we can manufacture fright cars and sell them all over the world by export. we know how to do it. stuart: 450,000 vehicles year. 10 billion export from one bmw plant? >> as whole thing was going down for tax tiles. they came up with a new idea. build cars. we know how to do it. >> careful, peter, taking new can you view toe's time. i took four seconds of your time. neil: eight, nine. i will let it this time, varney. thank you very much. following developments on capitol hill, remember senator rand paul was in senators not key on rework, meeting with president trump trying to it iron out differences. senator on 4:00 p.m. eastern on "your world" on fox news. charlie gasparino got wind of this sometime ago. on what expectations might be. what do you know, charlie.

>> a lot of flury of activity. sources telling the fox business network, that president trump himself is personally involved in the health care pitch as you talked about. he mitt with senator rand paul. he spoke with another conservative i guess you could say is opponent of current iteration. senator mike lee. spoke to him about the health care bill. mike lee expressed his concern. what you see, president trump, mike president trump, inviting senators james langford, ben sasse, to a dinner to talk about this. the white house is pulling out all the stops. they see this as a key part of their legislative agenda. they would like to get this done to move to tax cuts and they consider this very important and the president who was kind of in the background.

>> president kind of little bit in the background on this issue last couple days is now carrying the torch. i think what the conservatives will have to ask themselves is this. do they want to let the president of the united states, on a key legislative agenda, as he is getting ready to go for tax cuts. are they willing to upend that? i mean are they willing to pull the rug from under him when he is getting ready to roll out another, possibly even bigger legislative item, tax cuts, particularly for the economy, and screw up his momentum. i think that is part of the pitch here. you have trump, president trump directly involved. vice president pence directly involved. you have a heavy sell going. dollars to doughnuts. listen, donald trump is an eternal optimist. when everybody thought he would lose he said he would win the election. what i'm hearing in the white house they think they get the votes. we'll see what happens. i'm not there. neil back to you. neil: they have to agree to a debate on this. this isn't such a guarranty either.

to your point hope springs eternal. charlie gasparino, meantime he will rejoin us in the next couple hours. meantime we have the congressional budget office created this scare if you will among republican this is is not really worth the paper it is printed on. it doesn't add up. some numbers don't add up. before you talk about the estimates about 22 million people or fewer people having this insurance 10 years from now or 320 billion plus in savings and deficits over 10 years, step back to look at history of predictions, dicey. connell mcshane is picking apart cbo predictions. what have you got, buddy. this congressional office had a number of issues over the years. this time republicans are upset. sometimes in the history it has been democrats. but rnc pointed out past predictions have not come true. we looked into them. turns out they do have legitimate beef here.

cbo estimated 21 million people would enroll in obamacare exchanges in but only 12 million did last year. overshoot, cool 120%. second example, cbo predicted 4 million enroll in the obamacare small business program, shop. federalrecords, 230,000. way off. the another quick example, cbo turned out cost for medicaid expansion was huge underestimate. 42 billion, to 68 billion. they're off 60 plus%. you look at numbers, don't you refer to this as the bipartisan congressional budget office? looking back at history to be fair we found a number of bipartisan complaint. cbo founded in 1975. sometimes democrats don't like it. sometimes republicans don't like it. many examples of cbo being right or very close to right.

given the topic, health care and given the recent history he obamacare predictions that did not pan out it is republicans kept call. neil: connell, thank you, very much. that these plans would be something that would being down the road, committee for responsible federal budget maya maginnis is with us. if you go by the numbers, comparison to comparison, a big ol' government program to a slightly less big ol' government program, but still a huge federal commitment, right? >> well, that is true. all approaches to the health care involve the government more. they basically one way or another create entitlement programs. at the same time, what we're still not doing enough of is controlling entilement programs that we have. in the health area, medicare, medicaid, we really need to get

those programs under control. at same time is grappling with objectives of obamacare and replacement bills, how do you provide flexible, affordable insurance for everybody. what we've seen, there is tradeoffs trying to do that. nothing is easy. yes, government is central to all of these. neil: medicaid is central to all of this. the dirty little secret. they talk about draconian cuts in medicaid. we're talking about slightly trying to curb growth of medicaid spending last couple years. this program in the mid 60s, we were talking about a 65 million-dollar commitment. trillion really over scope of this program. that is just gotten very unwieldy. there is no nice way to spin that, is there?

