we will s later. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ neil: all rght, welcome. clock that is not taken. not quite the ticking timebomb at is so bad. welce, i trusting in for neil cavuto. things are getting even weirder. the administration is trying to make the stdown sound ev scarier. and barack obama tweeting today that this is important. putting the safety of our food at risk due to the government

shutdown. and of course many national parkare still ut. but lots of nonessential staff are also own and you had hat to thosethat are paid to clear brush and federal land n this is really tuning into a proverbial zoo. but it gets worse. members of he house actually have to pick up and clean their own houses. how trrible. now, it's hard to believe. how about someone to put ths to perspective. my next guest. mercedes, have to tell you that there is a clock in a hallway, everyone walks past it, no o decides to wind it up. that tells us that speaks volumes about why washington is

messed up. >> i was actually kind of shocked. the personnel clock wander in the capit. can't we outsource the position? [laughter] i think when you start looking at theifferent components, for example my kid might be upset about the panda cam been turned off, but it puts into perspective how our tax dollars being spent. so much pressure being put out there by the white huse and in some ways, ain, it's the reasoo we are having a problem is ecause of the republicans and theyare pulling out all sorts of things to push through this pr campaign that is going on right now in the scare tactics. charles: we saw it live sequestration through the white house, easter egg thing, all the things have lookedterific. but so far i think that the average american can't say hat

they have been hit by this governmenthutdown. this parti gernment utdown. >> that is in part because about 80% of what the government does is still operating. people do not oftenties realize -hat these talks are still going on, medicare, medicaid still being paid, the essential activities from border control to the faa, still in operation. agencies that we are talking about the fund education and commerce are not really vital. in some cases they provide important services, but they are not very essential in some ses may be unnecessary. th problem for republicans or not you have read "the wall street journal" poll today is the publiis blaming republicans more than president obama for this so the scare caaign seems to be working. what is back earlier when you try to scare with the sequester, it backfired because about was an essential government service

of the president was playing with. things like the faa and activities that americans depend on. >> reless working, i don't get it? >> i think it was becauss it was so overtly political the first time. rememberhen the president tried to close down the air traffic control system. smart republica le to coburn who said here is 10 programs you could cut. and o the same thing when they shutdown thefood inspection service and so fort this has gone on a while and americans would like this result charles: there is no doubt about that and that th president has won the pr battle. i have to tell you that it's pathetic some of the things they are ininabout. in the long run, mayye we will and we could live with smaller government. thank you and we will talk to you again soon. >> thank you. charles: the shutdown could slow down the keystone pipeline to

the state department saying that it's slowing down the review process for the long delay. john campbell says that it's just ather administration excuse to block this ting. representative, it's pretty always that they don't like it. the point is likee a ictim i the turmoil of washington. >> that's right. thank you for having us on. this is the hetorical situation because they are able to say oh, because of this, w can't do the keysne pipeline, which we know they don't want to do anyway. whe they are always ausing house republblicans of cateringo what they consider an extreme small element of our p party and catering to an extremsmall element of this party because the unions wanted and everything else. @% would pas the house and sena and this enabled him to slow it down and at the same time wayman on us on republicans. so he gets this to fear of

slowing down the keystone pipeline and adding to the narrative but you all just discussing the last panel about all offthis pain that is unnecessary and exaggerated and manuuacture that he is trying to create with the slowdown. charle there is no doubt that christmas ame ear this week for the white house. let's talk about what could force the hand. the president talking more and more about our reat energy renaissance, which s very interesting.ven't heard geoge bt any credit for it and we know the president is not like fossil fuels and has not donenything to help out. at some point we are going to get a real jobs report number out soon. we are going to see that this country is still struggling for jobs, high-paying jobs th keystone provides an ultimately it will trigger a genuine effort by the white house to get is thing ging. charles: i would love to tell you yes. >> when we did a poor jobs

report job supportrom the president will say that it's because of the shutddwn and because of republican scare tacticson th debt limit. it is becauue of all kinds o thiigs that we are doing or keeping him from doing because we don't have high enough taxes an because we don't have this or that. you know and i know that it is because a lot of regulation is standing in the way of all the genuine individuals that are out the in the economy, whh is energy production, but they have a lot of regulations that are being even greater and to our economy. whether it's that or 3-d printing order elents of the economy that obamacare is puttina wet blanket on all of us. we know those arethe real causes of what in slowing the economy now. but the president will have his own things that he is going to appoint him. and he sang at the stuff over

