will continue tomorrow. it will be a very important day. watch fbn all day long. >> money with melissa francis is next. melissa: i'm melissa francis and here's what's "money" tonight. the irs has been doing such a great job. its employees are getting $70 million in bonuses. wait, what? how on earth is this possible? congressman john mica tells us if insanity can be stuff stopped can money be pulled out of politics forever. owner of ben & jerry's will be here to tell us now. "who made money today"? not even a recall could stop him from making money. not sure who it is? stay tuned and find out. at the end of the day it is always about money.

melissa: we start with a brand new irs shocker today. reports are out that the disgraced agency is about to pay out $70 million in bonuses to its employees. i know, it is scandal louse, piling on to the outrageous stories we've been reporting one after another. here with reaction is congressman john mica who is on the oversight committee for government reform as well. welcome back to the show, congressman. >> good to be with you and bad to hear this latest nnws on the irs. melissa: yeah. $70 million. it is shocking. the irs notified the employee union on march 20 fifth it intended to reclaim $75 million set aside for bonus. then all of a sudden there is renegotiation of at some point. now they're giving $70 million? do you feel good having saved five million? >> we'll try to do everything we can to keep them from going through.

both omb, the office of management and budget, had directed the agencies not to give these bonuses, particularly when we're furloughing people. we're in the financial situation that we're in. then you have an agency that has spun out of control, whether it is targeting political groups. last week we did a hearing on spending outrageous sums on these conventions, speakers, gifts for that employees. melissa: right. >> and now they want to give $70 million which is not warranted or really required under, under their labor contract. melissa: let's dig into that a little bit. is it required? because the irs says that it is under a legal obligation to comply with its collective bargaining agreement which specifies the terms by which awards are paid to bargaining unit employees. but at the same time, you know, chuck grassley says that the fact that the original agreement allows for reappropriation of

such award funding in the event of a budgetary short fall. so which is it. are they required to give them or not? >> first of all we believe, senator grassley and i agree, that the terms of the agreement that they were working under allowed us to take the money back. if there was a problem with finances. if we don't have a problem with finances, these folks must be on another planet. melissa: right. >> they have been quietly negotiating hyped closed doors i think to cut another deal with them and give them the money but i'm telling you, this is causing a ruckus in congress. melissa: yeah. >> and the american people can't be happy that an agency that has spun out of control, now they're going to reward folks with bonuses. >> no, i'm sure people at home are asking, is the reason why they should not get the bonuses because we have financial problems in this country and the see kester and -- sequester and people can't tour the white house or is the reason they shouldn't get the bonuses

because the irs is doing a whole lot of things wrong right now? >> right now we're debating just a few feet from here on the floor of the house, we're debating whether to cut nutritional programs for children and elderly in the country and here they want to give, they're negotiating behind closed doors to give 70 million in bonuses to an agency that has been a poor performer at the very best. so i think we're going to stay on this we're not going to let it happen. and it is good that it came to light at this point so we can help stop it. melissa: conspiracy theorists are saying, this is all part of a larger cover-up. that these employees were thrown under the bus and blamed for things that maybe came from higher up the food chain. and now this is hush-money. how do you feel about those kind of accusations? it's a conspiracy theory but it is out there. >> i honestly don't know. we'll get to the bottom of it. if you think it's bad this week, next wednesday we're going to do a hearing on procurement gone wild in irs.

a contract that will shock the american people. so, this week it's giving bonuses to poor performers and last week it was irs spending outrageous amounts of money. melissa: right. >> for conferences and so the saga continues. unfortunately for the american taxpayers. melissa: it does and of course before that it was the targeting of conservative groups and their tax-exempt status. that keeps piling on. what are the chances that we see real reform here because the american people don't want you to get distracted by whatever the latest spending scandal is and not get real reform that changes the way business is being done at the irs? >> sometimes out of bad comes some good because it certainly sparked interest in the irs and maybe some true reform. i know chairman dave camp of the ways and means committee is now getting support for looking at a complete revamping and many other countries have gone to much simpler systems rather than adding pages and pages of tax

law to simplify. go to a fair tax. go to a tax that doesn't require this 90,000 employees we currently. melissa: right. >> adding ten to 15,000 more for obamacare enforcers. melissa: it is crazy. congressman, thanks for coming on. >> good to be with you, thank you. melissa: coming up on "money," the largest doctor's group in the country says obesity is now a disease. it could make your health insurance bill as whole lot chunkier. plus holding steady doesn't always keep things calm. there are two big winners and two big losers from today's fed decision. find out who they are. stick around, more "money" straight ahead. ♪