>> well, so one of the kind of asymmetrical things about government you see, it's a lot easier to put an entitlement program, people get upset about that word. it means it is mandatory. doesn't go through the appropriations process. if you don't qualify, you get benefits. a lot easier to put those programs in place than to scale them back. when it comes to medicaid, medicare as well, those programs expanded for many reasons. one of the big ones health care costs keep growing. what we need to do in all efforts. whether reforming replacing, rewording, any of these health care bills, we need to get control of our growing health care costs. neil: we don't, maya. thank goodness people like you around make track of this stuff. >> we're not making good progress. neil: media environment, cuts are teamed, you know, just, related to the growth in spending curbed. we don't even get our language right. >> that is very through.

comes to things like budget baselines, things you compare against, often times we'll build in a bias toward increasing growth of these programs. there is something in the new bill come out which is a cap on medicaid in the out years. it is very stringent cap. would slow growth of medicaid significantly. that is a step in the right direction if we actually stick to it. what we see when it comes to caps or limits on government programs, you need to put something aggressive to help control spending and doable. so we keep in line with these restraints. hopefully we'll be able to make progress controlling medicaid costs in smart ways that work with the program. really we need to look beyond that though. we need to look at medicare and other programs as well. none of the health reform bills focus on big pieces really at play, driving our budgetary costs. neil: let's say this effort fails. uphill battle for republicans to agree. say it doesn't work he have this

to put it aside for the time-being before they get on to tax cuts, no sure thing either, but if it does fail, what are we left with? what are we looking at? >> if it does fail, yes, take a breather. focus on tax reform for a while. use this time to really lay out what objectives of health care reform are. democrats call it reforming obamacare. republicans can call it replacing obamacare. what do we want to do? there are objectives that need to be met. we need savings out of the program because our budget is unsustainable. we need to fix health care programs. we need to find programs conducive with economic growth to help grow the economy. we need to balance flexibility and freedom of choice along with coverage and affordability. none of those are easy. but i feel like this discussion kind of jumped right into what the name is. we need to repeal and replace obamacare.

we never started out with first principles. what do we want to achieve? what are the ways to do it? what about the pros an cons. not run away from the fact there are pros and cons and tradeoffs. if we want flexibility, fewer subsidies, fewer people have coverage. figure out the right spot, hopefully with bipartisan buy in, to make reform to have sustainable health care system in this country. there is a lot of work to still do. neil: you are right about that. thank you very much. maya maginnis. responsible budget director. on this idea looking for bipartisan support, mitch mcconnell, senate republican leader has hinted to the white house that might be the way to go if they continue going south on support from exclusively republicans. overture for example, at that would be a chance for democrats to weigh in on a fix here. we're getting way ahead of ourselves. at a time when they can't even agree to continue debate on this, put that up to a vote, let alone final vote on passage itself, then something else has

to be considered. all of this happening at same time rand paul is at the white house right now discussing all such options with the president of the united states who now, charlie gasparino, is right, is very actively involved in this process. we're going to be hearing from the housing and urban development secretary ben carson on these back and forth battles. he has interest seeing where this goes. it could go a long way making government more efficient, something he wants to see happen at hud as well. we'll have more after this.

today, we're out here with some big news about type 2 diabetes. you have type 2 diabetes, right? yes. so let me ask you this... how does diabetes affect your heart? it doesn't, does it? actually, it does. type 2 diabetes can make you twice as likely to die from a cardiovascular event, like a heart attack or stroke. and with heart disease, your risk is even higher. you didn't know that. no. yeah. but, wait, there's good news for adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease. jardiance is the only type 2 diabetes pill with a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit. jardiance is proven to both significantly reduce the chance of dying from a cardiovascular event in adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease and lower your a1c. jardiance can cause serious side effects including dehydration. this may cause you to feel dizzy, faint, or lightheaded, or weak upon standing. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may be fatal. symptoms include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, tiredness, and trouble breathing. stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of ketoacidosis or an allergic reaction.

symptoms of an allergic reaction include rash, swelling, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take jardiance if you are on dialysis or have severe kidney problems. other side effects are sudden kidney problems, genital yeast infections, increased bad cholesterol, and urinary tract infections, which may be serious. taking jardiance with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you have any medical conditions. so now that you know all that, what do you think? that it's time to think about jardiance. ask your doctor about jardiance. and get to the heart of what matters. ♪ ♪ welcome to holiday inn! ♪ ♪ thank you! ♪ ♪ wait, i have something for you! ♪ ♪ making every stay a special stay. holiday inn, smiles ahead. whether for big meetings or little getaways, member always save more at holidayinn.com

neil: all right. remember "wannacry" ransomware attack in europe, that was a few weeks ago, right. they have a big one they're dealing with across much of europe, particularly ukraine where homeland security in this country reporting it hit the ukrainian power grid, a number of banks, offices across europe, rosneft oil company and danish shipping concern, apmersk. that list in last 20 minutes or

so that list doubled since i've been keeping track. hard to say whether there is another "wannacry" situation, if you're affected by any of these institutions or any of these ukraine ukrainian banks or customers offices or rosneft or some other you are already crying. what happens when you pop it up, it vanishes. there is nothing there to see. that leads people to worry did their bank account vanish as well? we're keeping eye on that. this looks like it happened second time in as many months. meanwhile google is considering appealing a $2.7 billion european union fine. at the heart of this is this notion that google or alphabet parent more to the point favors in searches or google does, in searches proprietary shopping arms unique to google. tracee carrasco has a lot more. where does this stand? reporter: google says it

