we just had a freedom caucus member say he is on board as well. i got to tell you it looks pretty interesting. stock market still guarded optimistically guarded but the market is coming back. neil, looking pretty good. neil: looking pretty good. thank you for peter, lizzie, deal with metallurgical coal issue. i might worry i have to explain it. charles: elitists like you look down on the coal stuff. neil: make america coal again. my thanks to all of you. we are following, my friend. only kidding you there. markets down about 13 1/2 point as charles pointed out, a lot might have to do with growing optimism, at least malcontent, not really keen on the latest rework of health care are more inclined to support the measure now. you know where that goes. at worst level we're down about 60, including a moment four congressman came to the microphones to explain the fact

they're leaning toward the health care deal right now. you know what that means, moderates on board, largely moderates, do you keep conservatives on board. back and forth we have on that. we'll explore that. goes back to so-called issue of preexisting conditions, what is covered and how is it covered, both crucial, as blake burman can tell you he live from the white house. hi, blake. reporter: two congressman now yeses as they said outside white house, fred upton, billy long, those two are driving this closer to a yes vote in the house. when i was speaking with white house officials earlier this morning. they were a handful of yes votes away. subtract that by two. this centers around preexisting conditions and new upton amendment which we're led to believe will be tacked on to the ahca. deals with this, in states which governors decide to opt out of preexisting conditions being covered and community rating, in

those states there is folks who might have a preexisting condition. if they have a lag in their insurance coverage, the worry from upton and long and some other moderates what happens when they try to go buy insurance, would prices be sky-high for them? now there is an $8 billion that will be added to that over five years to try to drive down the costs for those folks, potentially in those states. the argument here outside of the white house was this. it's a very small subset you but important one that will drive down costs. listen. >> this money with the others, maybe i let greg answer this, will in fact put downward pressure on what premium increases are there. >> you're only talking about this occurring in the states that got a waiver, that had a high-risk pool that people might not have continued their coverage. reporter: democrats neil, say this is not a fix at all. take a look what chuck schumer, the leader of the democrats in the senate put out a statement just moments ago, quoting here from schumer. the proposed upton amendment is

like administering cough medicine to someone with stage 4 cancer. schumer goes on to right this republican amendment leaves americans with preexisting conditions as vulnerable as they were before under this bill. neil, upton says he thinks there could be a vote thursday, meaning tomorrow. when i asked him about that, the last question there in this briefing or in this, speaking with reporters, he says he thinks it could be on thursday. this is still very much in the hands of republican leadership and folks at white house trying to get the last couple votes, neil. neil: you were prescient on that. good stuff, you buddy. blake burman at the white house. this whole preexisting thing was very big issue. it was taken that any republican plan would be pursuing this. we got a first hint, when i was talking to a pennsylvania congressman, maybe preexisting wasn't such a wasn't a guaranty. we got wind of the fact, wait a minute, these guys are not on

the same page. take a look. what if my state says no to coverage for preexisting conditions? >> a lot of people feel that is up to the states to decide. i really believe -- neil: you have that in the measure, sir what that is going to do is tick off a lot of your moderate colleagues would say no way in hell they would vote for that. >> neil, at this point i don't think we have something together that people would be happy. neil: he preexist something a big one, wouldn't you argue that? >> it's a big one. you have to have understanding how important the preexisting is. you have these high-risk pools and things you can do, reinsurance programs that help keep that under control. neil: those with preexisting conditions, illness before, they get a little nervous, not quite a definite, up to the states, are you telling me just to be clear that the way it is being reworkedded, this latest incarnation of a he repeal rework of the president's affordable care act, there is not a, there is not a guarranty that preexisting conditions are covered? that it will be at the discretion of states?

>> i do believe, and for me, for my vote, we have to have preexisting conditions in there. i think it just makes sense. some people will disagree with me. that is nonstarter. neil: doesn't sound like it is in there? doesn't sound like it is in there? that is what you want and maybe pennsylvania will be guaranteed by your state, what about another state might say well, maybe not? >> well i think the opt, the option to do it or opt out of it may be there for states. i can say where i'm from. neil: your colleagues are getting antsy, right, because you know, that is the one thing we all agree on because it is coverage of something that could happen to anyone. we want to make sure it is in there. now you're saying there is a possibility, your own personal views notwithstanding, sir might not be? >> my understanding it is in there. neil: everything exploded after that. coverages for high-risk patients that would be put, who would be put in these higher risk pools,

again, coverage for preexisting conditions. republicans like to say if you have a preexisting condition you are covered. but again that would be at the discretion of states. that's why congressman kelly is a good man of the he was saying i acknowledge how on would interpret that to believe some states would not go ahead and cover you or put you in the pool, especially if they don't have such a pool, if, if they feel that is not so important. it is very, very important to moderates and others, even some conservatives say one the few things they liked about obamacare, that would cover you with a preexisting condition and what have you. that is the a most important feature. we got first sign of skittism in the moderates and they were meeting with the president today to have differences address. blake told you at the outset of the show they did. back to this pool they would be in this get this sort of thing covered, this high had risk pool, if you will.

something similar what they have going on in maine. maine's governor, paul lepage explains how it works. what is the difference, if you could educate me, governor, high-risk pool, one with exists conditions and presumably a high-risk bunch? >> a high-risk pool means people go out, they register for insurance. we know whether or not they have a preexisting condition. they go in the back room and get their insurance and go on. neil: do they pay more for that, governor? >> no. that is the point. neil: okay. >> the point they registered into the high-risk pool. everything is done in the back office. they get their insurance, move on, same insurance all of us get. then the insurance company and government say we have a high-risk pool. government you will pay a little extra here. nobody knows who is in the high-risk pool, including people that said that they have a preexisting condition. neil: all right. so it is a way for the party to address how to cover those who have high-risk. if you had cancer before or disease before, or come from a family where that is the case,

heretofore, even before obamacare, you could be prevented getting any type of coverage or pay through the nose for this. now in maine, you don't pay through the nose for it. it is handled through this high-risk pool. the state is handling with the government. whether the state picks up cost or federal government picks up the cost they just want that ironed out. therein lies the rub, what they're doing to make sure that is addressed is not another costly government program as judge andrew napolitano was raising on show. that will be the decider. whether we get health care coverage or rework plan submitted to congress this week, up for a house vote, maybe tomorrow. we don't know. that is bar the battleground being joined. former south carolina gop chairman van hipp, director of health policy, paul howard. paul, do you think that the republicans can iron out these differences in time for a yea vote whether it is tomorrow,

friday or saturday? >> that is an excellent question. the bottom line can they construct a program look can a state prove if they want to move to different set arrangements, reinsurance, high-risk pool it offers affordable option. i think they can get there. get to the right policy, worry about the vote later. it takes care of itself once you to the the right strategy. neil: fear seems to be they won't get to a vote until they iron this out, delay is costing them a great deal right now. the president want a quick vote. phil graham, former texas senator harkening back to reagan era, these quick votes are important to get. it puts people on the spot. he wouldn't be surprised if a lot of no votes there turn out to be yes votes. there is urgency to voting right now. what do you think? >> i think the vice president walter mondale once said anyone who claims to be an expert on north korea is liar or fool. i think the same can be said about health care. neil: can you imagine what