♪ melissa: so as if health care costs are not going up enough, a new obesity diagnosis could hit us all where it hurts. the american medical association just classified obesity as a disease. now insurance premiums could get even fatter. here so toll us what it means and how much more we may have to pay is dr. sue dakotis. she is a medical weight loss specialist. doctor, thanks so much for coming on the show. >> thank you. melissa: what does it mean that

it's a disease? that you can't control it? that it is inherited? what makes it different? it's not your fault? >> it is really not. there is a stigma attached to overweight and obesity. it is so much more than lifestyle or will power. now we spend over $300 billion a year in the u.s. on health care costs. and this includes doctors visits, surgery. but just think of absenteeism from work, decreased productivity. melissa: what does it mean that it's a disease? does it mean that you, what does that officially mean as a doctor? >> what it means is, it is a your morbidity.can really hurt can increase mortality. and it is something that is very devastating for all of bottomed did i systems. and it must be treated seriously. you don't want to just wait to treat the complications, which is what we've been doing. we've been waiting until someone had heart disease. melissa: it is disease what follows on afterward not prone

to how you are doing to get it? >> it's a combination of things. no matter what you've done if you have the disease it has to be treated. >> does that mean things used to treat it are covered by insurance? when we say health premiums are going up. we're wondering if it means that if it is classified as a disease insurance companies are obligated to cover lap band surgery, medical weight loss drugs, going to the gym, all those sorts of things? >> melissa, they have been covering weight loss surgery for a long time. melissa: but they don't cover diet pills. i read again and again, doctors have to lie or fib or stretch the truth to cover diet pills. >> they have not been covering, they are not covering appetite suppressants. yes but if we can treat patients and keep them healthier we'll cut our costs back dramatically. melissa: what we said with obamacare. we'll add a bunch more people and add more stuff and it would cost less because people would be healthier and there would be

more healthy people in the system and that didn't happen. >> that is the way it was set up. but i say with these conditions, these are serious. they're not going to go away. this is not just an administrative program. melissa: yeah. >> you have millions and millions of americans who are obese and have obesity related conditions. so we really have to focus on treating obesity, preventing it so that people don't get all these complications. melissa: where do you draw the line? how do you define who is obese? in the past body mass index has been used. there is so much criticism. >> yes. melissa: you could be certain height and weight and a lot of muscle and very healthy and by virtue what you weigh in that combination you are considered obese. is bmi is good measure orrwe have to do something else? >> we have to do something else. i have a medical weight loss in manhattan, what i use a special scale to uses bio electrical impedens to improve your body fat. we sure they lose weight they're

not losing muscle or too much water, et cetera. that is very important. melissa: it is related to how much fat you have? >> body fat percentage, absolutely. melissa: what does this mean down the road if it is classified as a disease? do you think that means there will be more medical drug companies that flood in to try to come up with solutions because the potential gains from insurance which may go up, we're debating that here but there will be more money for them to reap if it's a disease and they can, those kinds of things are covered, maybe we'll come up with new technology? >> yes. i think there will be a lot of growth in the private sector just related to this disease. a lot of people are working on hormonal treatments. they're working on science and different types of things that affect the fat sells themselves and those are really the causal agents in obesity, if you're over 20% of your ideal weight your fat cells in your abdomen take on their own life and becomeorg bans that do a lot of bad things in your body. a lot of areas we'll have big

growth. big pharma will come in to develop more medicationses. the fda will push them a little bit because of the disaster with fen-phen in 1996. melissa: thanks very much for coming on the show. we appreciate. >> thank you. >> it is our "money" question of the day, should obesity be considered a disease if health insurancers would pay more for treatment? everyone says no. it got everyone reconciled up. contact us on fast book.com/melissafrancisfox or follow me on twitter, @melissaafrancis. we have the big winners and losers from today's fed decision. see right here if you're one of them. politicians love money almost as much as i love a huge scoop of chocolate chip ice cream. -@ben & jerry's cofounder, ben cohen, is trying to rid politics of money forever. he will tell us all about it. i hope he doesn't take my ice

cream away. we were talking about obesity, now we're talk about ice cream. do you ever have too much money or too much ben & jerry's in no way. a big chunk of chocolate chip right there. ♪ [ kitt ] you knowhat's impressive?

