eternal life is a bad regulation. i was impressed by trump's willingness to take that monster, we are going to cut regulations, they are stopping america from being what it could be. stuart: he could do it. >> he has a possibility of getting achieved. stuart staur times up. charles payne, it is now yours, sir. charles: appreciate it. we have brand new details on the regulation that are hurting businesses this as the candidates pivot to the economy. thanks for joining us. this is cavuto coast to coast in for niel cavuto. the obama administration's rules have reached $743 billion and more on the way followed trump's promise of new regulations. but first, let's go to charlie, former senator scott brown and democratic strategist jessica. scott brown, senator brown, your

reaction particularly from the business world and how they have embraced donald trump's new plans? >> well, there's a great difference and one of the reasons we haven't had any type of texas tax reform is because it takes leadership at the top. in order to get the things dope that he's talking about we need to have the house and the senate because it's absolutely no appetite when i was there for three years and still presently to do any time of tax reform and that's why you have this problem and then you throw all the tack of regulatory certainty, the fact that you have $750 billion being added to the backs of businesses, more businesses leaving the workforce and coming in. it's a mess. ly take trump's plan any day over hillary clinton's which is the continuation for obama's policies. >> bringing down the rates, closing the loopholes, very good. comments on regulation that we

have way too many of them. you layed out a statistic early on. we can talk about that. right on the money. i think his -- the boogie man of trade is absurd and this is where someone like scott brown and anthony scaramucci, friends of mine should -- know better should be talking to them. he said that yesterday. when donald says that something off base and somewhat idiotic, it cheapens the rest of his argument and gives the democrats an opening to attack everything else. i think that's where adults close to donald should step in and tell him, okay, we can always negotiate better trade deals. nafta did not cause detroit's demise. >> there's no response. i love you, charles, brother

from another mother. the plan that he puts forward right now is not going to be ultimate plan passed by congress but i believe it's a great starting point to put everything on the table there and actually then have the various particular, the house and senate and obviously the democrats have their say, you're going to get a very different plan, bottom line, at least we are talking about it and putting forth something because the last eight years, when i was there, charles, for three years, okay, they did nothing. democrats and republican who is wanted to do something for the average taxpayer and they just keep hammering and hammering individuals and business, that's why people are leaving. that's why businesses are leaving. we lower the corporate tax rates and they will come back. >> but that's not because of nafta. >> i don't disagree. charles: jessica, hillary clinton immediately responded with commercials or -- you know, certain tweets about trickled down economics. of course, democrats have attacked that trickled down

economics and made it a bad work for a lot of people, under ronald reagan we had a period of economic prosperity that went off for a long period of time. >> it did. we didn't have the level of economic prosperity under bill clinton. charles: clinton benefited from the trickled -- >> if you want to talk about ronald reagan is one thing but we are talking about donald trump today. charles we are talking about an economic plan that ronald reagan put out there. >> if you look at appraisals of economic plan, adding ten trillion to the deficit cutting 3.5 million jobs in the end. i will agree that we need to reduce the number of regulation to some degree. i think there was a poll that 55% of americans that say there are too many regulations. the humorous to listen donald trump after the flint water

crisis and say -- >> the flint water crisis? >> what, no big deal to you? i'm happy to talk about the economic plan. please let me finish. >> i hammer donald all of the time. i guaranty he didn't pollute the water. >> what i'm saying when donald trump says he goes from 0 to 60, either no regulations or as many as the obama administration has put out. charles: actually he said he would put new regulations and have the department examine regulations in existences. he didn't talk about a -- >> no, no. >> there are capitalists running flint, michigan. whose plan is closer to reagan, hillary clinton or bill

clinton's? >> jfk, ronald reagan, they are not going to be anywhere hillary clinton's economic plan. what we hear from the democrats, immediately they attack donald trump for having a plan. hillary clinton's plan is bernie sanders and the liberal democrats -- >> that's not true, senator. [inaudible] >> it's not true. charles: a lot of promises on the individual side and infrastructure. charley, we know plans resinate with voters but implementing them and long-term prosperity. >> that's a weak part of his speech. do we need infrastructure spending, yeah. the infrastructure never creates the jobs it promises to. his plan is, you know, obama like, it's 500 billion instead

of 800 billion and it generally -- that sort of stuff -- the money that gets handed out gets filtered through so many places that never gets to the ultimate worker. charles: there's a huge layer of bureaucracy. >> well, obviously that's the key and that's why you need to have the house and senate become republican, stay republican actually because like the democrats had two years before i got there of doing something where they did nothing. we have an opportunity to actually put the genie back in the bottle. when you talk about infrastructure, there are ways to do it. the reason people are so upset of putting money into the plan it goes anywhere but, arts and entertainment, it doesn't go to the actually thing that it's supposed to be. people are fed up and they don't do what they say and that's the problem. charles: sometimes, jessica, trains to no where.

>> walls to no where, whatever his trouble in the southern border. it's fine. >> that'll actually do something, though. it'll keep people out. >> i know that's a problem. [laughter] >> i just find it amazing trump surrogates defeat antiterrorism, infrastructure spending that's a good idea when that's all you criticize democrats for. >> you're no trump surrogate. i'm talking to the senator. >> jessica, i voted for infrastructure improvements. >> good. >> i'm not a surrogate, i'm a supporter and i will put donald trump's economic plan national security plan, military plan and protecting our law enforcement people against hillary clinton's any day of the week because people don't trust hillary, they don't like her -- >> she's more trusted than donald trump is today. >> the difference between hillary clinton's mistakes and donald trump's mistakes is

hillary clinton's mistakes have cost people their lives, country's their sovereignty and cost national security, so please, with all due respect -- >> with all due respect, no, i'm just trying to hang with the big boys here and talk in the way that you're talking to me. thank you very much. i'm curious as you brought up to security. [inaudible] charles: i do want to focus on this. donald trump -- he's laying obviously a more fine-tune economic plan. blake berman is with us with some of those changes, blake. blake: it does resemble the one he put out in the republican primary but clear departures. you've been going over some of them. the big changes relate to individual side of his proposed tax bracket. it was 10, 20, 25%. trump also said, you probably

remember this one, individuals who made $25,000, wouldn't pay anything and would fill out on irs form that says, i win. there was no mention of that one liner in detroit yesterday. trump did say under his reworked plan, many would still not pay income taxes but he did bump up the rates for everyone else. here is where they stand now, what he released yesterday. 12, 25, 33%. that is an increase specially on the top-end earners who trump said would, quote, pay their fair share. now the change comes as the cost of plan was at $10 trillion over ten years by some outside observers, his new plan is yet to be scored by those same outside groups. one other change, charles, trump said his plan would allow expansion of child care costs, trump adviser told me yesterday that'll be specially helpful for families who eastern some where in that 50 to 100,000-dollar

range. charles: blake, thank you very much. hillary clinton is getting ready with her economic speech and her tactic to attack donald trump as he hit her on her policies. jessica, tell us what we should expect from hillary on thursday? >> i think she's going to talk about how trump's plan will benefit people closer to trump's back -- bracket. and those are the kind of issues she's going hit. charles: is she going to talk about her plans, though? >> she absolutely will. 43 detailed plans on her website but will talk about her plan and she is going to add 10 million jobs. charles: senator brown, i want to ask you, senator brown, do you think donald trump going from 25 to 33%, that top bracket that's a big jump and also with the child care things, were