health care in north korea is? >> that is what is on this president's plate right now. the sad thing he should not be in a position right now of having to sign obama's budget deal. and i think he got some bad advice back in december to agree to continuing recent you solution. he had to spend so much time putting together obama's, and last congress's budget deal. i think it is important for republicans to get it right instead of getting it quick. don't forget it was obamacare largely led to the republican take over of congress in 2010. we don't want the gop walking the plank in 2018 and trumpcare leading to the democrat takeover of congress. they have to get it right. and i think they need to spend whatever time it takes to get it right. neil: the only reason i would ever disagree with van hipp on this, paul, a, he is on remote, so what can he do? the other is, i think there is something about speed in this case, not always justifiable but you will never get the conditions just right for a clear vote and there might be

something to putting all of these congressman on the spot yea or nay. and they might be pleasantly surprised. because everything hangs in the balance. you could make an argument, anything they would come up would be better than what it is replacing. that is what republicans say. what are you saying? >> the other point, neil, let's give it over to the senate. based on balance of power, you have a very narrow margin. the senate will make changes when it gets there. neil: why is it beginning in the house? is that the way it will go? >> because of the reconciliation procedure, it has to start in the house. once it gets to the senate you will see whole another debate. that is where the rubber will meet the road. what the senate will do and send back to the house. neil: van, the own other issue comes up here is the cost of this. if they do guarranty preexisting conditions, if they do leave it to the states to offer more flexibility, what you're doing in the end to your earlier point is replacing one big omnibus unwieldy program with a slightly

less big omnibus unwieldy program and in the end is that advantageous or is it worth it if it greases the skids for something that they can go back to their voters and say, well, we have something better than what preceded it, and we can begin with the tax cuts that everyone seems to like? >> neil, i believe you have to have preexisting conditions, in there, something president campaigned on, report out five hours ago says it is in there. i'm a tenth amendment man. i believe whatever not given to the federal government it belongs to the state. it is the right thing to do. this is why this president was elected. he campaigned on it. just as he campaigned on meaningful tax reform, repealing obamacare. he campaigned on building the wall. that is things i hope this president will do. he connects so well with the american people. get on air force one, go to those swing states, go to the rust belt where those democrats are up for election in 2018,

urge his people, urge the base, urge forgotten americans to come you out to put pressure on those democrats to support his package. neil: all right, guys, thank you both, very, very much. if you're keeping score at home, guys, it looks something like this. we've gone from 21 no votes to probably 19 maybe, 17 no, votes. but in winning over a couple of those congressman who were meeting with the president at the white house today were some conservative members lost? in other words, freedom caucus members who were much more into having the states decide this and leaving it open to interpretation about coverage for preexisting conditions? in other words, if you're being very generous with that, some people say it is moral and ethical right thing to do, are you going to lose then the conservatives who were looking at some significant cost savings and this denies the states that opportunity? what you gain, you lose with others. it is back and forth that shows

no bounds. meanwhile we're still paying close attention to fbi director james comey on the hot seat. he said one things very interesting. makes me mildly nauseous it may have affected the election. both sides, democrats, republicans, are saying it is him, comey himself who is making them nauseous, after this.

why pause a spontaneous moment? cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. tell your doctor about your 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 this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. neil: all right, president trump meeting with mahmoud abbas of

the palestinian authority. let's listen in to that. >> thank you very much. today i'm pleased to welcome president abbas to the white house for his first visit to washington in quite a while. almost 24 years ago president abbas stood with a courageous peacemaker, then israeli prime minister yitsahk rabin. here at the white house president abbas signed a declaration of principles, very important, which laid the foundation for people between israelis and palestinians. the president, and mr. president, you signed your name to the first israeli-palestinian peace agreement. you remember that well, right? and i want to support you in being the palestinian leader who signs his name to the final and

most important peace agreement that brings safety, stability, prosperity to both peoples and to the region. i'm committed to working with israel and the palestinians to reach an agreement but any agreement can not being imposed by the united states or by any other nation. the palestinians and israelis must work together to reach an agreement that allows both peoples to live, worship and thrive and prosper in peace. and i will do whatever is necessary to facilitate the agreement to mead yacht, to arbitrate anything they would like to do. i would love to be a mediator, a an arbitrator or facilitator and we will get this done. peace also means defeating isis and other terrorist groups. these groups are a threat to all people to cherish human life. i know president abbas has spoken you out against isis and

other terrorist groups. we must continue to build our partnership with the palestinian security forces to counterand defeat terrorism. i also applaud the palestinian authority's continued security coordination with israel. they get along unbelievably well. i had meetings and at these meetings i was actually very impressed and somewhat surprised how well they get along. they work together beautifully. but there can be no lasting peace unless the palestinian leaders speak in a unified voice against incitement to violate, to violence and hate. there is such hatred but, hopefully there won't be such hatred for very long. all children of god must be taught to value and respect human life and condemn all of those who target the innocent.

as part of our efforts to move forward toward peace today, we will also discuss my administration's effort to help unlock the potential of the palestinian people through new economic opportunities. lastly i want to note the positive ongoing partnership between the united states and the palestinians on a range of issues, private sector development, and job creation, regional security, counterterrorism, and the rule of law. all of which are essential to moving forward toward peace. i welcome president abbas here today as a demonstration of that partnership, that very special partnership that we all need to make it all work. and i look forward to welcoming him back as a great mark of progress and ultimately toward the signing of a document with

the israelis and with israel toward peace. we want to create peace between israel and the palestinians. we will get it done. we will be working so hard to get it done. it has been a long time. but we will be working diligently and, i think there is a very, very good chance, and i think you feel the same way. mr. president, thank you very much. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, excellency, i would like to thank you for this honorable invitation to come and meet with you and i look much forward to working with you in order to

come to that deal, to that historical agreement, historic deal to bring about peace. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, our strategic option, our strategic choice is to bring about peace based on the vision of the two state, a palestinian state with its capital of east jerusalem, that lives in peace and stability with the state of israel based on the borders of 1967. [speaking in native tongue]

[speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, for us to bring about a comprehensive and just peace based on the two-state solution such matter would give a great impetus to the arab peace initiative and the other initiatives, international initiatives as well as enables

to fight and deter terrorism and fight the criminal isis group. isis that is totally innocent and has nothing to do with our noble religion. and that also, if we create peace that is just and comprehensive, that will also leave the arab and islamic countries to have normal relations with israel based, as stipulated in the previous arab summits, the latest of which was arab summit in jordan. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, we believe that we are capable and

able to bring about success to our efforts because mr. president, you have the determination and the have the desire to see it become to fruition and to become successful and we, mr. president, are willing, we are coming into a new opportunity and new horizon that would enable us to bring about peace in that regard. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, as far as the a permanent solution

we believe that this is possible and able to be resolved. i am firmly believing that this is possibly we are able to resolve it and in that i also believe that we will be able to resolve the issue of the refugees and the issue of the prisoners, according to the international law, according to terms of international law, international legitimacy and various relevant references and terms of reference in that regard, and based on what is stipulated in the previous treaties and agreements, that no unilateral steps must be taken to get ahead of the agreement and discussing those issues. [speaking in native tongue]

>> translator: mr. president, it is about time for israel to end its occupation of our people and of our land. after 50 years we are the only remaining people in the world that still live under occupation we are inspiring to achieve our right to self-determination. we also want israel to recognize the palestinian state, just as the palestinian people recognize the state of israel. [speaking in native tongue]