a talking car. but i'll tell you what impresses me. a talking train. this ge locomotive can tell you exactly where it is, what it's carrying, while using less fuel. deliverinwhatever the world needs, when it needs it. ♪ after all, what's theoint of talking if you don't have something portant to say? ♪

tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 markets on the rise. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 companies breaking through. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 endless possilities. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab, i search the globe for the big movers. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 i can trade in 30 different markets tdd#: 1-800-5-2550 to help me ize opportunities, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and new ways to versify. potentially better returns tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 to getn edge, i use schwab's global research. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 they give me equity ratings on foreigntocks tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 based on things like fundamentals, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 momentum and risk. tdd#: 1-800-5-2550 i also have access to independent firms tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like ned davis research and economist intelligence unit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and with my schwab global account, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 i can trade directly online in top markets tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 in their local currencies-- when the markets are open.

tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 plus, their global specialists are on call around the clock. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 there's a world of winners out there. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and now i have a better shot at finding them. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 now get our best global offer! tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 trade commission-free online through ptembe2013 tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 when you open a schwab global account. tdd#: 1-800-345-50 call 1-800-482-1241. ♪ melissa: whether it is on wall street or main street here is "who ade money today." elon musk and anyone who owns tesla. not even a recall could beat it down. tesla is recalling up to 1200 of its model s sedans saying a rear seat latch could malfunction in a crash. investors just shrugged off the news with shares rising 1%. must la owns 22 million shares of tesla. that means he made $35 million today. talk about a winning streak. losing money today, george zimmerman apparently men's

wearhouse doesn't like the way he looks anymore. he has been fired from the company that he fired. simmer is the face of the ads. investors weren't happy with the news. shares fell as much as 6% today, before closing down. who will do the commercials now? making devilishly good mon today, ozzy osbourne and black sabbath. they topped the billboard charts for the first time in 43 years. never say die guys. what has really changed. for the fifth time ben bernanke says though the economy sim proving they're sticking with the 85 billion a month bond buying program for now. but in sorting through his intentionally confusing remarks the market got worried the punchbowl would go away and all we would be left with is a

hangover. bond sold off too. there are winners and losers. we'll tell you where you fit in. joining me now harvard economics professor, jeff marron. thanks for coming on the show. >> nice to be here. melissa: first and foremost, i watched the whole entire thing and the press conference afterwards. my goodness, it was long and boring but the markets gyrated up and down and they got something out of it. what did you make of the whole exchange? what was your take away? >> my overall take is that the fed is saying that they see the economy as gradually improving and the market data and market forecasts and all that are saying the same thing. so that means it is getting harder and harder for the markets to convince themselves that these low rates are going to last forever and everybody's known for a long time, they can't quite last forever. but that date will happen whether two years or three years away, somehow you can ignore it. maybe it's a year away or maybe even less. when that happens there will be

huge adjustments in the values of financial assets. there will be winners and losers. so i think that is what got the markets upset in the second half of today. melissa: definitely isn't how he manages the does mount. so far almost no one is confident that can be done smoothly. he said they were very much holding out the unemployment threshold of 6.5%. they wouldn't do anything before that happens. he think it is will happen sometime in 2014. do you think that is optimistic? >> well, in terms of the forecast of when the unemploymmnt rate will hit that 6.5% threshold. that doesn't seem overly optimistic. that seems perfectly plausible. i think what is optimistic believing that there's a way to undo what the fed has done that doesn't generate huge dislocations of the we just have a fed balance sheet that is completely out of whack relative to the rest of the economy. when they sell, if they do sell all of those treasury bonds, all those mortgage-backed securities, something's got to give. melissa: i'm sure what you heard, what he said we can

simply hold the securities to maturity. there is nothing that says we have to sell them. don't worry, we have it under control. as a professor of economics does that work first they hold them to maturity? >> that means changes, effects on interest rates will be very slow and very gradual and that might help but market seems to be dependent now on them not only selling off what they already have on their balance sheet but continuing to buy more, this 85 billion per month. melissa: right. >> that really can't go on forever. melissa: yeah. >> i think it is trickier than the chairman made it out to be today. melissa: absolutely. let's get to winners and losers. we promised viewers we would do this. good news for u.s. treasury and for banks. how come? >> well, what is happening the fed is buying assets that the treasury is selling and assets banks sometimes want to buy. buying those assets it bids up prices and raises value of those on the balance sheets of banks, other financial institutions.