respectfully disagrees with the ruling, continue to make the case and possibly appeal the $2.7 billion fine. this is the biggest fine the european union imposed on single company in an antitrust case. they found that google given prominent placement to. shopping service. google accused of blocking rivals in online search advertising. in a statement the commission said what google has done is illegal, under e.u. antitrust rules. not other companies a chance to compete on merits, to innovate. most importantly, it is european consumers genuine choice of services, full benefits of innovation. google however said data showed people preferred links taking them directly to products they want and not web sites they have

to repeat their search. google has 90 days to stop favoring its own shopping service or face further penalty of up to 5% of alphabets's average daily global turnover. in 2013 it settled with u.s. enforcers without a penalty after agreeing to change some search practices. google parent company alphabet is trading lower since the fine was announced. neil: tracee, thank you very much. i mentioned a few seconds ago about the cyberattack in europe. it claimed merck as well, the big drug concern was caught up and had network compromised as part of this global attack. it has locations all over the world, especially ukraine where half the country had what appeared to be a power grid compromise. and half the power, in half the country going out. that is generally not a good thing. just in minutes since leaving you, going back here, this thing is widening out considerably.

big tech stocks are down big today. not just what has been going on there with alphabet and of course google. alphabet parent of google this is something marc faber, international investor, dr. doom they like to call him, the the new doctor doom, yesterday on "your world" on fox news is just preview of coming attractions. why are you so bearish. >> nasdaq is exceeding the highs in year 2000, but driven by stocks that would not lead the index in 2000. technology is vulnerable to innovation and to new competitors. neil: all right. what famed investor marc faber is saying hose who lead the parade stumble and the parade goes the other way. i'm sort of over simplifying his case. those who led us on the way up,

will lead us on way out. he says that is happening with technology and some of these names that got us to the point that they were the double-digit gainers and most aggressive performers. but that will reverse itself. will it? do you have to worry about it, market watchers, jonas national national -- jonas max ferris and bob wiedemer. >> face it up tesla up almost 80% since the beginning of the year, not just because earnings, just part of the fad. apple as well up 35%. all of these companies are vulnerable if the stock market goes down. i think that is a real risk. most people say the biggest risk, i agree with them is china. i mentioned last time i was on the show, oil was heading down. that is worrisome sign. commodities are heading down. iron ore is down 35%. one of those crazy chinese statistics, reason this is important, people worried about

the chinese economy. crazy chinese statistics, enough iron ore in ports in china to build 13,000 i've fell towers. neil: you wow. >> it is slowing. neil: i don't even flip over the one that is out there. so, jonas, i'm looking, seeing these developments. maybe, you know, faber has this wrong, that if we have the selloff, it isn't necessarily contingent what happens with technology. to bob's point, whether it is china development or slow in development or switch in other areas, there are plenty of reasons to think the market will cough up a little bit. what do you think? >> i don't want to be a this time is different investors. i don't like parallels to '99. tesla makes fastest car in the world, 200 miles an hour. four-door sedan. not like dr. coop's stock back in '99. the fact nasdaq is higher than

it was in '99 is kind of irrelevant. it is cheaper than back then. that said fissures are going on in tech, we're seeing overexuberance that is questionable. you will not see them go broke or some doom scenario like 2000. we saw a fine, basically 10% of earnings for google is getting pushed under the rug act like not a big deal. this is too big after gravy train. they have done a lot of questionable stuff. google is gotten away sucking profits from content providers, media companies, they are not a evil company. definitely has done questionable stuff. democrats in country don't care about tech. like monopoly in oil. they lost it ever since microsoft ripped off apple years ago. not get away in europe. that is obvious. growing problem. these stocks are priced so though don't have competition. they will monopolies, not have margin pressure.

not lose out to lift all of sudden, never have profits. that is too optimistic scenario, both be monopoly and not have regulatory pressure from being monopolies. neil: bob, you could argue that europeans have problem with successful european technology stories. you heard that portrayed in the media but the fact of the matter is, developments like these do lead to companies like these, netscape comes to mind, microsoft comes to mind, where there is protracted litigation for years. it is always constant pal over these tech stocks. what do you think of that? whether, forget about the whether it is justified, it's a reason to reconsider these issues? >> i think it is a reason to reconsider. this is a massive fine. google is certainly, you know, vulnerable to the idea it's a monopoly. i use it all the time. and i think that is certainly one of the risks. it is worth pointing out there are risk to tech companies. neil: when you say you use it

all the time, do you know for example, if you're searching for shopping-related site -- >> i don't, i don't. neil: they will steer you toward their own? >> exactly. that is the kind of thing could proven, just like uber ran into what it was doing in terms of manipulating rides to avoid regulators you don't really know. i would also caution about being focused on fundamentals again. these stocks are up massively this year due to fundamentals. neil: absolutely. meantime, jonas, we have cyber attacks to consider, latest wave, second in as many months. what we pieced together it is fairly broad-based in nature. seems like old eastern europe, ukraine, banking oil concerns, drugmakers, so a broad swath. what do you think of that and the potential fallout? >> would like to say the use them all the time but they also use you all the time. that is their profit model did he. in how they use you, go for all apps on the phone, element of