here. moving to open the keystone pipeline. but i just don't think that is probably the case. history would say that it's unlikely to move at. charles: youe absolutely right. they challenge the state department. before i let you go, how are things going down at? are you getting a sense that there are no pickups and this could be rsolved early next week when i. >> i think tht it could be. everyone is talking, rhetoric has calm down. trying to give room for negotiation to occur. and i have heard lots of information from various sources which is somewt contradictory. whic i don't thnk we have a firm handle on who is really going to make some deal here and where and how and when. and i think that he funnel is narrowing a little bit and over the weekend things will calm down and people ca really get to work on a dealand i wuld

hope by mondayhat may we would have something or hopefully some progress. charles: representative campbell, have a great one. we know that you always do the right thing and we apreciate it. >> thank you very much. charles: when a guy who atually wrote the patriot act is fighting to rein it in, he is here next. wait until you hear about the massive lawsuit that is dragging him down. >> if the pirates find you, remember to keep them away from the important things..

l right, i know this isn't any fun to talk about, but we should. ok, so who's going to do what? i'll pack the dead batteries. great. girl: i'll only t what i don't need into a duffle bag. perfect. that's totally unhelpful. no problem. meanwhile, i will try to comrt everyone by speaking in a calm voice. and i'll try to get the nerator going without any gas. oh, let's not foet the cell phones, which probably won't work. right. and who is going to handle supplies? i caforget to do a list for us. thanks, pal. well, i think weouldn't be any less prepared. i'm proud of you guys. announcer: talk to your kids aboutho to call, where to meet, what to pack.

visit ready.gov/kid for tips and information. charles: it is time for the b side. tonight, congrsman john bennett joined us and he is the co-author of the patriot act with george bush. now he is actually fighting to rein in the powers tha are pushing this ne bill,

snooping.rly with the nsa suing the administration over this thing. weome to t show, congressman. >> thank you. thank you for having me. charles: i guess a little bit like the monsters have gotten out of handere? >> yes,because when the patriot act was initially drafted, we thought we had drafted the ability to prevent a collection the collection of metadata, which meant that everybody in theu.s. that makes a phone ca, made or received, durng the oversight we didn't have that. the collection of data. once i left and we were doing the oversight anymore, the nsa really got out of control. and then former ielligenceration mmittee chair in the house said what obama has been doing and we have to bring the rein in their spending in. there's no rson why ever innocentmericans on call ough to be picked up by th nsa and

then stored for five yrs or maybe even more. charles: did you sense that it had this kind of power? >> a lot of times people put things together and i lso think, okay, we figured it all out. people figure out different interpretations. section 215 of the stock. but could we see any of this coming? >> no, iould not see any of this coming in. as you kow, the court and the intelligence committees are supposed to doing oversight to prevent the nsa doesn't go wild. this is a failure of oversight more than anything else. the only way to stop any adnistration from going wild is by congress for goinit ability do this oversight and i really regret that both the legislative and judicial branches did not do it.

the church commission's recommendations in the 70s created the intelgence committee to put the brakes on the nsa and instead they have been stepping on the gas d acting as cheerleaders. that iwhy we got the problem that we have today. charles: where do we go from here? who are you suing, is that the viable way in the best option to try to get this thing going so that the american people are no longer victimized by their own gornment? >> they have to do a two-pronged thing. one of the lawsuit against eric clapper, who is the a national intelligence directo anremember that he told the senate committee thathe gave the least on truthful answer. long lying to congress as a federal crime and he should be fired by the president and prosecuted by the justice department. the other is doing i legislatively and senator patrick leahy andi will be introducing legislation as soon as we can get this back from the

shutdown. the legislation will do severa things. first of all that the collection of phone records can only take place when e nsa targets a foreigner who is a member of a recognized terrorist organization. either in this country or abroad the second thh is we are revising the court and any change would have to be public and it would be a public advocate that would represent the public and private intere. the third thing w would be doing with is telling the phone companies that they have the option at their discretion of saying how many requests they have gotten from either the nsa or the justice department to