it keeps interest rates low and the treasury can roll over its debt for now at relatively low rates that is good news for those guys. melissa: when the rates go up the government has a problem because they are borrowing money at very cheap rate so that will be tough. >> exactly. and we have a bigger and bigger debt of the despite the fact that interest costs are not contributing to huge amount to the debt we still have a big debt getting bigger every single year. when interest rates go up there will be a big increase in interest costs and deficits will go up faster. melissa: the big losers are savers. interest rates are low and you get no reward for saving your money. that is too bad, because one of reasons we got in the whole mess in the first place everybody was buying, buy, and leveraging and not saving. the other big lose certificate u.s. economy. how come? >> i think the u.s. economy will likely be a loser. more we keep doing qe, whatever the bigger adjustment and harder it will be to get back to normal. so i think we should probably have stopped it sooner, probably

much, much sooner. longer we keep doing it i think it raises the risk. i think it makes magnitude of the adjustment even harder. another way of saying, i think the size of the bubble we probably have in bond prices just keeps going up and up. melissa: professor you're so clear. >> the economy will lose. melissa: you are so clear and make so much sense. i hope you come back soon. >> i would love to, thank you. melissa: next on "money," can you really take money out of politics? i don't know. ben cohen, the cofounder of ben & jerry's ice cream says yes. he will tell us his ambitious plan to do it. i hope it includes the americone dream. that is delicious. breaking down the cost of immigration. cbo says it will cut the deficit and boost the economy and increase jobs. really? we have former cbo director douglas holtz-eakin to crunch the numbers. "piles of money" coming up. ♪

at od, whatever business you're in, at's the business we're in with premium service like one of the st -time delivery recordsand a, we do whatever it takes to make.

♪ melissa: no matter what time it is, "money" is always on the move. fans rejoice. microsoft just announcing that they will not require their upcoming xbox one video game system to have an internet connection to play games. this issue has caused a huge stir in the video game community. there is no doubt that news will

help microsoft sell the council. right now investors are gaming board's in don't know what to make of it, but soon there will. from making as commander montae ending a cold hard cash in the nation's capital and not in the big apple, ben and jerry's co-founder has a new campaign to stamp money out of politics. he is giving away $1 bills stamped with phrases like not to be ussd for bribing politicians. ben and jerry are no stranger to funding political causes. the details. is the ice-cream icon himself. welcome to the show. thank you for coming on. >> hi. how are you doing. melissa: what do you think -- thank you. what do you think eulogy by stepping these bills and and in the not? in d.c. the irony that you are kind of spending money to influence politics while trying to get people to not have money in politics? they're is a little bit of irony there.

>> no, i don't see the irony. you know, i am kind of fix some times. you know, this is -- this is just bringing attention to the stamp stampede campaign. stamp stampede is a campaign to build public support for an amendment to get money out of politics. melissa: what does that mean? you want to get corporations out. you don't want anyone to donate money. i mean, you want a federally funded political campaigns or everybody has the same amount of money? >> well, i think there are two options. one is limiting contributions from anybody to $100. and the other is having all campaigns kamal federal campaigns publicly funded, federally funded, you know, fund is essentially at no additional taxpayer expense by closing some corporate tax loopholes. melissa: how much money are you giving away?

what would be a success? would make you feel like it had been with it? >> you know, i will be giving away a few hundred dollars, but the big thing, the big thing is that we are bringing down to new york city the amendment extent mobile, which is the flagship of the stampede campaign. is a 12-foot high by 14-foot long lou goldberger tight money stamping machine, and what this campaign is about is getting tens of thousands of americans to get their own rubber-stamp, like this. i got a rubber-stamp here, rubber stamp here. stamp their own money with this statement, not to be used for bribing politicians. melissa: we have our own money here on "money" that says "money." we are competing with you. and not sure if i want to stamp my dollars because -- although these are not worth twice as much as yours. i guess it depends on what the