privacy abuse opening you and them up to hacks. almost every app you accept on your phone, whether -- you basically, all my contacts. go ahead. everywhere i go. neil: that i like processed meats and cheeses. >> no across the cloud are hackable. any one of these companies who has access to phone has access to a hack, even though not directly google or apple being hacked. needlessly you opened up to a problem knowing what exactly your behavior traits are, illusion of free content and services. neil: they're searching word ingrate for you, jonas, when it comes to google and it is not pretty. >> turn my phone off, neil. neil: right now it goes out. guys, thank you both, very, very much. we have interesting developments on ruth bader ginsburg who will considering so-called travel ban. a number of people say, you

really, you really shouldn't be in on this, justice. she is highly critical of then t candidate trump, worried about the prospect of him becoming president. now number of groups are saying you should sit this one out. we don't think you should be there, after this. liberty mutual insurance. the toothpaste that helps new parodontax. prevent bleeding gums. if you spit blood when you brush or floss you may have gum problems and could be on the journey to much worse. help stop the journey of gum disease. try new parodontax toothpaste. ♪

neil: are you guys into this whole driverless car technology? it is all the rage. so i'm late to this i guess i worry about it. but a lot of people tell me, you know, depending on driver these things are better, more reliable. i guess that's true but google is now looking at driverless fleet of its own, and wants avis to handle a lot of work behind it, as you probably heard. avis would essentially manage that fleet. i don't know how that would work, but maybe you just get to an airport, hop in the avis car, no, no, you don't have to worry about, go in the back seat, go in the back seat. avis stock was soaring yesterday, giving up half of those gains today. we keep on top of it for you. we have republican lawmakers meanwhile urging that supreme court justice ruth bader

ginsberg recuse herself from the travel order case. among other things right after donald trump was elected, she had referred to the president-elect as a faker who had substantial ego. she had some other choice things to say. i can't repeat them on live tv. congressman jeff duncan, beautiful state of south carolina with me right now. the congressman is pushing this notion the justice should recuse herself. does it go back, congressman, to what she had said about the president in the past? or is it more? >> well, neil, thanks for having me. goes directly back to what she said about candidate trump. criticizing him for what he said on the campaign trail, yet when he was running she had number of things to say. couldn't imagine what this place, washington would be like under his presidency. she went so far, what her husband may have said about them moving to new zealand. if you take all that in context, she should recuse herself from the travel ban, supreme court

hearing. neil: you always wonder about the justices who keep their opinions to themselves though. she just blurted it out, i remember. i'm wondering do others share the same view. she was maybe dumb enough to say it before a microphone? >> i don't think justices ought to comment about politics, politicians or candidates. they ought to be neutral when it comes to that. they ought to focus on the constitution. neil: do you think they are to the core? i readily agree with you congressman, they shouldn't let that intrude here. she made the mistake publicly saying something that alone should recuse her. >> yeah. because she did say something about president trump, she should recuse herself from this particular case. neil: you know reason i mentioned it, justice kennedy who might or might not consider stepping aside, had wanted to get a good measure we're told of donald trump, what kind of president he would be and justice would appoint.

sure enough when he saw his old law clerk neil gorsuch would be appointed, we are told he felt more comfortable with the notion stepping down, confident president trump would pick the right person. what do you make of that? >> trump did pick the right person in gorsuch. there is a lot of optimism here in this city anyway, speculation that kennedy is going to step down. if he does, then president trump will have another opportunity. i believe he will follow the same model with a gorsuch type justice nominee. we'll see what the senate does. i applaud trump for gorsuch. i think he has done exactly the right thing so far. neil: you know, while i have you, congressman, health care fallout with the latest initiative, we're told this measure, the senate measure according to cbo will save $321 billion, or pare that amount over the next 10 years, which is couple hundred billion dollars more than the house version would.

>> right. neil: but that already started competition among some in the senate to win over reluctant republicans by, you know adding a lot of goodies would use up some of that 200 billion. what do you make of that? >> i don't want them to add any goodies to eat up that. we want deficit reduction. we need to get our fiscal house in order. we need to quit spending more money than bringing in. we need to quit borrowing money. we have a 20 trillion-dollar plus debt. we'll address the debt ceiling. i applaud senate for more deficit reduction than the house did. i think it is the right thing. if we're going to work on deficit and debt crisis we have to get into mandatory spending. that is what we encourage our colleagues in the appropriations process and budget to look at mandatory spending. i applaud the senate. we're still looking at their bill. i don't want us to make the mistake, judge the senate bill, have a pelosi moment judging

without having read it. we'll read it. look what final version and we'll see if we support it as conservative member of congress senator what the senate does. neil: $200 billion additional budget savings over next several years and you would he see that welcome, not frittered away on other things? >> absolutely, neil. it is right move to start reducing deficit spending. we've been talking about that for six years. nothing new for me to have that position. neil: congressman. good chatting with you again. senator rand paul, that meeting with president trump still going on. the president will work roughly on four senators depending who you talk to, include those leery of senate health care plan. could be eight or nine republican senators with serious reservations what leadership cooked up, whether the president can intervene enough to stave that off, bring those numbers down is anyone's guess. rand paul, my special fest today

at 4:00 p.m. on "your world" on fox news channel. we'll assess what was discussed and what he wants to see, if they want to see any progress on any of it, after this. ♪ [vo] when it comes to investing, looking from a fresh perspective can make all the difference. it can provide what we call an unlock: a realization that often reveals a better path forward. at wells fargo, it's our expertise in finding this kind of insight that has lead us to become one of the largest investment and wealth management firms in the country. discover how we can help find your unlock.