these something that the economic talked him into or stay off the politics of envy? >> well, you are going to have the politics of envy regardless. i think obviously those brackets are very comfortable for everybody and once again it's not the government's money, charles. it's their money and they can charge whatever. please ask hillary, i hope the life-supporters do that, what's her top rate. >> it's 39%. >> that's dream world. never going to happen. >> i don't think so. charles: penalties for one million. if you make a million dollars you must pay at least 30% if you make over $4 million, there's a penalty to that as well. [inaudible] >> small business people that job creators and i will tell you, the press refuses to take that into account. they'll say most small businesses don't fall into that range, guess what, the small

businesses that actually produce the most jobs are in that sweet spot that hillary clinton is going to crush. >> charles, you know, you're absolutely right. they're still using social security numbers. their gross income fills within that bracket. >> but the democrats use the phoney statistic, average people with small businesses don't make that much money. these are people that are freelancers. [inaudible] >> but the small businesses that -- that hire the real people, the most of the people get crushed in this. charles: jessica, do i want to say new start-ups, small businesses are the engine of the economy. annual growth under reagan was 15%, under president obama is less than 10%. >> i think it's going to be very

difficult and that's the case that she's going to have to make here. she's going to rely on what positive statistics we have out of the obama economy that we have added and what kind of -- they say what kind of growth, we just had a not so hot gdp number there. she's going to have to make the case over and go over again that she actually does care about the average american whereas donald trump doesn't. but no doubt, i agree that it's going to be a difficult case to make. i'm heartened to see that he's only leading about 5 points and she might be ahead on a few polls. it's going to be a tough sell and americans are hurting and she had to acknowledge that on the trail. charles: let me ask you as a politician, we talk economy a lot, i feel like that's not what we are talking about anymore. it feels like that there's a philosophy of debate here. is america the place where someone can pull themselves up by the bootstraps and if there's not, is there an obligation for the government to do everything

for them, assistance because it feels like that's what's being put out there under the guys of economic theory? >> i don't disagree, charles. i lived in 17 houses by the time i was 18. i remember ronald reagan say, we are the party of opportunity and democratic, we will take care of you. with the regard to the estate tax under trump you can actually sell it and continue on. those farmers, wineries, those dairy people, people who have started from day one grinding it out have a chance to pass it on to the families and they're not going to be able to do it by hillary clinton. >> i believe bernie said he couldn't have started home depot if he had to do it today. charles: all right, donald trump saying his plan will keep jobs in america but boost them but

will it help him in the battleground states? we have those details straight d [ hip hop beat throughout ] [ fans cheering ]

♪ olympics 2016, let me get you on my level. ♪ ♪ so you never miss a moment, ♪ ♪ miss a minute, miss a medal. ♪ why settle when you can have it all? ♪ ♪ soccer to wrestling. track and field to basketball. ♪ ♪ fencing to cycling. diving to balance beam. ♪

♪ all you have to say is, ♪ "show me," and boom it's on the screen. ♪ ♪ from the bottom of the mat, ♪ ♪ to the couch where you at? ♪ ♪ "show me the latest medal count?" ♪ ♪ xfinity's where it's at. ♪ welcome to it all. comcast nbcuniversal is proud to bring you coverage of the rio olympic games. >> charles: donald trump talking to voters, is it resinating in those swing states? >> not, yet, charles. it will on this map of the electoral college. i will show you the numbers on fox business experts looking at the polling data coming in. we are able to say that hillary clinton has 217 electoral votes already with 270 need today -- needed to win. that's why over here we have clinton already up to 236, 236.

270 to win. so hillary clinton under that count with some of the state that is are leaning into the democratic column only need 34 of the remaining 111 up for grab states to win. so that's why yesterday's message is so important and particularly when you look in the middle of the country where donald trump does hope the message you were talking to the manufacturing states, places like pennsylvania, particularly the western part of the state and ohio would resinate because if he does not win those states and he is not able to put them in the republican column, you start to go blue with those two big states already, mrs. clinton as you see is over the top with 274 electoral votes. particularly a place like pennsylvania and trump has hoped that he will turn the state into the red column, the western part of the state has been leaning towards that message that trump has, largely an antitrade message but as you now expand the message to include things

like lower taxes and the trump campaign is hoping that places in the eastern part of the state, big cities like pennsylvania -- philadelphia go his way. for clinton she's spending time in florida. the math of this if you're donald trump, that does give you 29 electoral votes. we went back to pennsylvania and then you could take ohio. i mean, it's still not enough for donald trump. the math of this is such that the margin is to thin for him that unless he -- and people expect him to take the states like north carolina that are very close right now, even georgia in some polls right now. even when you put states in his column it's tough to get to 270, that's why yesterday's speech is so important. if you can expand the group that you're speaking to, yes, with

demographic voters and in often many cases do not have college degrees, trump is doing well. he needs to speak to a broader audience. started to do that yesterday, lower taxes, fewer regulations and things like that but this math and map tells there's work to do. charles: there's large cities within the manufacturing states whether it's ohio or other the other swing ones, how does he articulate the message that maybe you can start a business, change your life to these voters? >> the hope is that the regulatory message goes a long way because you guys were having a conversation about small business owners, if you're able to make that message and have the message stick, then maybe a state like pennsylvania is one that turns red. same thing with ohio which is the close as you can be with the polls right now, it's within the margin of error. lead for hillary clinton, very small. if you can turn it around in places like columbus, ohio, maybe the message does resinate.

the electoral math, that's the thing here, everybody is getting caught up on what the lead is for 5, 6, 7 points. charles: thank you very much. will his plan boost the business environment? we are going to debate that next

charles: so the bigger surprise from donald trump's speech yesterday were the three tax brackets as opposed to four previously. i personally think that these brackets are more realistic than range of 0 to 25% but considering there's not going to be a lot of cuts in programs but rather closing loopholes and reducing regulations. this plan will work with increasing the national debt. donald trump hammered away for

current trade deals but saying that isolation is not an option. some are still worried that he'll have to back up tough talk specially the notion of nafta if it is not revised. i have to tell you, i think we should all scheme at the thought of regulations and removal of the most vulnerable ones. some people say are too little too late to stop dodd-frank and many regulations don't even involve white house involvements. still looking at the 10% tax, i think it's a good idea. my question to donald trump why not dump it completely. we know low-hanging fruit, that should get votes with it. that should help the economy temporarily. donald trump promises more to his plan and in a few days we will hear from hillary clinton and get her economic plan. at this point donald trump is moving big-time in the right direction although i am concerned about the spending

side. i know it will spark economy and help overcome of the spending on some of the other things. let's bring jonathan on just how much of an impact the trump plan will have and can it really spark the economy? >> you know, charles, i think it can. we got some bad economic news today. we saw productivity numbers that fell once again. american productivity is down to 1990's. it's not because americans aren't working hard or we lost innovation, i think because washington, d.c., tax code and even more than that, it's our regulation, which is really a stealth tax that most americans don't know they are paying but i am thrilled that donald trump is not only talking about lower taxes but on top of that strangle-hold of regulation which has us in 1-2% growth

language which are enduring right now and we were capable of so much better than that. i do worry about trump's unwillingness to even talk about entitlement reform, but if the economy grows fast enough we can outgrow some of that spending effectively and i am confident we will. charles: the reagan economics approach, 4 and a half if you take in the last six years. so a lot of people saying, these plans are solid and the supply side of this sparks a enough growth that we will see wages go up to steve's point. >> charles, these plans are solid. he has changed his plans repeatedly and i don't think you can honestly trust a word he says even as something simple as regulation. charles, he talks about removing regulation but he's for bringing back eagle. that's a view that bernie sanders favors.