bargain is. you talk about wanting to give money and politics, but you are someone who has donated a lot of your own money to politics. you know, according to the federal election commission since 1990 you get paid $110,000 to politics. you have done in your own money. is there a conflict? >> i don't see any conflict in the least. i mean, i would gladly, you know, limit my contributions to $100 or have -- make it so that nobody can contribute. all the campaigns are federally financed. but until that system is changed , you have to play according to the current system. melissa: that makes sense. you got a lot of attention for being a part of the movement resource group which wws -- their goal was to raise $2 million to fund occupy wall street. some of that money going to administrative costs, some going directly as stipends to people that would essentially be paid

protesters that would -- with something like that continue? do you feel like that is money in politics? @% well, we are talking about is influencing elections, contributing money to politicians. melissa: you don't think that influences elections to have big, loud protesters? i walked through there for months and months going to work. it seemed like that was influence elections and influencing politics around the world. do not feel that counts? >> i am talking about is the system that people call legalized bribery whereby corporations and the richest people in the counnry are donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to politicians in return for political favors. and that is what we're talking about in terms of campaign finance reform. melissa: so funding occupy wall street would be okay, but you know what to give money to politicians themselves?

>> absolutely. funding any kind of, you know, organization doing whenever is fine. all we're talking about is not being able to pay politicians to pass laws that you want passed. melissa: interesting. thank you so much for coming on our show. it is always a pleasure, and we are all picking up on y screen now for the rest of the evening. >> thank you. melissa: all right. turning to a different area of politics now and "money," the real cost of immigration reform, good news for supporters of the senate immigration bill. the congressional budget office estimates that it would cut the deficit, grow the economy, and increase jobs. is it all good news? here to press a number, former cbo director. welcome back to the show. thank you for coming on. my exact number here. the cbo says that the immigration bill would decrease the deficit by $197 billion over

ten years. i was fascinated by that precise number. can you back us into that? where does that come from? 197 billion over ten years. >> i think the basic architecture is pretty simple. it is true that if you expand legal immigration to the united states there will be more federal costs. the cbo puts that estimate at about 250 billion. it is also true though that having a larger labor force, bringing the skills and that the bill intends to bring in enhances economic growth. the cbo expects the economy to be about three and a half percentage points bigger, and that translates into more taxable income and about for under $50 billion in revenue. 450 billion income of 250 after the deficit down by about 200 million. melissa: a couple of pieces in there you just said that i can hear people in the audience yelling at the television that people disagree with. number one -- >> let's yelled back. melissa: that's right. bring in skilled workers.

folks on the other side always make the argument that the workers that are coming in as a result of a new immigration would not necessarily be very skilled. so the productivity part of that is not correct. audi respond? >> well, the cbo estimates that the increased immigration will raise productivity, so you have their estimate. think the important thing to recognize that the u.s. has never had an immigration policy built and economic objectives. it looks that family reunification, political asylum, refugee status command in this legislation the cbo estimates that half of the increase in population would be for employment or merit based immigration. that is a sea change in the way we think about who we bring in, thinking about as an economic issue. melissa: i no -- i appreciate all that, and you are fantastic amount but answer the direct question. if they are not skilled workers, does it change? >> but they are. so i think they're going to get -- if you look again and find

the numbers, a big chunk of the immigration is high-skilled. the high-tech industries, stapling green cards, people of the 80's, silicon valley has been very interested. it is also true -- melissa: what percentage do you think that is? >> say again,. melissa: what percentage do you think that is to make the audience is young and that is a very small -- >> no. think of that as something that is 30 to 40%. think of those pillars 30 to 40% the smallest part, the part in the middle, that is the part that is the least represented in the bill. melissa: 10 million people coming in. it would increase the population significantly. does that mean as more people come into the country they would be using a lot more services, but there would be paying more taxes as well. alloy's wonder how that nets out. is that a net positive or negative in terms of cost? if you stack of how much more cost there would be in terms of

services, you know, social security, everything else the people come in to get food stamps, anything worse is how much taxes being paid because now these folks are legal, so they're paying tax. how does that number night at? >> the net is positive. as the $200 billion reduction in deficits over ten years. i think that is a narrow way to think about this. woody to evaluate something that is good or bad for america by how well the government does. melissa: we are crunching the numbers. >> and i agree with that. melissa: it is a much bigger the session, but we're just looking at the economic benefit in this particular segment. i totally appreciate the idea that it is more. >> the economic benefit to -- the other money piece, the private sector money. so an economy that is bigger, but thousand dollars for every man, woman, and child in america. that is important as well. melissa: so, the 10 million workers coming in, would they displace current workers? i have my list of all the questions on twitter and