>> translator: about president i affirm to you, you are raising our children, our grandchildren on a culture of peace. we are endeavoring to bring about security, freedom and peace for our children to live like the other children in the world, along with the israeli children in peace, need dom and security. [speaking in native tongue] >> translator: mr. president, i

bring with me today a, the message of the suffering of my people as well as aspirations and hope, the hope and aspiration of the palestinian people from the holy land, from that land where the three religions survive and the jewish faith, the christian faith and the muslim faith, where they all coexist together to to foster environment of security, peace, stability and love for all. [speaking in native tongue]

>> translator: mr. president, i believe we're capable under your leadership and stewardship to your courageous stewardship and your wisdom, we are, as well as your great negotiating ability, i believe with the grace of god and all of your effort, we believe that we can become, we can be partners, true partners to you, to bring about an historic peace treaty under your stewardship to bring about peace >> now, mr. president, with you we have hope. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. so we're going to start a process. we've spoken to bibi netanyahu. we have spoken to many of the great israeli leaders.

we've spoken with many of your great representatives. many of them are here today for lunch with us. we'll start a process which hopefully will lead to peace over the course of my lifetime. i always heard the toughest deal to make is between the israelis and palestinians. let's see if we can prove them wrong. okay? >> okay. >> thank you. >> thank you. very much, everybody. neil: no opportunity to take questions. the president and mahmoud abbas, the man who runs the palestinian authority. abbas managed to sneak in there his desire in any peace process, east jerusalem, be considered part of the prize. and the, the israelis of course long-held the view jersey, whether east, west, north, south in its entirety will remain part of israel.

that is not open to compromise. obviously that is a thorny issue here. keep in mind, that abbas speaks for the palestinian authority. he does not speak for another group, much more militant group, violent group, hamas. not part of this process here. if you think about it, abbas through the palestinian authority is a sinai, controlling much of the sinai or penetration on the part of palestinians in the sinai region. hamas, pretty much all of the west bank is not under israeli control, even though obviously it is. so, you know he, hope springs eternal. every president right or left, republican, democrat, has hoped to score a sweeping comprehensive deal between the israelis and palestinians to little avail. but this president, thinks given the novelty of his approach to this that he would and he could. this luncheon and this visit is all part of the process, winning over all warring parties. a lot easier said than done.

to wall street, the dow is about 13 points, 14 points. we had been down 60, i should say south of 60, when it looked like this whole health care thing was falling apart. a word that couple reluctant members won over again, largely moderate congressman won over on the idea that preexisting conditions were covered. the losses ebbed a bit, their 1/5 about what they were about an hour ago. that does not mean a deal is done. whoever you win over, let's say moderates in this case you risk losing conservatives. just like when you won over those conservatives you risk losing moderates. charlie gasparino with the latest give-and-take on this. i guess they want a vote tomorrow, they want everyone on record. the president is keen on that. handicap this for me. >> you know, my sources say it is still too close to call. it looks good.

the markets, why do the markets care about this. markets care foremost about tax cuts. here is the rub here, if you get the health care thing passed, get savings that a health care bill repealed and sort of replace of obamacare with something else, there is savings in there. if you get those savings, then that avoids a bruising battle over what deductions will be in or out of tax cuts. and that is key. because there is going to be certain constituencies that want the state and local tax deduction to remain in the tax cut bill, right? i mean, there are republicans in california, in new jersey, in new york, almost 30 of them, that would want that bill. they would want that deduction in there. wall street will put a lot of pressure on the president, i should say the private equity industry, who is here, in force at milken will put a lot of pressure on congress to keep the deduction for carried interest. they think that is good --

definitely good good for their business. they make a case it is good for the economy. it allows them to buy distressed companies to fix them up and sell them. that is what it does. that argument resonates with members of congress. if they get the tax cut bill through, excuse me, health care bill through, get those savings, well that makes tax cuts, those sort of decisions or battles definitely had on those deductions whether they keep them in or out, makes them a lot easier. you might keep the state and local tax deduction. you might keep carried interest in. you can, this thing can almost pay for itself. there is still savings and money to play with. that is why health care is very important. my sources still say it's down to the wire. i have this feeling, it's a feeling, i'm not in washington, i'm here in l.a., that they're going to pass it. just seems like there is some, there is some groundswell here to pass this thing. if they do, i think that is a net positive for the markets and

it is a net positive for, for taxes. let's be real clear. that means they pass it out of the house. it goes to the senate. another battle will go there. there will be a battle whether they can do this you through reconciliation should try to do. thumb nair nose at the democrats, filibuster nonsense, get the thing through with 51 votes. i'm not a parliamentarian. i listened to people say it can be done. that is another battle. we'll cover that story. you have to this before you get to that. this is very important, neil, for the markets. if you're an investor, you want health care reform. it frees up trump and white house to do the full month at this on corpos. neil: i think there is some logic to this, putting people on record. phil phil gramm made a big deal.

people who were no votes miraculously became yes votes. it puts them on the spot. no one wants to be in the position getting a call from the president. ronald reagan's view was deliver the goods. if you're not delivering the goods, we're all on record that you didn't deliver the goods. >> imagine having a scarlet letter, you're the guy that prevented health care and thus prevented tax cuts, and caused the dow to go down 3,000 points. imagine living with that in re-election. neil: oh, man. >> that would be unbelievable. neil: reagan's famous line at the time. you don't have to do it for me. do it for your country. have a nice day. imagine how that will go. >> good point. neil: thank you. charlie gasparino still in los angeles. the conference ended but he loves the city. who doesn't? i'm joking. meantime fbi chief james comey is in the hot seat right now a day after hillary clinton famously blamed him for her loss. you remember this? >> look this is terrible. it makes me mildly nauseous to think we might have had impact

on election but honestly it wouldn't change the decision. everybody who disagrees with me has to come back with october 28th with me, stare at this, what would you do? would you speak or would you conceal? i could be wrong but we honestly made a decision between those two choices even in hindsight, this is one of the world's most painful experiences i would make the same decision. neil: mildly nauseous. i like that. explains my entire dating career reaction. he makes me mildly nauseous. anyway, catalina magazine publisher, and emily deshinky. a little bit of hieny covering when both republicans and democrats are piling on justifying what he said it, when he said it, a week little more prior to the election and coming back more two days before the election. he didn't seem to win any fans on either side?

>> we're hearing more and more from comey as time passes. what i'm struck by every single time we hear from him how difficult his decision was. if he made the opposite decision i think we would be sitting here today, asking him the question why he did that? he was in such a you tough place. great he giving detailed explanations giving insight to his mind set. it should help the american people how tough the call was. mildly nauseous was healthy and ernest and we understand how hard the choice was. neil: what i have to wonder, cathy, what comes from an ongoing investigation we know is going on the fbi is conducting into the role of the russians in the last election. that is something that obviously pique ad lot of democrats interest here. he cautioned to say we don't think it changed balloting and vote count. this is much more than the

balloting and vote count. it was about how more problematic that can be for the trump administration? >> hillary clinton seems to think it caused a vote count change for her. all democrats mildly nauseous what comey did and decision he came to. i wrote down what he said. he had high confidence that the russians interfered with the election. that should have been brought up at the time. not the emails. not the servers, the russians interfering should have been brought up at time. hillary clinton i don't think she did anything wrong pointing that out, pointing out yes, comey, she is, everyone's a little bit responsible for this loss but she did win the popular vote and she did bring that up. and i think if she was on the other foot, donald trump would bring up why did comey say this? why did comey blow my chances? each side would have been mildly nauseous no matter what the results would have been with comey doing what he did. neil: i think as david axelrod said, none of this affected or was coming from the russians on

hillary clinton not campaigning in wisconsin. so, say what you will, influence that was the campaign call, not a russian call or trump call. thank you, guys, very, very much. >> thanks. neil: sometimes there is great benefit to putting people on the spot. people who talk or say bad things behind your back. what if you had a microphone on them or could witness it yourself, would they do the same? would they act the same? voting on health care, would they be an automatic no? ronald reagan always put this to the test, to put people on notice. i'm noticing your vote. vote yea or ney. why the gipper is very much alive and well in this health care debate after this. ♪

my name is pam. i'm 51 years old. when i was diagnosed with pneumococcal pneumonia, it was huge for everybody. she just started to decline rapidly. i was rushed to the hospital... my symptoms were devastating.