charles: let me ask you, jonathan, you don't like the plan or don't trust him to implement the plan? >> i think both, charles. a great example, he talks about repealing obamacare but now he wants to replace it with something called trump care and keep the individual mandate. that's the problem here. trump will talk about taking regulations away because he thinks practically it could spur economic growth but doesn't think morally that we have free economy and individual rights. that's the problem with trump. charles: steve. >> i think you and i are probably more libertarian than both of these candidates. within that political reality americans don't hate government. we have to make government sensible and have to make it work and out of the way of the economy and donald trump offers by far, but a long shot the better vision for economic growth compare today hillary clinton.

charles: johnothan, donald trump's plan or hillary clinton's plan? >> keep in mind in the crisis donald trump talked about nationalizing the banks. you want to get behind that, i won't. >> we effectively did nationalize the bank and the taxpayer is still on the hook. bernie sanders is right on that too. the taxpayer is still on the hook for wall street and we need to change that. charles: thank you very much. i love both of you anyway. see you guys very soon. what he's saying now about tax plan and what former presidential candidate cain said about his plan next. of howard. bababooey!

(announcer vo) sorry, confused neighbors, howard's on. siriusxm. road happy.

.. you can run an errand.

(music playing) ♪ push it real good... (announcer vo) or you can take a joyride. bye bye, errands, we sing out loud here. siriusxm. road happy. >> how much economic growth do you think you could actually affect the best low tax rate for business as well as for individuals? >> right now we have no growth. the country is stagnant. once you get over that come you have to do something. what we've done is a very, very large and really cutting tax cut. for the businesses and for people, but businesses in particular and the middle class

in particular. i think it is going to really push the economy forward. charles: -- thanks for joining me. your assessment of the plan? >> i like it. i think it is bold because quite frankly i didn't expect the corporate way to go as low as 15%. whether or not he was able to get that there was another thing. if all the naysayers out there who want to find ways to criticize the plan, of course you can find something to criticize it or appeared but in terms of well aware, look at the decade of the 60s. look at the decade of the 80s. that is all the proof we need to they start to bash it talking about trickle-down economics do not wear. yes they do work. it is called let people keep more of the money that they

earned rather than take it from them and try to redistribute it. i think it is a bold plan and i certainly hope the republicans get behind it and they are able to overcome the democrats opposition. charles: you are not surprised hillary attacked it. >> no, not at all. trend to their certain places you say trickle-down economics and people think letter word. without understanding what exactly it means than the success it has had. you feel this is recognized. >> i do believe it is reaganesque beard the reason they get away with trickle-down economics as they also have made republican a four letter word, which is why so many people are afraid to think about voting for a republican candidate who's put a bold economic prosperity plan on the table. i like it. would there be some things that could be tweaked to make it even better? of course. this is a long way from where we are today. what we have today and with what

hillary clinton is talking about is called economic stagnation like governor mike pence said. the are tired of hearing this is as good as they can get. 1.2% gdp growth last month. this i believe that donald trump believes can generate 4% plus if they don't tie too many obstacles on it and they try to get it passed into legislation. charles: of course someone like her herman kaine who is a millionaire and don't trump was a billionaire, of course they love it. they will put more money in their pockets and pass on their wealth to their kids. people at the bottom, and the 1% keeps the pie forever and there's no way everyone else can get the scraps. would he say to someone who thinks that way? >> that is a lie. all you have to do. larry kudlow wrote an article where from 2009 tonight 2013 the

top 1% are paying a bigger piece of the pie. secondly, what do people do with our wealth? they don't pass it on to their relatives. they build businesses which creates jobs. they invest, which creates jobs. here is something they fail to remember when you talk about who's going to benefit. too many people in this country has to solve the find to say the fire appeared to many people have to sell the business to save the business. that is a false argument based upon the data and it's just an emotional talking point that the opponents of a plan like this used to try to convince people otherwise. charles: i'm glad to use the word emotional. hillary clinton will speak in a couple days. it is my hunch we are going to see something similar to what president obama does money tax economics and it's not economics as much a philosophy. i asked senator brown about this earlier.

in my mind the american people are being given a choice between the notion that you can pull yourself up by the bootstraps in a system designed against you or you can let us the government on your behalf make sure that we acquire wealth from these businesses and take care of you cradle to grave. are right. hillary clinton will use the words fair or fairer multiple times without discerning what it means. the bureaucrats want to determine what is fair. trump's approach is you keep more of what she of what you earn and make more of those decisions rather than the government it out of your paycheck and they come back into five fair. you are right. she's only going to appeal to emotions. i doubt if we hear one

statistics similar to what is in trump's plan for what she has to say. it is going to be all appealing to the emotions. the narrative they've been using for decades have been a lot of people will fall for it. a lot of people are waking. charles: it's been a long slumber. thank you very much. >> thank you, charles. charles: a billion dollars back to the country. is it just another example of how we are being taken for not taking seriously. there is some serious concerns still ahead.

>> and nicole petallides with your fox business brief. the dow recession and high though we are all off of those. the s&p 500 and the all-time high. all three holding on to gains. s&p up to, nasdaq 14 as the dow jones industrial average is that they live in. keeping a keen eye yesterday and today as well. roughly a thousand flights over those two days because of a systemwide outage that they have globally. at this time the stock is down one third of 1%. charter communications that can. under pressure, coming down on

discount did have a slight television area. down about 7%. ...who've had no prior treatment. it transformed treatment as the first cure that's... ...one pill, once a day for 12 weeks. certain patients... ...can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. harvoni is a simple treatment regimen that's been prescribed to more than a quarter of a million patients. tell your doctor if you've had a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv, or any other medical conditions, and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni may cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni may include tiredness, headache and weakness.

i am ready to put hep c behind me. i am ready to be cured. are you ready? ask your hep c specialist if harvoni is right for you. ♪ ♪ drink is a former iranian president urging president obama to return frozen assets to iran. the former white house national security council julian turner says between this and the

alleged cash bill for prisoners, iran is walking all over us. they been walking all over us for a while, haven't they? >> you are right, charles. they have. some defenders of the array nuclear dealer claiming this is a matter of optics. this is far more important than optics. this goes down to the substance of the nuclear deal and the fact that we sat down with the iranians to negotiate without any preconditions. >> there's been consideration of it being is to compensate the victims and family members of the 1983 bombing in lebanon. i understand the $400 million also given back to iran. bill clinton had promised money to these dems as well. >> that's what the money is supposed to be. it is appropriated to be used for now. the former president of iran, president or lonnie saying he believes the money should be given back to the iranian regime.