everywhere else in 1901 to miss them. we displacing current workers? 2 million people coming into the country hungry, eager to work. it seems like they're going to rather than beaten million more workers at hampton million new jobs we don't really have those jobs open right now. are they going to despise current workers? >> remember that we grow all the time. 310 million americans in large part because people have babies, grow up in the jobs. the american economy has shown is tremendous -- shown a tremendous capacity to as our natural births and a restaurant history. the same thing would happen here. the important caveat is a genuine concern is we do have a @%d economy. double-digit with real measures. now, this would take a long while to get geared up, and i should hope that if you and i having this conversation about money five years from now we're not talking about an economy that is sitting. immigration would be the least of our problems. we need to evaluate this approach from the perspective of

fixing the short run problem and asking how we want to manage our immigration. melissa: one more math question because i love your brain. when we are looking at interest rates, the cbo projects that interest rates would rise. two of the interesting fact that came out of this kentucky above the average wage falling off. that was a little bit misleading because it makes people think that their wages are going down, but actually more workers are coming in you might be working for low-wage. i was interested in the interest-rate peace. the cbo projects that interest rates would rise. why is that? >> again, this is all compared to the status quo. don't do anything. even wages would rise. they're just worrying about how fast. the big insight, yes, it takes workers to reduce dust, but it also takes capital to begin the factories and equipment, ideas, all of the things that financial capital allows corporations to acquire, and if we give more workers we run into a little bit

of a capitol shortage. and when short people have to pay higher interest rates to get which is always going on. melissa: all right. i always say that ron and i apologize. i love having you on the show. i hope you will come back. >> a pleasure to be here. gusty math again. melissa: perfect. coming upon "money," enough is enough. broadcasting rights by sending cable bills soaring and customers of time warner cable are finally rebelling. a class-action lawsuit could cut the cord on high cable bills. you will explain why because at the end of the day it is still all about ice-cream. we are still enjoying our ben and jerry's. making a mess. what you doing? ♪ if you've got it, you know how ha it can be to breathe and man, you know how that feels. copd includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis. spiriva is a once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment

that helps open my obstructed airways for a full 24 hours. you know, spiriva helps breathe easier. spiriva handihaler tiotropium bromide inhalation powder does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an larged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva. discuss all medicineyou take, even eye drops. stop taking spiriva and seek immediate medicahelp if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, vision changes or eye pain, or problems passinurine. otheside effects include dry mouth and constipation. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva hes me breathe better. does breathing with copdeigh you dn? don't wait to ask your doctor about spiriva. this man is about to be the millionth customer. would you mind if i go ahead of you? instead we had someone go ahead of him and win fiy thousand dollars. coratulatis you are our one millionth customer.

nobody likes to ss out. that's why ally treats alltheir. whether you're the first or the millionth. if your bank doesn't think you're speci anymore, ally bank. ur money needs aally.

♪ melissa: allis this? your cable providers bins billion securing rights to air games for sports teams a you don't even watch and then charge you to recoup the money. that is exactly what is happening for time warner cable customers in california. the good news, the fight against the cable giant could be the beginning of choosing your channels.

here to explain his attorney nicole the board. thank you for coming on the show what is wrong with this? >> you know, that's the thing. i think that this lawsuit is going to be a difficult one for the plaintiffs are the people who are suing because the fact of the matter is if you don't like what you're paying for from a company you can choose with your dollars to go somewhere else and choose another service provider. i think if enough customer speak up, at some point time warner has to hear the message and spend some money. melissa: i myself have been a victim. the differences -- i say that jokingly, but always sort of. cable has a monopoly on whenever blocked you are on. if you want cable, you have a cable provider. there is not a lot of choice. now you can do netflix and other things to me but you cannot have a different cable provider. does that factor in?