the doctor said, "pam! if you'd have waited two more days, you would've died." if i'd have known that a vaccine could have helped prevent this, i would have asked my doctor or pharmacist about it.

neil: what if you're leaning as a no on this, all of sudden you had to vote one way or the other? still a know? congressman phil gramm said sometimes there is benefit to forces people to vote and getting people on the record. you said something interesting during the break. sometimes the numbers don't look good but if you wait for the numbers to look right you would

wait a long time. >> let me give you a an example. the day we voted on the reconciliation bill for the reagan program, that called for the tax cut, it eliminated three social security benefits. it was a tough vote. 30 republicans are uncommitted. reagan calls them down to the white house where we're all sitting around the cabinet table. by the time we got around the table back to my, almost everybody was with reagan. it was just their constituents. so reagan sat there and he didn't say a word, what seemed like five minutes. then he looked at everybody, he said, you know, i was confused. i thought this was about country. i didn't know it was about constituency. he got up and l. he got up and left. that was the end of the meeting. neil: how did the vote go? >> we call the roll, won by one vote. neil: interesting, maybe there is a lesson here, if the leadership is waiting to get the

votes, that maybe if they hold the vote they will have the votes? that's what happened. they had the votes you but it didn't look that way going into it. freedom cob cause member louie gohmert of texas joins us. what do you think of that, do the vote, yea or nay, see how it goes? >> i was thinking we should have done a vote last week. think about it, the freedom caucus, there may be one now a no but, we've been yes for at least a couple of weeks. i was saying we could have had the vote like phil gramm and you were talking about because think about it. you have got people that are part of the moderates, who, have voted over and over and over to repeal obamacare, and repeal so much more than the current bill does. how do you tell your constituents, i voted over and over to repeal obamacare when it

didn't count, you but now that it counts i am not going to keep my promise and vote to repeal even part of obamacare? i think that's a tough thing to sell back home. that is why i think if we just went ahead and had the vote, that we would get there. we would have at least 218. neil: really? you need 216 depending who would be there. >> right. neil: let me ask you, congressman, right now looks like former no votes, fred upton of michigan and billy long, are right now going to be possibly yes votes. they were won over with the new provision on preexisting conditions. that is more amenable to them. looks like leaning with them are michael burgess of your fine state and greg walden of oregon. say all four end up being yes votes from guaranteed almost no votes. how does that change it among caucus members who might say anything that makes them happy is make me unhappy? because what you do for one side ticks off the other side?

how do you think that affects the math? >> you know, i will never be in leadership. i made too many people mad if i were, i would say, okay, well then you have got a choice. we're either going to vote this or we're bringing a full repeal bill to the floor and you're going to either vote on one or the other. otherwise, you're telling your constituents, i was lying year after year after year when i said i wanted to repeal it, i would vote to repeal it. so you tell us, do you want us to bring full repeal to the floor, or want us to bring this one that repeals some of it? you make the call. neil: yeah. >> and problem i had originally was, it really didn't repeal anything about obamacare. it was going to give more power to the health and human services hoping we could do it administratively. neil: but some moderates then worry that in so doing, it jeopardizes coverage for preexisting conditions, and all of that. let's say they sorted that out.

you know this better than i, the president is saying look, whatever we have here is better than what we have now. that the obamacare is so bad that almost anything we come up with will be better. do you agree with that? that apparently is the pitch he was making and is making? >> i didn't agree with that originally because it gave more power to health and human services which is a step in the wrong direction. the changes that president trump readily willing to agree on, we had an agreement twice with our republican leadership in congress wouldn't go along. he had to back up. no, i think originally, it was not better than what we had, you but now it is. now it is. neil: you will vote yea on this? >> yes. neil: when is the vote coming? will it be tomorrow? >> that is what i was saying, neil. i thought we should have voted last week. i think people have been

hesitant to yes would have a hard time explaining to their constituents how you could vote for full repeal dozens of times. neil: you think the vote will be tomorrow? >> i have given up trying to predict what our current leadership will do but i think it is the smart thing to do because if we don't, the house isn't in session next week. it will be a terrible mistake for people to go home. we haven't seen done this. this needs to be a win. we need to put it in the win column and move on. neil: taking vacation? what is the deal with you guys? >> i keep telling my friends like sean, actually you don't want us in session every day. we pass more laws every day. that infringe on freedom. neil: we don't have to worry about it. because apparently you're not. >> not if we're not voting for something meaningful. this is meaningful. this will make a difference in people's lives. bring down premiums. we just need to take the vote and do it. i think it passes soon as we do. neil: okay. we'll watch closely. good seeing you again, congressman.

>> good to see you, thanks, neil. neil: on to apple. you've seen this all sorted out here. i thought the big takeaway from this, the fact it is sitting on $256 billion cash hoard. the uk and canada, that is one they have got. so you have a, a company that's richer, has more assets than countries. the trouble is, a lot of that money is held abroad and it is not coming home anytime soon. we have tech analyst peter shenkman joining us now on that. do we have shauna as well? no, just peter shenkman. i apologize. peter, the question is, with all of that money, does apple get incentivized to bring it home? is that crucial? one-time low tax, say 10% do the trick? what do you think? >> the question what does it do for them to bring it home? it is cash and liquid, and available. stop, put the number, put it into the perspective, they could purchase right now if they're

board and have nothing to do this afternoon, test last, netflix, snapchat, uber, twitter, not necessarily a good purchase and spotify and spotify without breaking a sweat. they would still have enough left over to fly home first class couple hundred thousands times. you're looking at just an obscene amount of money. the question becomes is it more beneficial for them to have it here or more beneficial to have it overseas? the current administration would haveyou think the beneficial to have it here. but fiduciary is. they could do one heck of a buyback with this. they could do one heck of a dividend with this. neil: hang on peter. donald trump might speak about economic developments in the luncheon with the palestinian authority leader mahmoud abbas. >> president abbas is with us. we'll be having lunch together. we'll be discussing details what has proven to be a very difficult situation between

israel and the palestinians. and let's see if we can find a solution. it's, something that i think is frankly, maybe not as difficult as people have thought over the years. but we need two willing parties. we believe israel is willing. we believe you're willing. and if you both are willing, we're going to make a deal. so i want to thank everybody. i want to thank rex tillerson for being here. rex, we have anything to say? >> mr. president, i think it is a historic opportunity because there are a number about positive conditions in place and i know under your leadership and willingness of the president, prime minister, that we hope good things will happen. >> thank you, rex. and vice president mike pence sitting right here, has been a long-time supporter of peace and certainly peace between the g?lestinians and israel. >> thank you, mr. president.