i would like to state here that if the administration decided to do that, it would be an incredibly ill at a concession to the regime in the same tent, especially coupled with the $1.7 billion we are going to be repatriating to the regime for this but didn't steal from before 1979. trade to dallas 400 billion plus interest. the numbers overpaying by $200 million even if we owe them the money. but having said that, president obama wanted this nuclear deal so bad and he made it so obvious that the iranian increasingly tested. illiterates got worse and worse as we got closer to the signing day. since then it has become unbearable. >> the latest stuff about the claims we now owe them another couple billion dollars or whatever it is really cuts to the heart of something that mess up another critic said the deal have been saying from the

beginning which is there is very obvious disconnect between the united states and iran when it comes to the deal. from the get go, the assessor president obama, secretary kerry and the administration about a nuclear negotiation. for the iranians, it was about the money. it was about sanctions and allowing them to open up their economies to the global marketplace. it was about money and it remains about money to do. charles: it's been an extraordinarily successful shakedown. president obama has actually called out our european allies on behalf of iran to last them. this is almost unheard of, is the neck? it is. especially considering that president obama said from the outset that we are going to take the nuclear issue in isolation, take it out of the framework of the broader potential bilateral relationship between these two countries and forget everything else. we are not going to talk about their egregious human rights violations.

we are not going to talk about their horrible states sponsoring terrorism. we have only going to talk about the nuclear deal. it turns out he was talking about some other issues. he was talking about ways they could sweep the nuclear deal with economic promises. charles: before i let you go, there is talk about the next president pushing the genie back in the bottle. the economic parts of it can't this money back now that we've given it to them and consider giving them even more. >> there is that any idea that we can't runs a community of nations like this are allies. we can around because we push so hard. it would be very hard to backtrack at this point. those would take years to build up again. charles: big-company earnings reported today. what you need to watch for. half up, half down. we will be right back.

v ♪

(ee-e-e-oh-mum-oh-weh) (hush my darling...) (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) (hush my darling...) man snoring (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.)

woman snoring take the roar out of snore. yet another innovation only at a sleep number store. charles: the zika virus has claimed the life of a newborn baby in texas. the first zika related test in that state. the baby's mother had traveled to latin america. according to the cdc, 15 babies have been born the zika related birth defects. more than 7300 americans have been diagnosed. we are of course monitoring this story. we will bring you more as the details come in. in the meantime, quick look at the dow. companies reporting earnings today. ashley webster in our newsroom of some of the big names we are watching. ashley: the big one after the closing bell will be disney. we are all waiting to see how disney is doing.

we know that the film aspect, the film studio is doing well. all eyes will be on their tv cable operation espn. one year ago today the earnings a year ago showed that cord cutting is starting to cut into the number of subscribers. that's a big cash cow for disney. the st 9%. i bought a bias on how espn subscriber is doing. it's been flat for the last year. i mention the movie studio. the jungle book, captain america, civil war among those. the open in new disney resort in shanghai. we would like to know how that is performing. all of this coming up after hours. disney stock up slightly ahead as you can see. other companies reporting after the closing bell we have solar city, gallup, my legs also grew. disney is the standout one both moving pretty well today of

1.5%. before but wanted to mention talking about the pharmaceutical company. this is a company under a lot of scrutiny, a lot of controversy. basically as you can see the stock is up massively today. the mr. earnings however maintaining the upper end of the guiding saying it is continuing its reorganization plan and investors say we like that. you remember valiant has come under scrutiny using specialty pharmacies to maintain sales of his high-priced drugs and a lot of investigation into that basically not allowing generics for insurers. what's interesting about the bill on the board of valiant. a famous activist investors. we have no plans to sell any core assets which would include bausch & lomb, but it's interesting because one researcher last year or the

beginning of this year described the pharmaceutical and run. it is doing a massive campaign to restore investor confidence in this particular stock. that guidance is pretty interesting to push the stock much higher today. charles: a lot of work to do. thanks for that. ashley: my pleasure. charles: stacks up slightly, but the s&p nasdaq and lifetime highs. warren buffett sitting on a record cash pile. what is his next acquisition target? we think we know what it might be coming up.

charles: donald trump holding a rally in north carolina in less than an hour. this, of course, after releasing his plan for the economy. so will his plan resonate with voters? of course, this is cavuto coast to coast, i'm charles payne in for neil cavuto. adjusting his top rates from 25% to 33, putting his proposal on line with what house republicans had already put up.

so does this prove be he's actually more willing to work with the party? to real clear politics' national reporter, caitlin huey burns. what do you think? you know, his 25% a lot less than that 33%. looks like he said, okay, i'll go with the house republicans. >> and he made a point of it in his speech yesterday. if be you are a house republican running for re-election this year and looking for a nugget, something from donald trump to be able to go back to your constituents and say our nominee is on the same page as we are, this could be it. so significant in that way. what we have to watch for, however, is whether trump is able to stay on message, right? we saw him give a very, you know, deliberate speech yesterday via teleprompter. besides the change in the tax rates, a lot of his proposals were among the proposals he put forth be last september. so that's what was new after yesterday, and we'll see whether he can stay on this economic message. when you're looking at the polls

right now, donald trump is lagging behind hillary clinton nationally and in a lot of battlegrounds. but one area where he has potential is on the economy. charles: how -- why would the house republicans want a higher tax bracket? that's the part i did not get. i still don't understand that. and some core trump supporters are wondering the same thing. >> well, if you look at the current rates, it's actually a deduction -- charles: well, it's down from 39%, but 33 is a lot higher than 25. >> right. and he had a fourth bracket for low income earners. he said it's part of his roam, but he didn't say that -- his proposal, but he didn't say that yesterday. what house republicans want to do, they say, is decrease the amount of complexity in terms of income taxes. so they think that these brackets are a way to do that, the three instead of the seven. of course, critics say that it's certainly more complex when you're talking about ways to tax income. charles: sure.

you know, last week i was surprised at some of the anger and disappointment when donald trump actually did endorse paul ryan and others. and then, of course, today you see susan collins -- and it feels like the establishment is never going to truly embrace donald trump. the gop establishment. and a lot of his core supporters who have been with him from day one think it might be a mistake for him to sort of -- this whole idea of unity, it would be a false unity anyway, and that he should stay on the direction he was on in the first place. >> well, i think what you're seeing among rank and file republicans is this dissatisfaction with the way that donald trump hats handled the campaign -- has handled the campaign, but also the way they perceive he has blown opportunities to move past hillary clinton. i think after the -- charles: how do you explain the susan collins of world, the day after he puts out this economic speech, sort of sabotaging it to the degree where she writes op-ed. she's a sitting senator, a republican senator. >> it's interesting, too, the language that she was using

about trump's judgment and temperament. this also, of course, comes the day that 50 national security advisers of former campaigns said they could not support trump. i think what they're pointing to is not necessarily his economic speech, but -- charles: right. but the idea of unity though, is the idea of unity, is donald trump paying too much attention to this notion of unity when it may not exist for him by these republican establishment types no matter what? >> well, i think it goes both ways here, right? if you talk to rank and file republicans, they say trump has not made the necessary overtures in terms of messaging on the campaign trail and that sort of thing. you talk to trump supporters, they say these are people, you know, the exact establishment that their supporters have been railing against. charles: right. >> i think there needs to be a message from the trump campaign that signals to these reluctant -- charles: i don't think they want to see the tail wagging the dog, that's all i'm saying. >> he has to expand his support. charles: donald trump also