>> it absolutely can if that is the circumstance for the particular litigant. for many people there are actually choices among providers. they can get a dish, at&t, another provider. the interesting thing, it's the reverse of what the people who are suing is saying, you cannot go to another provider to get the baseball game with a basketball game for the teams in question because their the only companies that carry those teams. melissa: that is a great point. so had you think this turns out? it sounds like you think that the planters don't have a leg to stand on. >> you know, from where i said it looks like this is going to be a difficult case for the plaintiff to win. that being said, the cable company is apparently spent billions of dollars to get the rise to show the games for the dodgers and the lakers. keep in mind that there will be willing to spend quite a lot of money in order to defend the practice that there currently using with the customers. on the other hand, they may see that the people who are willing

to sue are also willing to go somewhere else for cable. while they may not win the lawsuit, then they get something changed. melissa: it is without question bad pr. "would you advise them? how damaging do you think the pr is? is it worth it to them to settle or does it did create an avalanche or open them up for other things down the road? >> i think that they are opening themselves up for quite a lot of litigation. takes time and money and eneegy to defend. the right thing would be to settle with these folks. find a way that they don't have to get the baseball and basketball bundled into whatever package they're getting. otherwise they will see possibly increase legislation and legal fees. if people want to buy the basketball games or the baseball games, they can simply buy that package. i think that might be the resolution that the cable company needs to consider. melissa: assuring in new technology. you hate your cable provider, it

makes things like dish, netflix, anything else more interesting. thank you for coming on the show >> thank you for having me. melissa: up next on "money," should the miami heat. it issa little early to put a two-time champion inside your new shoes. why he is tempting,. let's get that. look closely. it is all in "spare change." you can never have too much money. i have to be honest. it's right over there. i'm giving it a second. ♪ she knows you like no one else.

and you wouldn't have it any other way. but your erectile dysfunctn - you know, that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's righ you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. >> this is a test and symptoms of bph, like needing t frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthynough for sexual activity. do n take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood prsure do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis.

side effects maynclude headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-termnjury,seep for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allerg reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial.

melissa: kind of a downer. we are more excited than that. let's have a little fun with spare change. today we are joined by julie burzynski and doug burns. >> it is my pleasure. >> thank you for having me. melissa: first up, checkout the future of this jet by honda. that is right. it is a honda jet. $4.5 million. it's not for everybody, but it can be cheap. it only takes one pilot to fly it, there is little financial release. do you want to go in on it that is the real question. i think it is fabulous.

>> you get like 10 or 20 people. you can do shares. >> i don't get it. it's kind of like it's not like the jetsons thing where you commute. >> what is good about it is that you can landed on a shorter runway. >> well, okay. melissa: can you landed on the highway? they say that it is like the honda civic of planes. it is more compact, but you only need one pilot of in front. more affordable. >> i can't wait. okay, i'm going to test drive it. okay now onto basketball braggarts. the nba championship isn't over yet. but lebron james making a

stunning statement with his new line of nike crosstrainers. i couldn't make out this picture first, i was scared. but then i realized that that i3 a hand at the top of issues. the two-time champion on it. so doug, i will start with you. is this a smart move caramelize? >> remember millions offpeople watching, that really tick everyone off. finally he earned it. you don't say that you have two championships when you don't. melissa: you are treating about this earlier. >> i really was.

>> guys really kind of a -- i don't really know the word. melissa: you can say anything you want, it is cable. >> if he wins, it's going to look like the best move ever. >> that's great. >> the point is that his risk and reward. if he wins on thursday night, he is good to go. melissa: i don't think he should have let somebody photographed okay, onto the next, this

property was for sale in 2009. $370 million. do you think the auctioneers were gunning for this assignment? >> it is right there. for those of you who don't live in your comment is right next to a hospital. you can go in and did a little facelift or whatever you need done. it is very convenient. -p>> you cannot hold it out. you have to get this first. >> why would you spend money on art if you couldn't get yourself? >> well, in other words, you have to keep your eye on that one. >> very interesting financial prediction for a segment that is supposed to be more joking or not. >> let's hit the rewind button.

melissa: that is all the money that we have each night. be sure to watch tomorrow. i will beat talking with jeffrey katzenberg. you know, they make all of those movies that kids love. they made a deal with netflix. we will have it tomorrow.@ here comes "the willis report." gerri: tonight on "the willis report", a big change in the way that we view obesity in america. but already warnings that will make us even fatter. and new problems with the obamacare help exchanges. millions at risk of having no health insurance at all. and getting groceries for free. we are watching out for you tonight on "the willis report." ♪ ♪