i just would like to welcome president and his entire delegation here to the white house. it is good to see you again. my family and i had the privilege of your hospitality during a christmas visit just a few short years ago and we welcome you. look very much forward to our discussion. >> he has made great progress, hasn't he? he is doing a great job. rex is doing a fantastic job also. thank you all very much. thank you. [shouting questions] >> go to the door behind you. neil: all right. i just thought he might be answering one of the questions concerning the health care vote. he had a couple of those reluctant kong at the white house earlier today, won them over with coverage for preexisting conditions. we have peter shenkman, geek

facttry founder and ceo. president wants to entice that money back home. might be upwards of five trillion, not two trillion. apple is big contributor of that, 256 billion. do companies really get incentivized if there is one-time low-tax hit on that money when they can keep the money abroad and not pay any tax on it? >> that is really the issue. do you want something for fry that seems to be working or pay something to have something that you doesn't know? it is not necessarily in their best interests do that. that looks great. keep in mind that is what -- let ace bring $250 billion home sounds great, right? neil: right. >> it is really great press sound bite but what does that do for the company itself? right now the company is there, they're earning in the time our president spoke just now, there is calculator, i found on-line, during the time the president spoke between the time he with talked and time we're talking now, apple earned $3.2 million. neil: is that right? >> we're asking ourselves what does it benefit them to bring

all this stuff home? not talking about going to chase to open up an account. this is lot of money to move out from up with place to another. where is the benefit for apple? it is not necessarily there. neil: they could get a toaster. there is that. peter, thank you. >> my pleasure. neil: apple stock turning down a little bit. market down 25. biel have more after this.

..

>> preexisting is one of those

things at the nonsense they want. they come to the business model insurance business model insurance at what is the state's role because we do believe that they should have some sovereignty. they should put together what they think is. neil: what if my state says no to preexisting conditions. >> dataset to the states to decide. >> yes, that issue has been resolved. the american people have spoken with. we want to stand for preexisting conditions. if the state outside of the mandates from obamacare, they must still provide for preexisting conditions in their state. neil: i don't know how clear that was. suffice it to say that is really where republicans were and maybe still are divided even no less divided now it would seem more coverage for preexisting conditions. in other words, you can never be denied coverage. one of the more promising and

positive features of obamacare committee affordable care act. i matter what your pastor what is happening to you, you will always get medical coverage. part of the constellation to bring conservative freedom caucus members on board was that the states would decide on matter how much extra you could potentially pay for that if let's say you've had cancer or a recurrence of it and whether you could possibly get coverage for the same price as someone who never gave. for mike kelley in pennsylvania, that was the first time on air that you heard a congressman saying this is where they are dividing the medical hatfield and mccoy's. they've come a long way to bridging that gap. they are set on a couple of those that could take place as early as tomorrow on the issue and the health care repeal and replace effort that we are told will include coverage for preexisting conditions. again, some conservatives because the coverage should be

left up to the state today. that means that potentially some people are denied coverage or pay through the nose through that coverage. you can see where this is going. they want to get this thing voted on and put people on record. so where does all that stand? gerri willis, cardiologist dr. kevin campbell. do you first on this notion of preexisting conditions and coverage? some people have a real problem leaving that up to states that even in this party, and big on states rights and all of that, this is one thing the federal government should ask that. you agree with that? >> i have real concerns about leaving this to this day. there's very little about the affordable care act that i like, but i do like the preexisting coverage. if you leave this to the state, patients will be priced out, they will have no care and ultimately will be the more expensive because they look at no care and show up in extreme

distress. neil: jerry, fortunately you've made this a very good cause in terms of what she been personally going through battling cancer. there is a possibility under such a plan that depending on the state you live, you could get coverage. you might not get coverage. it always comes back to that. what do you think? >> this is obviously a cause are important to me and i know to you as well. they both have our health care battles and we went to see people get coverage. what is going on right now, states can opt-out, but they can only opt-out if they come up with a plan that is better and works. the idea of high risk pools, there is a very big problem with those. let me tell you specifically what it is. republicans put more money toward this idea. you're really talking about covering two to 3 million americans who have very big high-priced medical bills. in one state alone in iowa, one patient cost the state a million

dollars a month. so how do you solve for that? how much money would it take? $200 billion conservative estimate over 10 years. this bill does not propose $200 billion. much less do not what a billion extra that fred upton suggested today. neil. neil: you know, dr. meera cardiologist. you are the smartest of the smart. so let me ask you about the expense because when you've got cardio related issues, they can be pricey. especially if you have a past history of them, then getting follow-up coverage is going to cost you more. do you think high-risk pools, however they are paid for are the answer because those pools themselves could be very pricey? we would be replacing one on the base program another big on this program. >> i think he set up right there.

we are trading one bad choice for another because you are right. cardiovascular disease is the number one killer in the u.s. today. however, if we focus on prevention, preventing heart disease by working on preventing diabetes and high blood pressure and things of that sort, we can lower these costs in these patients are not that expensive. from personal experience, my daughter has type one diabetes and she's one diabetes and she's had it since five years old. without insurance, it's almost unaffordable to keep her healthy and well. she's 16 now but luckily i have insurance. neil: you know, my problem with the whole preventive thing i discovered in the process this thing called the food. matt and i didn't have to be reminded about that. i hear where you're coming from. but jerry, that will be the issue here, whether republicans back and forth and still stuck to the basic principles, the things i like about obamacare coverage for preexisting conditions.

you could never get turned on, all of that stuff. the cause will still be substantial. then why make the move at all? >> the cost to be substantial. there's no doubt about it. let's be crystal clear about what we are talking about here with the risk pools. the costs go to the government. people paying for insurance coverage wouldn't notice any difference. those costs would be borne by the government. that is what they are talking about right now. this is what could happen. we are talking about a very different paradigm that existed before obamacare. to the good doctor's point, kevin is a very good friend of mine. prevention is everything. prevention is great, sometimes there were some diseases you can't prevent. you hear about the first time in the doctors office and you have to deal with it right here and right then. neil: no one healthier before you when you were diagnosed. me, i had it coming. i left it at that.

thank you, both very much. interesting read. that's a separate issue trying to get this health care thing done one way or the other and cover preexisting conditions. to windows lawmakers over who didn't like the fact that might be forced out or left to the states to decide. that's enough for one state to another and all the sudden you are covered for her. to win over the likes of fred upton to the reluctant congressman, do you lose anyone else? that's the way it's been going. the conservatives this is a two state rep moderate or vice versa. real clear politics cofounder on that notion whether the white house is making progress on here. the president is obviously working overtime to make sure whatever we come up with and i guess this is leading herein is it's going to be better than what we've got now. everyone on board. he's not been subtle about it. what do you think? >> well, i did think having fred upton, meeting with them, that

they've switched from a node to a gas is big. right now on capitol hill, they are passing up the upton amendment to all of the other folks undecided. there is still republicans and another night team that have come out against. >> you are unsure and i don't know if you are on earlier. prepared remarks from him that said there really aren't that many who are guaranteed no. if they put on record it have to be an record, they would vote for this and a number of so-called uncommitted that you just outlined would be -- that this effort would win. what do you think? >> that is the republican leadership is hoping. that is the lesson learned is they go ahead because they thought they were going to get to those. they put them on record and they think when they do that, if they do that, they will try less

resistance. neil: does not always happen? that was certainly the history in a series of those that president reagan have a tax cut to increase defense spending but a lot of people would balk at it. and put on the spot, in other words it's much clearer ea then made. >> well, i think it is true when you force people to vote, you end up getting a lot of folks that will go along with the party. they don't want to be seen as the outliers they are and be seen for causing the initiative. again, republicans can only handle on this thing goes down. they are looking forward to tomorrow or friday. ditto on all these congressmen to go home without having them go on record and have the vote