outlining his jobs plan, calling or for the revival of the keystone pipeline. phil flynn is at the che with the details. keystone -- cme. keystone, we haven't heard that in a while, phil. >> we haven't except in the beginning of the year when transcanada sued the obama administration and the be united states for the rejection, saying it was unfair, it was arbitrary and unjustified and really violated the rules between nafta. one of the things that donald trump isn't too happy with anyway. but it's amazing. donald trump didn't come out and say, hey, we're just going to approve this pipeline and bring it back, he says we're going to ask trans-canada to reapply. now, i feel bad for trans-canada, because it took them right years to try to get -- eight years to try to get approval last time. and donald trump says, hey, reapply, but we want america first. we want a big part of the jobs deal. i think if trans-canada is going to reapply under a trump administration, guess what? they're going to have to give up a bigger piece of the pie to the americans. maybe we'll have the extra money

if they win that lawsuit against the united states. so maybe we can get it back a little bit more. [laughter] charles: phil flynn, thanks a lot. appreciate it. is donald trump right? is the keystone pipeline one of the ways to get job creation and the be u.s. booming again? to former bush be campaign adviser mark serrano and superwe reach cho. we know it does create a certain amount of jobs and economic activity. >> right. thousands of construction jobs and thousands more in jobs supporting those construction jobs. look, if i think you look at polls back when this was an active part of the conversation, all of the polls show that a majority of americans, a significant majority support construction of the keystone pipeline. most people understand that it was rejected simply because some of the green energy folks feared that it would drown out green energy projects. so, you know, it was sort of a political decision on the part

of the obama administration. so i think it's smart for donald trump to bring it up as part of his own economic plan, because it certainly is part of republican policy. building the pipeline was a huge part of their agenda in congress. they passed multiple bills trying to direct it in that way. and i think it's something that americans support, and it will produce jobs. i think there's a question of how many permanent jobs, but certainly in the construction process and in terms of making america more energy independent, americans appreciate that. charles it wasn't just the environmentists, a lot of people worried about the mating habits of obscure salamander species -- [laughter] but beyond that, you know, this was something that resonated with the american people, and it cut across political aisles. unions wanted this project as well. >> yeah. look, i love salamanders, but they shouldn't get in the way of new jobs in the united states. charles, donald trump's economic plan really overall is intended

to end the war on capitalism that's been waged by president obama and will be continued by hillary clinton if she wins in november. keystone pipeline, to me, is a model. it's a model for how we can bring jobs back to the united states. it alone, once it's operating, the keystone pipeline will generate $3.4 billion to the u.s. gdp. so there's plenty of jobs based in the united states. we make ourselves more energy independent, we generate economic activity here in the united states. heck, there are counties all along the pipeline down right through the united states that will receive tens of millions of dollars each in tax revenue. and they're going to be able to contribute some of that money towards infrastructure. so this is the trump doctrine for the economy, to bring jobs back, union jobs, union supporters will take a look at this, and they will probably endorse donald trump merely because of his position on the keystone pipeline to help bring

jobs back to the united states. charles: susan, i want to digress a little bit. the thought of climate change is beginning to resonate with american voters, and, you know, i don't know how much it will sway the election this time around, but it's certainly something that the democrats run on all the time and they talk about all the time. at some point if we don't get these projects done, they may never get done. >> well, people when asked about what's important to them when they come to the polls and vote, climate change is almost never at the top of the list. it's always national security and the economy. i mean, climate change is asked and ends up on the list because pollsters are questioning voters about it, but i think really people are more worried about jobs and national security. and as long as those two issues stay at the forefront be, i think it's going to be difficult for, you know, the climate change agenda to really dominate, especially because we have a congress where republicans will almost certainly hold the majority in the house if not the senate.

that, if you will, puts the brakes on any kind of big, you know, global warming agenda that even a president hillary clinton might try to push forward. charles: guys, i want to switch gears. a former iranian president asking president obama to return $2 billion of frozen assets to iran. mark, you actually say this is further proof that iran has no respect for us. >> oh, clearly, charles. look, ahmadinejad is clearly an enemy of israel and an enemy of the united states. he generated this letter, he's planning for running for president of iran again on may 17th. and, you know, he is intending to take advantage of the ransom payment from the obama administration. the u.s. supreme court in april ruled, supported a lower court ruling that the $2 billion in assets that ahmadinejad is seeking should go to the victims of the attack of the marine barracks in beirut in 1983 and

other attacks that iran has supported. so ahmadinejad clearly is exploiting the ransom payment here to try get more money out of the administration or out of the united states. the supreme court said no, and that's the way it should remain even through into the next administration. charles: susan, you know, there are reports that this money would actually be earmarked for victims of the 1983 beirut bombing, but we heard that also about that 400 million that became $1.7 billion. bill clinton promised that money to these families as well. when will we get a final decision on this, this money? because the idea that iran has the nerve to ask for it is unsettling. >> they're not going to get the money. the supreme court has ruled on this. i would be shocked, frankly, if the president overruled that and somehow made a deal to give them their money back -- charles: so you mean the hague wouldn't have authority over the supreme court? >> i don't -- well, it's a political issue here in the united states at this point.

i think that the ransom money be or whatever you want to call it was not a good move for the president. i think the public didn't like it, was suspicious of it, and i think at this point that money's staying here. it's not going anywhere. let's not forget that iran is the chief sponsor of terrorism. hezbollah, bashar al assad. this money is going towards terrorist activity potentially, and the public knows this -- >> yeah, but the $400 million was a down payment. i believe when the next payment's made, we won't know about it, and it might not be made until after election day. whether it's the $2 billion that our currency reserves that are frozen or the other part of $1.7 billion of which 900 million -- 400 million's been paid, i believe there will be more payments to iran, and once again israel will bear the risk of these decisions from barack obama. charles: susan? >> i've got to disagree with that one. i think at this point the administration's gone too far with this $400 million payment, and at this point i think this

money's going to stay here. charles: all right, guys. let's hope that it does. thank you both very much. donald trump, in the meantime, promising to cut red tape. president obama created a ton of that during his presidency. now, how the chamber of commerce is also taking action against the obama administration. ♪ ♪ you do all this research on a perfect car,

then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates. maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. just one of the many features that comes standard with our base policy. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

charles: a new study revealing president obama has issued nearly $790 billion worth of regulation since 2009, and now the chamber of commerce is taking action. joining us is the executive vice president for government affairs at the chamber of commerce, bruise johnston. -- bruce johnston. what exactly are you doing now? feels a little late, but what are you trying to do now? >> well, we've been pushing back

on obama administration regulations for years, and we've won a couple of victories in court along the way. at the start of this year, the chief of staff to the president said that they were going to be audacious, to use his term, in pushing regulations out the door. and they have been. this one deals with what's called section 7874, and it's a real example of an administration being far more than audacious. this was capricious, and it was punitive in the nature. basically what it did was singularly stop the merger of pfizer and allergan pharmaceuticals. now, the issue here is interesting. the congress of the united states had previously set a threshold through which a merger would be considered an inversion. this one came beneath that threshold. treasury didn't like it, they didn't abide by the threshold, and without even providing a comment period -- which is

required also by federal law -- the treasury unilaterally just changed the rules of the game, looked back three years at other mergers that had taken place between one of the two companies and acted as though three years ago somebody had preplanned all this. so it is totally off the charts. we think it's an illegal, an abuse of regulatory power. and we're challenging that in court. charles: bruce, the topic of inversion is one that doesn't have a lot of popular appeal on main street. most americans feel like it's another attempt to take jobs out of this country to foreign countries and for corporate greed to manifest itself. so while i get where you're coming from, how do you explain to the american people that this is something that helps them? >> well, here's what the american people need to understand, and i think the administration has been more than clever in how they've approached this by calling the american companies un-patriotic, for example.