♪ neil: get on board, or get out. that was the threat now of number super-pacs, one in particular targeting republican senators even thinking about voting against this latest health care measure. take a look. >> republicans have been promising americans, you give us republican president, we will get obamacare repealed or replace. neil: you either go along with us or we'll primary you out, even means risking losing senate in the process? you ought to look at cutting off your nose to spite your face. >> neil, democrats when they believe in something, when they have power, they use that power to fall on the sword. that is obamacare. this is the exact same thing for republicans. neil: as long as you're

recognizing, katrina falling on the sword you have a good possibility of losing republican sate in nevada, that is your call. that is the risk, right? >> we promised voters, conservatives, republicans alike we would repeal and replace obamacare. neil: you didn't really repeal it. this is hardly the replacement. >> this is beginning the process. that was her view of this. navy republican heller could be in, in a state with lot of workers, depend on obamacare, the word was he would be extra vulnerable. word he is is. to a guest, shouldn't be just heller. health care measure being pondered you by republicans.

citizens united david bossie, good to be here. >> thanks for having me. neil: republicans not keen on supporting this senate measure. by that i mean rand paul and ted cruz and some names we're showing up here? >> i really don't, actually. i think senator heller are off on their own. mike lee, they have principled positions they would like to see the president and mitch mcconnell consider. i think that they are working like the freedom caucus in the house, how to get to yes. how to pass president's repeal and replace bill. that is one part of it the other political calculation dean helloer is taking, i will be off on my own. that is situation he will be held to account. that is what katrina was talking about. she was exactly right.

neil: i know what you're saying. >> we campaigned on this. neil: the situation in nevada, is a unique, situation, right. >> every senator, every senator -- neil: you want a challenge to him, right? >> no, i'm saying if we want him to vote yes. we want him to get to yes. but he needs to be part of this team because he is putting the entire republican agenda, if you will, you know at risk, by being a no vote here. if we don't get repeal and replace through. the next thing i on the president's agenda is a tax reform package. if stalls if not derails -- neil: rand paul, ted cruz, they are the kind of guys if this is closest to getting a rework, it is not worth the time. if they get to that stage, despite their best efforts, these other senators saying i can't vote for this thing in good conscience. this is obamacare light.

you heard all the stuff they characterize it? >> of course. neil: would you recommend a primary challenge to all of them? >> no. we're very early in the process. like katrina said, in your show yesterday, this is going to take place over the next couple of weeks. today is a little bit early. we're trying to give thesen oppk with the senate majority leader who is doing i think admirable job trying to hold this together. neil: why not do that with heller? why not do that with heller? >> rand paul is meeting with the president, talking about important issues he believes imperative to have as part of the package. if he can go meet with the president and try to do it, what i consider the right way, which is working senate leadership, with the white house, dean heller caught everybody by surprise, did his own thing. part of it is how you do it as well, neil. if he wants to participate in

the process he will have to deal with the ramifications of that. neil: you could characterize it to the likes of senator portman and shelley caputo, and go on to cory gardner all of whom expressed serious reservations about some of the more draconian cuts they say -- >> neil, there is difference -- neil: what is the difference between those guys and helloer? >> those folks, you mentioned, want to get to yes. they're looking for the best senate bill to send to the house. senator heller just seems to have said no, we're not moving forward. that is different attitude. that is what we're trying to address. neil: when i hear him talk about a fix that makes sense for nevadans, how you is that saying no. >> if he is saying that, that is good news to me because i haven't heard him say that.

neil: he is only one you would consider like katrina to go after? >> i think that is right. we're looking to work with him. we want him to get to yes. i'm hopeful he participated with the legislative team outstanding at the white house and senator mcconnell's staff to try to get to yes. this is bigger issue. this is bigger issue than one senator who wants to look through their lens. neil: i understand it, david. i want to be clear as i was trying yesterday, i appreciate your time to clarify this, would you be happy regardless of his health care view with this see potentially slipping to democrat in your request for purity. >> first of all if we have to go that route, i think it's a hypothetical that will not happen that seat is winnable by other republicans. that is not throwaway seat. you're not saying dean heller is

the only one that can win it. that is not accurate. neil: usually that what happens, if there is party challenge, you're right, normally, that side loses? >> that condition happen. it happened historically both ways, i can tell you in nevada we can win that seat either way. i hope that dean heller gets to yes. neil: david, thank you very, very much. david boss sir, citizen united president. when we come back the white house is warning syria over these reports that maybe they're planning another chemical attack. how we knew that. what we plan to do about that, after this. at fidelity, trades are now just $4.95.

we cut the price of trades to give investors even more value. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. fidelity, where smarter investors will always be. and at $4.95, you can trade with a clear advantage. so new touch screens... and biometrics. in 574 branches. all done by... yesterday. ♪ ♪ banks aren't just undergoing a face lift. they're undergoing a transformation. a data fueled, security driven shift in applications and customer experience. which is why comcast business delivers consistent network performance and speed across all your locations. hello, mr. deets. every branch running like headquarters. that's how you outmaneuver. buttrust angie's list to help.,

[ barks ] visit angieslist.com today.