turn over and notspecifying who theyey were being requesting fo. >> this is a biparsan issue and it seems like to ma no-brainer. we areooting you on because this is egregious and outrageous and is an offense to almost every single american. we definitely want to touch base with you. >> i would agree with that. but i wod also say a few things that you can't put on the air to say what it is. charles: i would too. have a great weekend. all right comingu.s. taxpayer spent over $11 million bailing out chrysler. that's how its repaying it. ey should create 1100 jobs -- but in mexico? the unbelievable auto ba

charles: talk about taking the money and running. chrysler says it's investing more than $1.2 billion in two mexican plans to build commercial engines. that is almost the exact aunt american taxpayers mony. susan, they are forcing chrysler south of the border anything thiss the reason this is happening? >>bsolutely. in order to build a oduct that you n actually sell in today's market, the unions are holdi companies hostage so they have no choice. we cannot continue to pay the kind of labor prices that we have had pay and remain competitive. charles: that's not too far-fetched. a lot of people believe that unions demanded too much from

the automakers to begin with. but that attitude added to th demise. charles: it's not far fetched but not remotely new. a decades long topic thattyou are discussing right now. thought we would discuss whether or not chrysler is backstabbing u.s. taxpayers. to that i would say that you have to decide. do you want them to operate as a business or do you want them -- do you want them to do them what weell them to do is the taxpayers. >> i wou ratr that they operate as a business. >> than they o both? this is the argument that i hear all the time that we are going to ensure and bring businesses back to america. so are you admittin that this is not the right business climate to actually bring businesses back to? >> nothing of the sort. i don't have a list of all of chrysler'sfactories in front of me. my hunch is that they continue to manufacture cars in the united states and that they ll

continue to manufacture cars in the united states. they re a global company and a nufacturer and all sorts of places. making a decision to make an investment in manufacturing in mexico is one of the capital investmentthat chrysysler will make in the next decade, i woold assume. i'm glad, i know that you're not, but i'm glad they're still business. >> we have to let companies make money. we want your moneyack from chrysler and have them pay taxes. they have to be able to make money and that's the bottom line for any business. charles: i think that we are all ppy th they are in business to do wht w disagree on is how they went about it. i believe that all of them cld ha found financing and we didn't have to let them see this. that's a long and drawn out story. we can't have it both ways. we keep hearing g others going t be a manufacturing renaissance in this country and one of the prime companies that should be setting an example of this. >> yes, but right now there are 600,000 unfilled manufacturing

jobs in the united states and we do not have the skills to fill those jobs in this count. i said before that whave unions holding some hostages we have a multitude of situations. >> i was going to say that if this was strictly a union issue, they could be ging to mississippi or alabama or a southern state where auto manufacturing is fighting a nonunion states. clearly there e more issues at play. >> the bottom line, maybe not a complete st in the back but a nick in the back? >> i agree thaa it's a boo-boo charles: this is serious stuff. not almost double what it was in 1975. this after spending ore than $60 trillion on the so-called war on poverty since 1964. susan, you say that it's an

entitlement society that is fueling poverty more than anythi elss. >> we have createdda society in the united states are wejust don't have a strong work eth anymore and people expect to be talking about this. fast food workers want to pay $50 an hour. we have a skills gap with all the unfilled manufacturingobs and we ought to be doing this argiving these people incentives to stay at home and at their cell phones and food stands and all that,e should be using that money to help them get the education so that they can go out and work. i know that at 34 letter word, they can go work and create and be a part of society and economy to one of the same thing that adam told me about a week ago. would you ke to reiterate that? >> yes, i would like to reiterate that, charles. i tnk it is insidious. certainly it is a clever suggestion to say that the money spent on helping poor people has caus them to be more poor.