so let's be specific. the rest of the world and the oecd countries, the organization of economic cooperation and adopt, -- development, for decades have been pointing out that the united states is standing still while the rest of the world lowers corporate tax rates, moves away from what we cling to under this administration be, an antiquated, worldwide tax regime which very few countries in the world even abide by any longer. so while that's happening, u.s. companies that play on the global field of competition, international trade, are becoming increasingly tax-disadvantaged and noncompetitive. it creates an atmosphere actually where, for example, foreign companies have a tax advantage in taking over a u.s. company. inversion argument is the tail wagging the dog. there's only been, charles, about 50 corporate inversions in

the past decade. charles: sure. >> simultaneously, about 2500 foreign takeovers of u.s. corporations in the same period. what we need to do is fundamentally reform the corporate tax code like every other industrialized country in the world has done, including japan a year ago, we need to abandon this worldwide tax regime which is the thing that probably is contributing to the disadvantage in the tax base more than anything else which japan also abandoned a year ago. charles: bruce, thank you very much -- >> we need tax reform desperately. charles: there's no doubt about it. appreciate it. donald trump promising to boost infrastructure. why his plan could be good for both the economy and your portfolio. that's next. ♪ ♪

>> we will build the next generation of roads, bridges,

railways, tunnels, seaports and airports. that, believe me, folks, is what our country deserves. charles: trump pitching to boost infrastructure spending. to financial expert dan celia who says this could be not only good for the economy, but for or portfolios. -- for our portfolios. walk us through how it'll work and what are the best stocks that should benefit from this. >> well, i think, you know, first of all, charles, the best benefit that we're going to get out of this that we don't want to lose sight of is the fact that we're going to see enormous growth in the economy by way of -- remember, the vast majority of these jobs are going to be davis bacon jobs. these are going to be high income jobs. this is going to infuse an enormous amount of this many into the economy -- of income into the economy. as far as your portfolios go, you know, when you look at the

steels, the infrastructure that is involved in and around the concrete, cement, the caterpillars of the world, the heavy equipment, the retooling of major construction companies, this is going to have a huge impact on the economy not to mention the thousands of people that'll be employed. charles: you know, it's interesting, because i had actually tried to get ahead of this. i was in united rental. it went up so much, i got out hoping i could buy it back before the actual election outcome. tell me the opposition to this. some people, particularly conservatives, saying it's a little gimmicky, it's the kind of thing that democrats -- after all, president obama had his, quote-unquote, shovel-ready proposal that also did not work to spur the economy. what are they getting wrong? >> well, there's nothing gimmicky about it. it's a necessary part of what we need in our country. certainly, when you look back if you still have that trillion dollar deal shovel-ready

projects in your head, then, yeah, it seems very gimmicky because it was failed government policies and at a time when we needed it the most. but, obviously, it didn't work. this is a situation where we need it even more, and there's -- look, it's going to create growth and jobs. and for anybody not to be on or deny the fact that we need infrastructure, is crazy. is it going to create more for the private sector? yes. we could do an infrastructure bank like hillary clinton wants to do and have more government control on this infrastructure with more bureaucracy. she might -- that might be something that would be right up the alley of the left. but this is something that if it is handled right in the private sector, giving accountability to the private sector to make sure these projects that are ready

get done and the money gets spent right, it's going to have an enormous impact on the economy. charles: sure. let me ask you, paying for this. >> yeah. charles: a fund designed to pay for it, perhaps reminiscent of war bonds. does a tapped-out america have half a trillion dollars, or would it involve corporate investment, even overseas investment? >> i think it's going to involve corporate investment. i think it's going to involve a little bit of innovative private sector investment. but it is going to involve, make no mistake about it, adding to our debt. but if we are adding to our debt in an environment that is going to be a growth environment for the country, you know, the question's going to have to be can we afford to add to the debt and have the growth to pay for it? i think we can afford it, and i think we will have the growth be to pay for it.

you know, charles, we're coming in -- this could be a presidency of, an administration of donald trump coming into a game of seven years of zero growth. i don't know about a 4.5-5% growth rate that some are predicting. i don't know that we're going to see that in the first couple years of this administration. charles: right. >> i'm not in that camp. but think about even a 3.5% compared to where we've been for the last seven years. it's going to have a dramatic impact on the debt assuming that we get good, solid spending cuts to, the shrinking of government that has yet to be vetted out that we need to talk about as well. charles: right. 3.5% would be better than the last 16 years, dan. >> right of. [laughter] charles: thank you very much. really appreciate it. >> charles, i appreciate being here. charles: day two of troubles for delta that as a carrier, still experiencing big problems from

that power outage yesterday which caused nearly a thousand flights to be canceled. adam shapiro's in the newsroom with the latest. >> reporter: and at this point delta just about 45 minutes ago updated the number of cancellations today, tuesday, more than 24 hours after these problems began, it's 530 flights right now. 1600 have departed, and this is a quote from the airline's press release, their working diligently to normalize operations after monday's outage. it was circuit breakers that failed. hard to believe they don't have a backup system, but they didn't, and thousands of people stranded. they're offering $200 in travel vouchers to all customers who experienced a delay of greater than three hours or a canceled flight as a result of the system-wide outage. they are continuing to waive the change fee. usually if you try to change your flight, you get charged with a fee. they are waiving that again for travelers today, august 9th. to get the $200 voucher, you

have to have been delayed more than three hours or canceled. bit of a quote from delta, and this is coming today not from the ceo who you saw that video, but they say they want our customers to know we are thoroughly investigating the matter and that we are truly sorry. this is gil west, delta senior executive vice president and chief operating officer. and then the press release talks about canceling flights. they're trying to get back up to speed. stock today was trading up, now it's gone flat, but up by a penny. so investors, apparently be, have faith delta will get on top of this. [laughter] charles: thanks a lot, adam shapiro, appreciate it. well, it's a race for campaign cash, and hillary clinton, that camp is really worried. so what's behind donald trump's surge in fundraising? that's next. ♪ ♪ ♪ there's a lot of places you never want to see "$7.95." [ beep ] but you'll be glad to see it here.

fidelity -- where smarter investors will always be. if only the signs were as obvious when you trade. fidelity's active trader pro can help you find smarter entry and exit points and can help protect your potential profits. fidelity -- where smarter investors will always be. when a moment spontaneously turns romantic, why pause to take a pill? or stop to find a bathroom? cialis for daily use is approved to treat both erectile dysfunction and the urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas for pulmonary hypertension, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include he, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away.

ask your doctor about cialis and a $200 savings card.