taken if they can get it. neil: what is more embarrassing? having a vote and get defeated or delay the vote after vacation? >> i think -- look, it's been a defeat for republicans overall because this is a rubik's cube they have not been able to figure out. i do think having on the record a vote for republicans caused this thing to collapse would be worse than kicking the can down the road and delaying it and saying we wait until we actually know we have the vote and take this thing to the floor. you don't want to have a situation where the situation fails. republicans caused it to go down to defeat. neil: great catching. thank you hit by the way, talking to senator john did in the gop chairman. the united states senate assuming it gets out of the house and therein lies what could be a real battle between it is about to those if you

include the fbi's director still on capitol hill. knowing that whatever he decided to do and hillary clinton and exposing the latest investigation over e-mails, it would be tough. now, both sides are coming back and saying you are right on the not eating thing. after this. >> between really bad and catastrophic, said to my team is about to walk into the world really bad. i got to tell congress that we are restarting this. the bottom line is, for your goals,

this is a strategy i'd recommend. this actually makes sense. now on the next page you'll see a breakdown of costs. what? it's just... we were going to ask about it

but we weren't sure when. so thanks. yeah, that's great. being clear and upfront. multiplied by 14,000 financial advisors, it's a big deal. and it's how edward jones makes sense of investing. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $509 on auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

neil: real quickly, we are getting word of what appears to be a potential shooter at-large advisory college in irving, texas. the complex is on lockdown. irving police tweedy and an active shooter is in the college area, whether he or she is still on that campus. anyone's guess but they are not taking chances. there have been barricaded themselves in rooms amid this intruder recover. also, keeping you up-to-date on what is going on on capitol hill right now. james comey testifying any skype

patrick leahy, democratic senator from inserting himself in the last campaign and handing the election of donald trump then what these latest investigations into donald trump and the role of the russian last election. connell mcshane with the very latest. reporter: and now, watching this for about three hours now, it's almost like two separate hearings. democrats want to know why the director was more forthcoming about the hillary clinton e-mail investigation and he was the possible collusion between the charm campaign in russia. the word mr. cohen is when asked about that all day long is consistent, consistently looking at those. republicans pushed them on the leaking of classified information regarding russia and on that point, senator chuck grassley was questioning him and mr. call comey -- nor had he authorized anybody else to be an anonymous source. so with that, the reopening of

the clinton e-mail probe our investigation and 11 days before the election has been a big topic today. the director made his thinking. said he had a choice between two outcomes. >> speak with me really bad. an election in 11 days. where did that would be really bad. and ceiling in my would be catastrophic and not just the fbi, but well beyond. i can't consider for a second whose article fortunes to be affected and in what way. we have to ask ourselves what is the right thing to do and do that thing. >> at thing of course was to speak. he went on to say it made him mildly nauseous to think the fbi had an impact on the election. the question has gone back and forth a number of subjects. he says russia still involved in american politics, but it's also to be pointed out he's refused to answer questions in an open planning, which is what this is.

he wouldn't say whether debris or has access to president trumps tax returns, wouldn't comment on whether he was the subject of an investigation. it continues. neil: thank you, my friend. meantime, president trumps hitting back comey is the best thing that ever happened to hillary clinton and that he gave her a free pass for many bad deeds. charlie gasparino on that and where it's all going. >> i am still here. a lot of stuff in new york, though. if you talk to fbi agents, which i do on occasion about the politics of the place, they would concede that they believe james comey, the director has a very tenuous hold on the job. they live from day to day and donald trump is going to change his mind and ask for her resignation. while he does have a long-term, i think he's in the third year -- 12 or 13 year term.

i don't remember the exact time when his term sunsets, but it's going to be a while. they can exert pressure on the fbi director to be up and say is not proper for the office here in that case, usually does leave. they do now, is wide james comey's hold is so tenuous. if you look at those hearings, neil, he did not satisfy anybody. democrats believe the election into donald trump, which they think is an abomination. republicans believe he blinked and should've indicted hillary clinton. the standard that he's using, that nobody has been prosecuted for this type of stuff for generations is just too high of a standard. you have a private e-mail server as hillary clinton did indicate classified information right there and you don't have to show a high level, there is a malfeasance that goes along with

just accepting that classified information on something private that you should know about him that he should be charged with one cart. so he is satisfy you nobody. now maybe there is an alternative view inside the fbi also. that might make his job secure in this sense. he is above politics. it will cause an uproar. that is usually not the way it works, though. usually you have a political master. once master. one side of the fence or the other side of the fence. you know, if you are on the wrong side of the fence, you are gone. if you were in the middle, you usually get pulled apart. it is kind of a sad day to be the fbi director having to explain why he did and what he didn't do in terms of an investigation. no offense to the democrats out there, i mean, clearly james comey helped donald trump. there is no doubt. the whole thing would've been negated as hillary clinton didn't do something like have a

private e-mail server. it begins and ends with the fact that we have a very high level official government so paranoid shoes to private e-mail server. you know, whether that is technically illegal for obviously illegal is not for me to say. i think, you know, if she didn't do that, she probably would have been president. here we are right now. what is interesting is inside the fbi, neil, people do recognize that the guy they call boss has a very tenuous hold on this job. back to you. neil: to point out he's about three and a half years into that 10 year term, so it is in the early call of 2023. again, as you say the president can make that very, very difficult. it's hard to fire, but you can have a mutual agreement or they

just don't think it's a good idea for you to stick around and most will defer to the president of the united states. we will watch as he's been there for at least another six years. we'll keep an eye on that. thank you, but you in the meantime, more on the shooting or the fear of one occurring. still on a trigger lock down. go to the nearest room and locked down. if the campus, stay away. we are hearing from a number of students affected. germans alike who are not taking any chances of going out. one witness told local media they saw police officers with high-powered rifles going room to room. that is all we know. we don't even know if the assailant, one or more still on campus could we just know they are not taking any chances and are not taking any chances and have the entire vicinity on? lockdown. we will have more after this.

that's why i rent from national. where i get the control to choose any car in the aisle i want, not some car they choose for me. which makes me one smooth operator. ah! still a little tender. (vo) go national. go like a pro.

neil: all right. we are getting word out of irving, texas of an active shooter incident north of lake college. it is a two-year community college and about an hour ago there were reports of shots fired on the campus. one witness told david s. aa the abc affiliate in dallas that they had a lease with high-powered rifles going room to room. students were running out of the school with their hands out. another student heard people yelling in a hallway when a man entered a room that he was in, turn off the lights, lock the door. also talking about one or two shooters on campus. if you have any business on the campus to obviously officers entered this room where some students were locking themselves and ushered them out of there. we don't know anything more than

that. this is a fairly large community college system. 11,000 people enrolled in the school irving texas to former n.y.p.d. detective on the phone with us right now. i apologize. pat, what do you make of what you are hearing there? >> it is kind of the seybold think again and again. it wasn't that long ago we discussed similar beginnings. the potential horror show is unfolding. it's difficult to say with any precision, but hands up, and people yelling. one or two shooters in a room. this is a recipe for an absolute disaster. very premature to draw conclusions, but this is i hate to say groundhog day, but it is something we unfortunately are hearing more and more frequently

in recent years. you and i have been on this many times. neil: this only occurs a day or two -- the day or two -- yesterday when an austin church or stabbing. the person actually died and injured another half dozen. that was in austin. not exactly in the exact same neighborhood here, but in texas. when we get these incidents, you always wonder about copycatting it is. the lockdown is just an automatic or caution the public institutions take these days. >> absolutely. very good reason we took away some lessons. connecticut a while back about five years ago. we have learned some valuable lessons in terms of lockdown and ways to mitigate and manage and

minimize injuries with law-enforcement or series of protocols policies. nevertheless, human nature being what it is, who knows what's going through individuals with weapons or individuals, students and so forth and instruct others. so it's obviously a rapidly evolving. the police are kind of closeas . i'm certain you have a smiley, talented, very professional, very informed. that's a different story we chatted on the police now are operating with a different series of policies and instructional game plans and they did five years ago and i think that helps to mitigate. >> that's reassuring. neil: thank you again. we are getting a few more details. at the very least they can confirm that shots were fired on this campus and irving, texas.