we cannot prove that, but it sure makes for good situations to say it. but i would point out on specifically regarding the poverty data that if yo includedthe food stands that people had received that the data does not include, fewer people would be in poverty, which suggests at least some of these governmt programs are helping people. >> you are making susan's point that it would suggest th opposite the people are not lping themselves. in other words that we have created a climate and 1978, the job market was upto 3% in the last time hat we got it was half othat at 35% and e have actually created an environmt where kids don't want to work for the entire state sury say that one of the things hurting businesses more than anything else is people coming to work on time. you're talking about skills. how about just setting an alarm

clock. >> i have run businesses my entire life. because i am the owner, i will be working 24 hours per day seven days a week. but he will come to work, they come in late. they take at least n hour or an hour and half for lunch. heaven have an event you would ask them to stay 15 minuues after the clock a5:00 p.m. >> that is why they call it rush hour. look how great ou look working 24 hours a y. all right, is washington on wall street hurting wall

charles: at halftime and jpmorgan is gettinthrottled. not by investors that the government. the comany with a 380 million-dollar loss last quarter. releasing this tatement. while we had a strong underlying performance across businesses, unfortunately the quarter was maed by legal expenses that were very large. they are from fighting the

government. to hemayoral candidate joe load on whether they are going after wall street. we did reach out to his opponent, bute are happy to have joe here. >> they have been paying a heavy price rhetorically. it seems that every time i pick up this there is another fine. >> yes, and the congressional delegation is very concerning in the senate as well as the house of representatives. they are not representg the number one cy in the city of new york. this is the goos that laid the golden egg and we need to diversify our economy and al understand that wall street is headquartered in the city of new yor charles: i see this symbiotic relationship to be frank with you between washington and wall reet. words like, okay, we will get you or srt of treat you like

the family cow, we will not do, could yoevery now a then for printing. but we are not going to kill you. when things get down, e will take taxpayer money and lul. from the outse it sounds awful, but it's like game between these guys and the taxpayers ultimately pay the penalty. >> y, it was a true relationship were washingn and wall street and wall street and waington. for many years in the latter part of the 20th century was a true partnship to work together. it has been split apart now. they no longer our partners. ey are adversaries. >> detroit used to be called the paris of the west. an amazing city. they engage their politician petions and it mindset and tax themselves and ran business out and smart people out. o'd be onthe cusp of that, something very similar o what we saw maybe in detroit 50 or six years ago?

>> are we close to that? i don't think so. charles: you just talked about this. right now the opponents are pulling in and your opponent, bill de blasio, is talkin about the rich people and wall street. if new york has embraced that, what is the logical conlusion? >> it is that they don't understand and relationship with w the world really works and howrevenues come in and how they are helpless keep the government in place and the social safety net that they fun we need to continue to diversify our econmy and so theeeds that mike bloomberg as in the high-tech industry. it is number two in high-tech companies and we need to expand that. we have the best medical schools in the coury. the scientists are not talking about this always, these are industries that we needdto have unlike detroit wich had all of its eggs in one basket. and when the auto industr

decided to go elsewhere, there was nothing else like it. >> but how did you get the politics that are extraordinarily powerful as a politica tool? i could be making $75,000 a year. i used to drive a cab, but now i do not and i'mtaking care of my family. that someone could remind me that the wall street guys re making millions of dollars a year and how unfair that is to me and my kids and buy into it. >> well, i have an opponent that is driving class warfare right now with the campaign and the tale of two cities where he is pitting one against anotr. but it's really unfortunate. here's what we need to do. weeed to make sure th children are educated and that we expad our economy and diversify our economy so that we can get the unemployed employed and get those people underemployed better off.

charles: i still hear what you're saying. but the way that you guys handle thmoney my kids can never get educated. >> the gullibilit of people is one thing. but the reality is ano charles: you are telling us a message that a lot of people in business or looking for you to be the savior. i have to tell you that you are very polite and successful. but you have to be hitting the wrong nerve on people. this is not t best thing for them. >> that's right, we need have a growing d prosperous economy. income inequality in the world. t getting little bit too wide. but we also havehe deal with the concept of jealousy and invigorated anthe american spirit andthe american eam. i'm going to do better than my father, my child will be better than me so that we are dark city as well as thh cotry alace of opportunity. charles: it is not looking good