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 $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.

neil: all right. we are getting some indications that syria, might, might, be poised to use chemical weapons again. if that intelligence that's alarming, probably more important what we do about it afterwards. blake burman what is behind this. blake, what do you know? reporter: neil, you remember when bashar al-assad forces or at least his government inside of syria earlier this year launched that chemical weapons attack against his own people the united states responded by sending 59 tomahawk missiles into one of the airbases inside of syria.

folks at pentagon, activity at that very same airfield is what inspired the statement here from the white house last night. it was 9:45 in the evening here in washington when the white house press secretary sean spicer put out this statement with a very big warning to syria, which ended with the following, spicer writing, if as i quote here, if mr. assad conducts another mass murder attack using chemical weapons, he and his military will pay a heavy price, end quote. earlier today the u.s. ambassador to the united nations nikki haley talked about a tweet she sent out last night, that the statement send a warning to iran and to russia. >> the goal is at this point, not just to send assad a message but to send russia and iran a message, if this happens again, we are putting you on notice. reporter: neil, once the state was put out at 9:45 last night

on east coast, afterwards into the morning there was some suggestion maybe some of the top level folks within the administration, within government didn't really know this was going to be put out. however the deputy press secretary sarah huckabee sanders pushed back on that saying all the top-level folks knew, state, dod, cia, odni, so she said. neil: thank you very much. blake burman. what do we do now? former navy seal carl higby on follow through. what do you think, carl? >> it is very clear, that assad doesn't care what we say. matters what we do. if he does launch a chemical attack you must leave him naked to his enemy 500 years and destroy his entire military operations base, no runways, here and there, no 60 tomahawks, send 500. he needs to be taken care of now. we will not tolerate that. beyond that let him run his country any way he wants but do

not use chemical weapons. neil: last time we gave head's up to the russians using tomahawk missiles, should we do the same. >> general head's up, putin, if they launch chemical weapons, we're coming in. get your stuff out of the entire country. neil: russians, do you think they do what they did last time, look the other way, complain about it afterwards? or as they promised with airplane attacks they will do the same? >> well, i think we have a lot of tension building up because of last jet we shot down every there. to be honest, i think russia will probably push back a little bit. i've been saying from day one, neil, we have to get on the same page as putin before we enter the conflict any further. we have sit down, tell him, explain true intentions f we start doing, we may have to commit to long-term occupancy, restand up any type of stability. if we lose assad, as bad as he is, there are worse factions in the area that take over. neil: if you argue, some people

say this created isis we know today. i'm wondering how far we go, what kind of help we can rely on, whatever we do, we would be doing on our own, what do you think? >> we dozen factions in syria fighting against each other. no true alliances. we need to understand the dynamic first up, russia, iran, rebels, isis. once we find out which ones we want to prop up, we need to commit to occupying and training with these people long-term but engage other muslim nations like president trump did when he went to saudi arabia. they need to lead this fight. the problem you have a dictator, we done it before with saddam hussein, we put a dictator in charge, back him up, arm his forces. he does exactly what we don't want him to do, and start fresh. we need to leave assad there, however heinous he is is or potentially remove him. this chemical weapons potential attack he is threatening or preparing for could be deciding

factor what we do there. neil: carl, thank you very, very much. i hope people are listening to that. carl higby. >> thank you. neil: meantime, dr. ben carson, man who runs hud, his views what is going on in the department, seeing big budget cutback, his views on poverty and latest battle over health care, as a doctor what he wants to see, whatever the finished product will be, after this. ♪

..

neil: we are going to be monitoring that and any developments on how it looks at the ongoing health care battle. the federal reserve looks at these things and whether they are too similar, not similar enough. there have been indication of the number of dead governors who make up the fomc at the market committee, that nothing being funded right now would dissuade them from at least one more rate hike before the year is out. another six months of the year. anything that fossils that consensus, invariably something does, we'll bring that to your attention. we're taking questions from academics to my fellow economist from reporters and the like in britain. also going to be outlining how terror affect the psyche of people across the world and

whether they go out, shop come any of that stuff. really it on the display of the land. we will keep you posted on what she has to say. in the meantime, the health care plan, the vice president on capitol hill as we speak trying to sway lawmakers, but right now the question is forget about a vote on this. what about a vote of the procedure and right now "usa today" congressional reporter in nuclear politics national reporter caitlin healy burns. caitlin, where does this thing standing your own eyes? others may follow who are going to the white house with their differences with the president who we are told is going to take a much more active role in this. we think of that? >> right, exactly. as you alluded to earlier in the segment, senators are debating whether to even support getting on this bill in the first place.