about an hour behind us central time. it was just after noon, dallas, irving texas time that we got these reports of shots fired and students immediately aborting themselves up in any room they can find and campus personnel urging they do so. they have not found a shooter. we know of no injuries or anyone who was hit, but we will keep an eye on it for you and update you as it comes to us. in the meantime, other news we follow in washington with progress of the health care vote if and when it comes to speak at all. phil graham, former texas senator telling you it's important that they get a vote. >> 30 republicans are uncommitted. we are all sitting around cabinet table. by the time we got around the table that to me, almost everybody was just their constituents. reagan sat there and he didn't say a word for what seemed like

five minutes. and then he looked at everybody and said, you know, i was confused. i thought this was about country. i didn't know it was about constituents be. and he got up and left. he got up and left. that was the end of the meeting. we won by one vote. true to the tax-cut revolution was fun. that was then. the president at the time saw the wisdom of going ahead been holding everyone accountable, voting for what would be something that is structurally change the united states. at least 20 some odd million jobs created. of course this fella probably wasn't even born at the time. talking to senator john dan, republican of south dakota. good to have you. ronald reagan's dead then sometimes there can be a great value in holding above because

he'll never get the exact circumstances are the exact commitment that you want, but sometimes holding the vote puts pressure on people and they are accountable. what do you make of that? >> that is by and large true. when push comes to shove, it really elevates and raises the stakes in terms of any conversation about a major issue. that being said, i would be coming from a school that i would want to make sure before i put it on the floor that i have the votes. i think they are in the process of doing that. the whips are trained to work their magic over there to get the various competing factions in this discussion to come together so they can get the 216 or so votes necessary to pass the house. i hope that they'll get to the vote and delegate put the bill on the floor and move it, send it to us and we'll have an opportunity to go to work in the senate. tree until i heard from a number of republicans is that it would be far more embarrassing right

now to show the vote than he did lose that vote. what you think of that? >> you know, you can argue that both ways. i sometimes find myself in the school that says put it out there, let see where people are. but like i said, i tend to sort of fallback. we always like to know that we have the vote before they put it out there. they have to note that it's close. always a few people you can pick up when you actually have to say yes or no. and maybe that's the conclusion they will ultimately come to. i just hope in the end they can muster to ask this. i've been ready to deliver on for the american people. we need to move in the direction of health care insurance program that is sustainable that gets these rates down for people and more patient centered and more affordable health care for americans which is certainly what we don't have for obama carrots today. >> at this skip the later voted down or significantly put off, obviously it seems like the

appetite is get this done first before tax cuts are addressed. would you be open or do you know whether your colleagues would be open to say look, we are going nowhere fast on this health care thing. let's proceed to the tax-cut thing. >> i think in a lot of ways the tax reform debate is health care is sort of a building block to get there. one of the reasons you know is it is significantly affect in a trillion dollars, the baseline and that lessens the hill that we have to climb to tax reform done. i hope health care reform can go first because we can use the serious reconciliation vehicle created by the fy 2017 budget. that is pretty arcane for a lot of people. you have to do another budget to do tax reform. neil: senator, i don't want to jump on you. whatever concessions are made to get them in line, especially when it looked like preexisting conditions are so black and white, especially when left in

the hands of the states. do you worry about that, but that could be the thinker on this? >> writenow that is the point of contention that got to resolve and they're trying to get this flexibility and that may be ultimately how they fixed it for me to do tax reform either way. we are stuck in this 1.5% growth pattern and the cbo is projecting the next 10 years is 2%. a historic average to world war ii was 3-3.5 favorite got to get the growth rate back up. raise wages in this country and tax reform helps you achieve that. we've got to simplify the code and make america competitive in the global marketplace. whatever happens to health care reform, like i said, it makes more sense to do them sequentially. but if we are unable to do that, we need to move forward on tax reform is in the office of the better. neil: thune, good thing you can pierce connected to be with you. neil: we are getting a few more details on the shooting incident, appears to be a

shooting incident in texas. police units have been deployed to this area. what we can say is police are sorting out the info in a possible suspect a white male wearing an orange tank top appears to be one individual. as i say, coming from authorities in the area, every available unit has been sent that way coming from irving police officer james mcclellan who set up your business in the area for community college, best not to go. i think that is stating the obvious. a little more after this. i use what's already inside me to reach my goals. so i liked when my doctor told me that i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me

with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen. and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin. it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing; a lump or swelling in your neck; or severe pain in your stomach area. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin

increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a non-insulin option, click to activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

click to activate your within. at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly.

hthis bad boy is a mobile trading desk so that i can take my trading platform wherever i go. you know that thinkorswim seamlessly syncs across all your devices, right? oh, so my custom studies will go with me? anywhere you want to go! the market's hot! sync your platform on any device with thinkorswim. only at td ameritrade. neil: we're getting word mark zuckerberg is addressing facebook live issues. hiring what would be thousands of folks monitor stuff that goes on-line. hillary vaughn with all latest details. what can you tell us? reporter: hi, neil. you're right, facebook is finally addressing its facebook life problem. ceo mark zuckerberg says they're adding 3,000 workers to the task

force that looks at reports of flagged content. in addition to the 4500 employees they have already on duty but facebook isn't just adding more manpower. they're making changes to the social site they say make the community safer n a post on facebook, zuckerberg says seeing users hurt people or themselves is heart-breaking it is a problem he is figuring out how to fix. writing we'll make it simpler to report problems to us, faster for our reviews to determine which posts violate our standards. easier for them to contact law enforcement if someone needs help. facebook has been battling bad headlines after violence continues to go viral. some americans don't think facebook is doing enough to stop it. a new study by firehouse strategies, found 37% of people they surveyed want more government oversight of facebook. zuckerberg says the strategy to stop suicide has been work something far. last week they were able to stop someone from harming himself.

they worked with law enforcement to stop it. we'll keep an eye on the story. we'll watch facebook's earnings out after the bell today. don't miss our live coverage at 4:00 p.m. eastern. back to you, neil. neil: hillary, look forward to that. i want to get quick reaction on apple news with jonas max ferris, maxfunds.com. co-founder and editor. this is not the first time facebook faced down criticism it doesn't do enough to things from dangerous guys. will force of 3,000 individuals do it? >> it is not going to be the last time either. i don't know how the government can make a huge difference. billions of people are doing everything on this one company's website. neil: right. >> there is limitation how what you can do about it. that said, they will probably figure out better ways to address it. it is a bit of a free-for-all in the internet this late-stage of the game. it hasn't been a priority for a lot of companies. includes google with search and fake news. they want traffic and clicks that is the business model.