for obamacare. the numbers are in and the sign-ups are weak in this very first

charles: collett wishful thinking. oba administration anticipating people signing up for the affordable care act by the end of open enrollment, march 31. but the numbers are in and showing that only about 50,000 people have sign p. so if the rate holds at this level, i'm prey good with math and not add up to the president counted 5 million people short. tonight, beating obamacare. my next guest says this law is a huge mess. >> i was looking at yr bok. it is a little tattered. but that shouldn't be a little bit more than? >> employer mandate, the caps on expenses, it is a mangled and

distorted and illegally altered version. not this law at all. and they sala bèmenot really all be one hen anyone says that the law ha been passed and we can't change it. however the website is up, it's an unmitigated disaster. i saw that everyone had a lot of fun poking fun. but i think that the more egregious problem ha to bethe fact that people are not taking the bait. people seem to tool around. >> that is because they ar reeling from the sticker shock. don't forget the president said that this would be affordable. the act isthat the average person -- a man willpay double what he would before, premium earnings are up 99% of what they would have been. charles: is this the average

ross-the-board. just. >> foromen, 62% up. for young people, 30 and under, up 27%. these are all figures from the manhattan institute interactive map, they have studied the state-by-state. it's not affordable a it's not just the premiums that people are rreling with. it is the deductible, which are double what they are an employer provided health plans, if i 5000-dollar deductible and the bronze plan, 3000-dollar deductible in the silver plan. a young person who writes a check for maybe $300 per month is never going to get anything back. how mny men in these 30 to 35-year-old age categories ever go to a doctor. including the three were 5000-dollar deductible, unless they are in a motorcle

accident or get an unexpected illness, heaven for bed, after two or three months they are going to say, wh am i doing this, i should be making a car payment. >> tt's right. >> or it i also the hireof god or a percentage of your income. so for families, those penalties will add up reallyfast. >> it still might be an option for someone who is on a tight budget. >> that is right. >> who isn't on a tight budget? >> thereou go. you saw this from one aspect to another. now it is up and running and we get a chance to see it. what i the prognosis on this and how to keep alive? we know they are determined to. how do they figured out? >> that will be pr disaster. it is really hard to keep this alive. once you get in that plan come

you can't go to the doctor and hospital that you would prefer because to keep the premiums for spiking even more, they have eliminated so many doctors and hospitals paying bargain basement rtes. th one you always inform us, we always appreciate it, but it's always kind of sad. this is amazing stuff, really shocking numbers that we saw is week. ha a great weekend. tom hanks already getting som oscar buzz for s betrayal of katherine philips, but the real captain screw is not happy about the movie at ll, they are yered up and they are suing. >> we have been boarded by armed pirates. we will be all

[inaudible] [inaudible] >> everything will be okay. look at me. charles: lots of buzz around captain philips. several crew members are describing the movie as highly fictionalized. the owner of the attked ship, captain philips ignored warnings to keep a safe distance office mulley cst and that is why he put the whole crew in jeopardy. so do they have a case? let's bring in the lawyers. whenndividuals as they do have a case and another says they don't. let's go with how they have a case. >> i think that they have a huge payout coming their way. this isn't simply just a negligence cae like the captain

made a mistake, but a punitive damage case to the tune of 50 million. i had a chance to read through that complaint todaynd let me tell you that there are some strong aegations in there. the plaintiffs are essenally saying thatthecaptain inteionally and llfully put their lives at risk. there are definitely facts to back that up here. charles: we know that hollywood kes extraordinary liberts. but to the actual facts of this al be such that the captain really did put everyone in jeopardy? >> captain philips and this is nothing but back telling in itself. this is roudo. the lawyers, they are the ones that will weigh in on this one in the white house. captai philips committee was in any kind of wrongdoingwhy has he been so open about

everything? he has done depositions already and he has spoken on tv several times, he' all the time i know tom hates smiling with him. there are plenty of attacks happening there and you can't avoiit. ur 200 miles away, 600 miles away, 1200 miles. or 1300 miles off the coast. charles: wat do you think? >> i think s made the case for them right there. the fact of the matters, let finish -- [talking over each other] charles: okay, go ahead. >> in order to prove a negligence case from you have to prove that they knew or should have known. there is no dispute here. it's not that they should have @%own, they had numerous hijackings that took place in the captain was won seven times. seven times to stay t least