. . . .

charles: house speaker paul ryan up for re-election in wisconsin today. his opponent, nehlen, after fall's terri refusal to endorse ryan. that he has a very long shot. experts say paul ryan will win big time. hillary clinton asking donors for extra push as donald trump shows really strong closing the gap on fund-raising. in fact, take a look at this, in july, trump raised $80 million.

hillary $90 million. we have a former financial co-chair oncampaign cash. you were most confident person i spoke in last two months donald trump fund-raising. everyone was saying not raising enough. he is not reaching out. he said he was going great. you knew this was happening. >> i did. i tell you why we're quietly working hard behind the scenes. we wanted this to be a little bit of a august surprise for hillary clinton. let's forget the polls for a moment and look at mother's milk of politics that is an indicator whether a candidate is really on track. in this case we had majority of donations coming from small donors, $60 and below. that tells me he is growing his grassroots base. in addition, look at his rallies, 15,000 to 20,000 attending. hillary people, you can put them in a coat closet. we feel like we're on track. after yesterday's fabulous economic speech, i am hearing

from a key voting bloc and that's middle class, educated women, who are so excited about this child care deduction. now i was a single mom for 10 years. i can tell you, that in the summer months, sometimes my child care bills were up to $1,000. under the trump plan, a family or a parent would be able to deduct $12,000, depending on the state, for child care costs. now that has to do with the entities such as child care facility, or an individual such as nanny. it doesn't have to do with groceries or that type of thing. charles: sure. >> but u.s. news called middle class the new poor, which gives us some pause. trump said they're really forgotten class. what is being defined by the heritage foundation as middle class income, it is as little as $756 a week, 38,000 to maybe $110,000 a year.

how do young families make it? i don't know. they have college dent, obamacare. it takes two to support their children. charles: on that topic, hillary clinton has hit this really hard already. she has been on this some are saying should have been a credit rather than a deduction. a lot of folks will say, this again, you used the word nannies i think, something like that. this will help the folks with au pairs which is fine and stand did i, that is the donald trump crowd, but won't help lower working class women, they need help even more. >> there is provision in the plan for lower income working class families as well. they with be able to have a payroll deduction and seed that in their paycheck. that would be reflected. that savings. i think it is, if i remember correctly, 50% of their payroll taxes would be deducted. charles: so, that, we'll see, as donald trump promised yesterday several times there would be more updates and fine tune, sharpen the pencil, whatever you

want to say. back to the fund-raising aspect, yesterday will reignite pick up on momentum, clearly donald trump has fund-raising momentum right now? >> that trump train has taken off. there are over 25 fund-raisers planned throughout the country for this month alone. it's a robust schedule. you would be surprised at the new donors that are coming on board, in addition to the old tried and true relics like myself this is my seventh campaign and i don't think, at this point that we're really that concerned. if it was october, i would be worried but the money is going to continue to flow. and so will the ground game. it will be built out after this. charles: and, spending that money, because, hillary clinton is spending money like crazy. i think i read where she spent 13 million on olympics. donald trump spent zero on the olympics. he didn't have to worry about it in the primaries. got so much what they call earned television coverage. whatever they show from him, they have to show for hillary.

he will not have the distinct advantage. >> no, but burn rate is important. this campaign is a lot leaner and meaner than hillary. a lot more efficient. donald is businessman, not a politician. you will start seeing attack ads, coming out, we scheduled one in september and we will slowly roll those out. we're just not showing our whole hand to the media at this point. charles: can you show me the box, the box is beautiful by the way? >> yes, for those viewers who missed charles's clip yesterday, he went sliding down a water slide fully clothed including his tie, so i had brought him some water accessories, rubber duckies. this dapper one reminds me of you, charles. charles: [laughter]. thank you very much. oh, boy. >> i am told the queen has one of these with a crown on by her bathtub. you're in royalty.

charles: thank you very much. you're a fund-raiser extraordinaire. very thoughtful. thanks a like, mica. see you real soon. hillary clinton might have got a boost in the polls. that doesn't mean she is winning bernie backers or president obama's donors. we'll explain to you why next. ♪ i have asthma... ...one of many pieces in my life. so when my asthma symptoms kept coming back on my long-term control medicine. i talked to my doctor and found a missing piece in my asthma treatment with breo. once-daily breo prevents asthma symptoms. breo is for adults with asthma not well controlled on a long-term asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. breo won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. breo opens up airways to help improve breathing for a full 24 hours. breo contains a type of medicine that increases the risk of death from asthma problems and may increase the risk of hospitalization in children and adolescents. breo is not for people whose asthma is well controlled on a long-term asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid.

once your asthma is well controlled, your doctor will decide if you can stop breo and prescribe a different asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. do not take breo more than prescribed. see your doctor if your asthma does not improve or gets worse. ask your doctor if 24-hour breo could be a missing piece for you. see if you're eligible for 12 months free at mybreo.com.

reporter: good afternoon, live from the floor of the new york stock exchange, i'm lori rothman with your fox business report. s&p and nasdaq managed to hit lifetime highs so far during the session. powering s&p, well, amazon, hitting also an all-time high today. key number for amazon to close at a life-time high, 767 and $74. we're just above the key level -- shares up 1/3 of 1%. all eyes after the bell. latest round of earnings. we will hear from a lot of industries, solarcity getting a lot of attention after tesla's 2.$6 billion. cheap oil hurting the company of the shares are down 7% on the week for that. yelp we'll hear about, up 1.7%. walt disney, one year ago the ceo warned of subscriber losses at espn. more "cavuto: coast to coast" after this.

>> voters, disaffected voters, independents and they don't buy into this two party system. i think what the clinton

campaign needs to keep in mind is it just not speaking to voters and their concerns and pains that is what bernie sanders did, but also understanding that the "brexit" problem could very well happen. that the same energy that was positive in bernie sanders's campaign could also turn negative. i'm getting it on twitter, constantly, if i say one thing in support of the democrats, my own people have turned on me. i think it is something for the clinton campaign to keep in mind. different type of messaging needs to be made to the voters because in swing states, when you look at issue-based voters in states like colorado, in ohio, if she says she is against fracking, but she is holding fund-raisers with natural fast executives, those people know. if those 3% of voters don't turn out in ohio that could lose her the election. charles: jehmu, is the message or earninger? is she imperfect message for the bernie philosophy? >> i think she is quite a good job comparing it to trump

consolidate votes for conservatives or business-minded republicans who are not interested in backing him. look, nomiki, i think you are living in somewhat of a vacuum with kind of the twitter feedback that she gets. you're not your average bernie sanders voter. the average bernie sanders voters, that is odd thing to say average, because i think they are all very unique and very loud and vocal and passionate, but they see exactly what bernie sanders wrote about in the "l.a. times" this week. he said hillary clinton is the one who is going to carry his issues through. you have seen some concessions on college, debt-free college, on the dnc platform. charles: sure. >> he has gotten some concession. it is just about 91 days. how many more of bernie sanders supporters is she going to pull in? she is doing really well with republican woman and hillary, she may be the candidate that actually brings together a broader coalition of democratic voters for her than even

barack obama was able to do in gate and 2012. >> but that shifts the party to the right. i think this is the concern. that just because, i was on the platform committee, and i saw those fights. i am a democrat who will be voting democrat in this election, but to discount the fact that 1/3 of the bernie sanders supporters, he got 85% of the those under 45. that is a big part of the barack obama coalition and future of the democratic party. if she is pivoting to the right, she is alienating future of the democratic party. very important to take these numbers into consideration in swing states. it is not about these large national polls. it is about understanding numbers at the macro and micro level. knowing that -- charles: because -- >> 3538.com, when they assessed it, if there is third party candidate in the race, a third goes to the third party. that is something she has to pay attention to. charles: to your point, i think we all agree, she did move the platform extremely far to the left. whether -- >> i don't agree with that. i was on the platform committee. it is weak language.