there is a procedural hurdle they have to get across in order to first get to the bill. that is in a contentious state right now. what's really important as the cbo score came out last night for the headline this morning of course highlighting those who would be uninsured under this plan although the cbo does note without the requirement to purchase insurance of course people will choose to be insured. still the headline is going to be glaring for a lot of republican senators trying to get on board here. the 22 million fewer americans are expected to have insurance as a result. never mind more in what we have today. we'll have coverage in 10 years. be that as it makes for much of the fact about the $21 billion in savings over the next 10 years was almost like senators or leadership or looking not reluctant senators because it's significantly more savings in the house measure.

that worries me when i hear that. >> when a passerby might care to the side backroom deals. a little bit of money for uris date, little bit for your stay. it's what they have to do to get the legislation through, especially with someone like rob portman, capita, they are concerned about not enough money for opioid addiction. assuming some of this money that has been saved, they put a pool of money for opioid addiction. not such a bad thing. people are going to be against that and that might bring those moderates on board. the senate is meeting now with vice president mike pence, but earlier today, probably behind-the-scenes conversations of kind of trying to get people on board with some of the money being saved. trinity and no caitlyn, which you make i think it was lindsey graham who said this president,

if this goes down in flames, really paraphrasing here, he might come back and blame you or take it out on you. what did you make of that and the role the president could play or maybe not play if this thing torpedoes? >> right, i think senator graham was referring to the fact that the president had all the republicans over to the white house to celebrate the passage of the iteration in the house only to later call it mean with republican senators. that's what he's referring to this idea that there is some concern that the president will kind us not be supportive of lawmakers who are already seen that. i know you didn't earlier segment that the pac supporting the president in the campaign going after republican senators on air, senators like dean heller, a key vote here. neil: he's the only one -- in other words they are promising a primary challenge.

where does this go with it fails? way too early and you remind me in the past these things can sing differently. sometimes it only takes opioid research, what if that doesn't pan out in fails, what happens? shall they move on to tax reform or is that not doable at this late stage? >> there's a lot of a lot of questions then this is for mitch mcconnell. they want to get this done before the july 4th recess at the end of this week. the senate has one rule. the first vote that we might not even get through opens up the debate, brings it to the floor. democrats do everything they can to slow the process down, bring amendments, block it. then you have republicans like rand paul who might introduce an amendment we know. susan collins, lisa murkowski to get an amendment to the funding for planned parenthood back in the bill. that is all moving. her right now we don't even know if we can get the first step.

will he bring this up at a later date if it fails this week? potentially, but also the health care thing has been a drag on republicans, which is really interesting because it's how they got in to campaigning on this. it's not clear if he wants to bring this back up and the headline to vote on this bill at 22 million people be uninsured on. they do want tax reform that seems a little bit easier. the argument that could make it happen, now we will meet with democrats to fix what's going on and move on the tax reform. but also the voters want repeal to the might go back at a later date. neil: it is crazy stuff. ladies come in thank you both very, very much. you heard back and forth about the senate and the characterization of what they came up with the house. he always wonder, what a speaker paul ryan think about that? he did talk to bring killed me who sat down to sort of get his measure of things.

>> newt gingrich said if republicans get health care wrong, they lose the house. do you feel there's that much at stake? >> it's probably the biggest signature issue to have been the biggest promise in the modern era. we said. we set up to get elected we will repeal and replace obamacare. i think they are going to do it. i do agree that we were elected to solve people's problems, improve peoples lives. fixing health care is a big part of that. neil: that's the closest i've ever heard paul ryan say let's get this done. "fox and friends" cohost, author brian kill me. he said it out there, didn't he? >> he doesn't want to get involved but he understands that and he also said springhouse to realize i will have a vote and will be on your watch. i'm no longer going to be the enemy. that is who he thinks mitch

mcconnell might get to. now the story might be the mitch mcconnell threat will be not i'll do it and not so susan collins wants. that would put big fear and chill up the conservative spine like rand paul meeting with the president right now. neil: do you think and does he think i may know, he wouldn't even attempt to vote if the votes aren't there. i get it and whether it worked or not. is he worried about that that the vote goes down and then they are really up the river. >> i would think he would do it only if it was a tactic to get them towards a yes. for example, we just had rand paul on the radio and he wants to be yes. he wants to be as ted cruz wants to be yes. ron johnson was just on and wants to be a yes. that is not my problem. they want to be a yes.