600 mes away from the coasts and he chose to ignore it. >> he was 240 miles away from the coast and that is where the attack took place. charles: okay, let me jump in for one second, please. i want to say that you brought up initially the fact that the captain is not being sued and more tn likely he doesn't ha $15 million for an insurance that would pay off a lawsuit. >> i am lawyer and i know what is going on. >> my point is tat it is horrific that we are always going after deep pockets. when we make a point whether h has been considered nligent or not. he wasn't negligent. charles: the entire crew is almost unanimously saying that this guy broke a lot of rules

and assumed a dangerous was that he was taking. everyone knew it was a dangerous place. but they set up this danger and he violated them and shouldn't they vouch for that? >> the reason why -- >> the reason why this individual was not named, and megan described it perfectly. he does not have the deep pockets to satisfy a judgment and it's not the lawyers fall. you're not ready to sue ssmebody winning or you can collect. yes, the ship owner is vicariously liable. what that means is that they are responsible for the conduct of the catheter and that is what is going on. charles: we know the captain has ma a fair amount ofmoney. and i know that both of you ladies probably agree that this will be settled out of court and the pirates will win again on both sides. a spirited conversion. weewill have you back soon and

have a great eekend. as mark zuckerberg looks to protect his own privacy, he keeps nding new ways to invade

charles: time for the blitz. this is a part of the show that you should bwatching and discuss your opinions. mark zuckerberg and his palo alto mansion. security surrounding it. addressing this coming on the same d that facebook is telling that it's users can no longer hide its profiles from search. to prevent guys for this. i want to start with you on us. hypocrisy aside. what about this? >> i still don't think that that

is worth what everyone thinks that it is. social media, all about voluntarily contributing your informatioto the greatest rketing machine in history and you have to convert them to paying customers. i don't care if it's 10 or 100 million of them. i don't like tis. charles: you are a momentum guide, certainly they have turned it aound. >> they have turned around in the stock, despite all of the privacy erns andhe haters out there,,there seems to be too many. it continues to perform as does the service. i think you're overselling it when you say that mark zuckerberg and facebook are invading people's privacy. despite this algorithm, they are is robust privacy settings, which is not to share things you want to keep right on facebook. so people are getting a lot out of this service, but i would not put much faith in this stock.

>> a bull market. still much talk about jcpenney. bringing back their old ceo now the retailer is bringing back its old logo as well. ping that the move will somow reignite her regain old customers. doesn't jcpenney need to do more than a logo change? >> the stock traes back in 1978, the old soldiers don't die but they fade away. jcpenney had faded away and this is a company that really dominated the retail states. ii america community to innovate and ccmpete and they did not, which is why despite logo change and even a ceo change i think the jcnney has a tarnished brand and liky will go to zero. >> i have to tell you the one that i go to is a hot mess. it's idiculous. can pending turn this around in time?

>> no, i think that the brand has had its heyday. it's sad because of iconic in the american scheme of thing. but the private brand doesn't work him, the sales don't work. turnaround is promising, but prising and profitable differences are huge. charles: okay, what is that? it is time fo the nightcap. what everyone is going to be talking about coming monday. >> they had some trouble inthe recent couple of months and it's interesting to see the come down. the net intest margin will grow as interesrates rise. that is why we have a lot oo biological base your. charles: sometimes companies can have great numrs and earnings.

but these stocks struggled toay. two they did and a lot of them dead. i think that longer term we are still beating the market year-to-date and i don't trust the banks, but i think that that is what they are doing. >> tapering may be a 2014 event, i'm saying 2016 but for rates actually go back up. >> unless we have the derivatives to make a concerted effort concerted effort against the fed, i think that that is probably right. she's going to everything she can keep the rates low, and i think that thinks will benefit. middle arica will be sold on

the river. charles: jonathan is getting a waiver on a facebook account and they won't be snooping on him today. you uys are the best. i love you. have a great weekend and we will chec ♪ ♪ >> president obama within the confines of the white house. apparently he is waiting for the republicans to say something that he likes. will they? was all of this really worth it? day 11. i am lou dobbs. house republicans passin a funding bill without any