they, policing the world is not what their game has been. if it starts to hurt them more letting be free to help them, they will crackdown. believe me they have the money to do it. neil: their business model has not been hurt over the last couple weeks, facebook more importantly, alphabet, some others are soaring even with some of these concerns for social media. how long does that go? a little bit of a breather today, but, still, incredible? >> apple, yeah, apple, earnings were within a dollar of all-time highs. neil: all the tech guys. they're all racing crazy here. what is going on? >> that is one of the reasons they're high. the other is more expensive. a company like apple, people replace the phone every two or three years, they will maintain the valuation. pretty easy business model. like warren buffett owns it. he doesn't think it's a risky tech stock anymore. neil: what is interesting too about apple, we mentioned earlier on the show, i don't know what your thoughts are

about the apple cash it is holding $256 billion, many in similar position, not as lofty, boy, that is a lot of cash, and they are always asked what they are going so do with it, leaving aside bringing it back home maybe doing something here you but apple seems to be loathe to that sort of thing. despite all their wealth big into acquisitions. do you see that changing? >> yeah. it is not just that, they're the biggest player -- microsoft i believe is 100 billion. pfizer too. 2.3 trillion for the s&p 500. that is a lot of money, theoretically taxed would pay a whole year's government deficit here. what doesn't get as much attention, how much engineering has to go on to make that happen. apple has more debt than puerto rico which is basically bankrupt, to let them have money here and keep money untaxed there. it is a very hard problem to solve. the current tax code is just going to permanently create this incentive. it won't go away. a lot like, giving them quick 5%

deal to give them back is like amnesty thing. it will keep accruing trillions of dollars tech and ip companies, shift the profits to make them appear anywhere. i don't want to blame them. it is legal. the tax code has to change for the modern world where your profits and expenses appear like "whack-a-mole" anywhere in the world. maybe have to go to zero taxes on corporations at least at profit level. it will always go on. they can, you're talking about the tax savings on one percent less tax, that kind of money could pay for the whole, the whole pricewaterhousecoopers payroll. no way the irs will be able to fight the gamesmanship that can go on. unfair to other corporations that don't have ip in that way, have to pay very high corporate rate which we have compared to other countries while other companies pay much lower one. neil: jonas, great seeing you, thank you very, very much. meantime we are about 13 minutes away or so from a fed decision wrapping up 2-day meeting.

very few expect the federal reserve hike rate today. they could be sort of telegraphing a move six weeks from now when most expect they will hike rates. for the first time overnight bank lending rate will be north of 1%. 1%. more after this. are allergies holding you back?

break through your allergies. try new flonase sensimist instead of allergy pills. it's more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist you may not even notice. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one. and six is greater than one. break through your allergies. new flonase sensimist your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates.

what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $509 on auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.

neil: word is, it is over right now in irving, texas. the gunman has been found dead, one victim. it could be a personal dispute, murder-suicide. we're not sure. they're no longer looking for the suspect. the lockdown takes a while to unlock as you can imagine. we'll keep you posted on that. but again this is now or deemed over. all right. still not over, we're still a few minutes away from finding out for sure, a fed decision, the latest one whether to raise rates or not. doesn't look like a decision will come from this meeting to do that but, fed officials could be targeting maybe one six weeks from now. to market watcher scott martin what to expect f they hint of a rate hike the next go round in six weeks, it would be overnight lending rates north of 1%. that still seems paltry by almost any measure but it would continue upward direction. do you see that continuing? >> i do, neil.

it sounds crazy, doesn't it? neil: right. >> where are the days of zero interest rate policy, zirp it was called, sir row interest rate policy. nowadays the fed is back in play. i have something weird to tell you. i almost feel like the market had a burning desire for the fed to say, hey, everybody, the economy is good enough, markets are healthy, we can move off of zero. we can lighten the balance sheet. we can let interest rates get back to normal a year-and-a-half ago when the market was freaked out by the fed raising interest rates. it is in a lot better position today. neil: you know, the federal reserve, i know it is stuck on raising rates and unwinding all of this, this balance sheet, trillions worth, but what if there may be ignoring the latest data which seems to hint that whatever robust economic activity they saw picking up steam isn't? i mean, latest jobs numbers have been softening. some of the numbers we're

getting out of the auto giants show a lessening in sales here. what is going on? is the fed @tuned to that? what do you think? >> yeah, i mean how about personal income and spending numbers too, neil? neil: right, right. >> those have been pretty disappointing. they are a head-scratcher with respect to the jobs numbers. the fed is in an interesting spot because you're right. they need to pay attention to all sorts of economic data. more importantly to recent data points as they change and things ebb and flow. you could see the statement today, neil, look a lot like the statement we saw in march. but as it portends to what happens in june and further on is really a key here. i believe the fed wants to start normalizing rates. at some point they will get back to the 2, 3, 4% range. they do that by starting hiking process or restarting say in june of this year. neil: if it is three or four rate hikes a year, it would take, you know, a few years to get to that norm, right? i mean a couple of years at least? >> exactly.

and i'll tell you what is interesting. i actually believe the market would like that. i think the market expects this. and any deviation from this new course, that the market is expecting which is higher interest rates, could be a hiccup for the stock market. neil: you know one thing, maybe help me with this, long-term interest rates have nothing to do with what the fed can control, they could set the stage, they have been rather flat. in fact coming down even in the face of promised stimulus from washington. is it the markets way, the bond market's way we don't see it is happening? >> yeah. the tax cut progress is obviously slowed or at least dimmed a little bit. neil: yeah, yeah. >> the infrastructure spending plan, right? as you create a trillion dollar infrastructure spending plan, you will issue more debt. that would typically, you know affect interest rates. i think market is saying hey, we don't totally believe this idea of the tax cuts and all these growth policies we've been promised for months are going to come through. neil: all right. we'll see. scott martin we have the

decision in a few minutes or the non-decision. paving way for something they want to do in the future. meanwhile the comey hearing has adjourned. that is over with for the time-being. all eyes on the federal reserve and what it is going to do. stick around. you're watching fox business.

. .

neil: all right, we are getting word from the new york post right now, our colleagues there, that fine paper, the holdout, the key republican holdout, fred

upton from michigan went from possible no vote to a yes vote on promise to get additional funding for healthcare package to assure patients with preexisting conditions that their premiums won't go through the roof as a result. so he got that concession. now the question is whether that's going to tick off some conservatives that will say, wait a minute, $8 billion added to this, this thing is as big as the alcatraz we are trying to replace. cheryl casone in for trish regan. cheryl: mr. cavuto, thank you so much, breaking right now, we are just moments away from the federal reserve's decision on short-term interest rates. hello, everybody, i'm cheryl casone, i'm in for trish regan today. we like to welcome you to the intelligence report. now, look while we expect the fed to leave interest rates unchanged, that's the consensus, many will look for rate hikes in

june. at least for today we are looking at the language, today on the heels on some weak gdp in the first quarter and disappointing job's report for the month of march. we have got a lot to look at and investors will be watching closely these numbers. now, let's -- >> no change in interest rates, no change in market conditions, the committee decided to maintain target range for three quarters to 1%. the committee views slowly growth likely to be transitory and consumer prices decline in march. the statement reads as follows, the labor market continues to strengthen even as economic slowed, job gain on average and unemployment rate declined. household spending rose modestly but the fund rentals underpinning the continued growth of consumption remain