there two type of amendments a very democratic amendment and weak amendment. charles: bernie sanders thinks she did. he endorsed her an continues to endorse her. at least the man himself, not the message, but the man has gotten behind her. i want to ask you guys about another thing. nomiki, you brought up president obama, on donors, shows 1/3 of his donors yet to donate to hillary clinton. jehmu what is holding them back? >> i don't think hillary clinton is having a problem when it comes to getting democratic donors to back her. look, she is different candidate than president obama. one, she is on track to either meet or surpass what he was able to do in 12. two, she and her husband built up a different donor base than he did. those other donors -- charles: why are the other donors reluctant? they have given big money before. why wouldn't they give her big money is it. charles: no, the same people. >> small money.

i don't seen see how this is story when you have got the fact she is going to, either meet or surpass what obama was able to raise in 2012. that is significant. now, individuals they give to candidates for different reasons. clearly mow meekky and bernie sanders -- nomiki and bernie sanders are in a different place right now. individuals can be in different place than who their candidate ends up supporting and the reality is she needs to continue to raise as much money as possible because donald trump finally realized money is part of the political game. charles: nipping at her heels. we heard the mother's milk of politics is money. i would be really concerned if 1/3 of obama's big-time donors are ignoring my campaign? >> listen, i have to differ with everybody on this i think if anything, bernie sanders, i am former obama bundler. i got into the obama campaign fund-raising for him. i didn't do it for hillary clinton because i understand that t

function today is very different than they did 10 years ago. bernie sanders proved that you didn't have to do it all through the large donations where he has given $11.6 million to the clinton campaign, not all through ads. a report was most ineffective way to reach voters through advertising. because a lot of people are dv aring through advertisements. if you want to run a campaign the way they ran them in the '90s, that is the way to go. if she doesn't raise as much money as obama and that is great. if she wins and doesn't raise as much money with obama, that is even better. smaller dollar donations, focus on field, even better. we have to change the business model. doesn't work for republicans an democrats, the last four ones that raised most money didn't win. charles: the last four were not necessarily paupers. speaking of paupers, billionaire warren buffett sitting on record amount of cash. that might not be much longer.

who would the next acquisition target be? we think we know. we'll be right back. ♪

approaching medicare eligibility? you may think you can put off checking out your medicare options until you're sixty-five, but now is a good time to get the ball rolling. keep in mind, medicare only covers about eighty percent of part b medical costs. the rest is up to you. that's where aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company come in. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they could help pay some of what medicare doesn't, saving you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you've learned that taking informed steps along the way really makes a difference later. that's what it means to go long™.

call now and request this free decision guide. it's full of information on medicare and the range of aarp medicare supplement plans to choose from based on your needs and budget. all plans like these let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients, and there are no network restrictions. unitedhealthcare insurance company has over thirty years experience and the commitment to roll along with you, keeping you on course. so call now and discover how an aarp medicare supplement plan could go long™ for you. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. plus, nine out of ten plan members surveyed say they would recommend their plan to a friend. remember, medicare doesn't cover everything. the rest is up to you. call now, request your free decision guide

and start gathering the information you need to help you keep rolling with confidence. go long™. ♪ charles: warren buffett's berkshire hathaway has a record 72 billion bucks in cash on hand. experts are saying well, it is only a matter of time before he invests it somewhere but where? to steve lieb and jonas max ferris who the targets might be and how that might impact your portfolio. you think he is going to buy something. jonas, you think this is red flag for the overall market? >> warren buffett is a little bit of a market-timer. he tells people not to market time which is smart and good advice. he lets cash build up when market is expensive. when there is crisis he uses that opportunistically, he needs to with the money he has to beat the market.

financial cash, he lent money to goldman sachs. cash was high in '07. got high before the 2011 greece problems. it was high last few months which was not bad to be heavy in cash. he will wait for a slide to buy something big. charles: he was involved in the heinz deal, right? buzz wiser? >> i think jonas makes a very good point, he is a market-timer, this is not well-known about buffett but very, very good point. where i would agree and disagree with you, that there are some stocks out there that are very cheap on a long-term basis that i think you can buy now and you will get a lot more in terms of yield, in terms -- charles: give us the names, baby! got me all excited? i have a pen in my hands? give me symbols. >> make it simple. stocks i light i know he owns and also there is a third person

in here and it is bill gates and bill gates's management company which are, company that manages bill gates's money called cascade. when you have stocks owned by everybody you probably got something that's interesting and probably the most interesting to me, because i like it, i have it, et cetera, is deere. d-e-e-r-e. charles: that is stock symbol. that is depressed stock. >> it is totally depressed. charles: that is his wheelhouse though? doesn't he totally go consumer brand or consumer oriented type of thing whether coca-cola years ago or recently budweiser or kraft. >> that was buffett circa the 1990s or little bit earlier. his largest purchase recently has been burlington-northern. charles: rail company, which is why people say he is against the keystone pipeline. i let you rebut this deere sounds like depressed stock. forget where the overall market is. >> i don't see him going into

utilities or telecom, they got expensive recently. i don't see him adding to coke of long-term position. charles: what about deere? >> i would see apple believe it or not. >> doesn't have enough money to buy apple. the other one i would probably look at, you want companies that will hold their own come what may and here again is intersection between gates and buffett. there are two others. one is caterpillar. bill and melinda gates. charles: give me one more. we're running out of time. >> republic service. charles: service waste. okay. >> all conservative. charles: jonas what do you think? >> if not apple goes financial services. he understands the most of all business models. >> got enough of them i think, jonas, already. charles: ge, caterpillar, my subscribers are in cat. i hope you're right. donald trump getting ready to take the stage in moments having a rally in north carolina. hillary clinton taking a tour of a health facility down in miami. we'll follow latest on both candidates and their dueling economic plans.

keep it right here on fox business. ..

charles: catch me at 6:00 with donald trump's national finance chairman. here is trish reagan. trish: donald trump is about to speak any minute from now in north carolina at a rally after laying out his bold plan to jumpstart our economy and his campaign. with a work? will we hear more about it you will this plan which has a lot of red meat to appeal to conservatives and went over the never trump people and unify the party, i am trish reagan, hillary clinton blasting mister trump's plan. >> 3 wall street money managers, oil baron, former chief economist of one of the big banks at the heart of the financial