so start dealing. don't sit on the side. >> what is ron paul want? >> are 10 things in this bill, said mandates in this bill, two are receded. he wants it passed if not more gone. he says you have 321 billion off the deficit. that's nice. i go that's nice, is not a dream for rand paul to say that? the newt gingrich today goes republicans can't message. the message should be we are not increasing medicare and medicaid at the same rate for democrats are, but raising a 20%. the goal for anyone of the opposite management director says not to be and medicaid. that's not a goal. that's something to keep you sustained until you get off medicaid. >> you're probably right in this day and age we refer to cuts. slowing increases. did you get a sense from ryan said if he had his brothers he would not have begun with the

health care thing? understanding the baseline for taxes and all that, but obviously this is much more divisive than he thought at the time. >> my opinion. he didn't say this. >> i think he did, but you're masking it in your opinion. >> you're using your inside voice. >> usually keep that thought in your head. >> i should've thought. you destroyed my premise. my opinion, but somebody says i'm going to be the best i can and let the chips fall where they may, not whatever it takes. i think he'll do whatever it takes, but i'm doing the best i can. don't pretend like we can repeal and replace them get 60 votes. i can. you know that. you can get mad at me and say it's not full repeal and replace, but the rules are 52 votes which means i need susan collins is not just had cruised you give me a break if that's what you're talking about. >> this is going on republicans

because by the way, it's a threat for republicans to do that. and how does right feel about that? >> that i did not bring up because it happened this morning. i should've asked. if i was neil cavuto, but it wasn't. neil: it looks like you guys seemed very active. >> a couple things bother me about him. a stressful job at two locations, three children and doesn't seem like a care in the world. that bothers me. i resent it. i can't mirror that. number two is his body is lower than mine. neil: i find that hard to believe. >> he does that p90 x workout. i've got 20 more minutes. i've got to do as much as i can. neil: i'm stuck at p. nine. >> they are thinking about a minute after me that they are

getting some pushback. how great is that duty zero? >> what you think of this? >> i don't think it's that great. i think it could be better. but you keep it nice. try the veal on the way out. neil: best-selling author and of course he's the real star and keeps telling me that. we have a lot more coming up. in case you're counting, facebook just hit it 2 billionth user marks. 2 billion people. that man, that's amazing. a little more after this. your insurance company

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 $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. >> corporate tax rates are not going to balance the budget, but they can certainly help. it would be wonderful if we could get them down. i think the president probably come off of that particular figure recently. i would like to get them done, if we could get him down to 25% or 20%, they would turn around overnight. >> did you catch that? orin that? orrin hatch's interview with adam shapiro, 25% would be

obviously a lot lower than it is now. almost dismissing the 15% sort of bottom-line figure that the president and his people still have on the books for the time being. media chairman steve forbes on what to make of that. if that is his baseline, it's a lot higher, better than where we are. where did you make of that? >> can't negotiate with yourself. you've got to go up there with a strong bill, 15%, do the other good stuff they want to do. and on the personal side if you want to get in the weeds on it, do 20% across-the-board tax cut the way ronald reagan did. sweep it across the board and do it. don't get caught up in the commercial budget office thing we can afford it. we can afford not to get the economy going. if you get it going up 4%, that solves a lot of problems. we have the historic record in the last 10 years. we'd have a balanced budget today.

neil: you are right about that. republicans by and large are not on that page. revenue neutral, deficit natural. there's not a lot of bang for the buck. >> did not fully realize when you make an investment it doesn't happen overnight. he announces a bill and it takes years getting the permit and all the things you have to do. it happens over several years. the idea that overnight it's got to be revenue neutral, >> they could live with deficit before they get better. in other words, the revenue that comes to tax cuts sometimes can be years out. you and i know the history of and every penny afterward. it's no mystery that it creates a lot of revenue. >> absolutely. in the 1980s, revenues were 50% higher at the end of the

decade does this get the american economy growing? better paying jobs for the american people, wages going up. forget all this budget neutrality congressional budget office does. do it right for the country and move with it. neil: would you make of this health care, you know, speedbump, whatever you want to call it? >> makes you realize on something as complicated as that you make a start. democrats waited 40 years patiently step-by-step how to set act like with hillary care. so see, this is the same process. step by step to repeal the thing. neil: you might not like the version that you can keep tinkering with it. >> you can keep moving. >> you know what bothers me? big government types moderately different this is less than the last version. but it's still an enormous -- >> this is where they are smart

they get real flexibility to make changes on medicaid. you're disturbing to see it happen. kentucky, radical big reforms were you save money and patience are happy because they have more control. neil: a state like california and iran by democrat. >> but then you have the contrast in you go back to congress and save look at these states have done, what with the state that done. we'll push those that have worked. welfare reform started in wisconsin. neil: you are right. you'd think they'd move on to tax cut? >> if they don't get a big tax cut they are all going down next year and no one will shed a tear. neil: steve forbes, thank you very much. in the meantime we are monitoring this alphabet. they are hit with a two-point billion dollars fund. the basic argument has happened to a number of titans over the last decades.

we think it's unfair. only your stuff. tell me if you've heard this before. charles payne haas and charles payne react. welcome to holiday inn! ♪ ♪ whether for big meetings or little getaways, there are always smiles ahead at holiday inn.

neil: i don't know this is another situation in the hack attack that spread throughout much of europe. this is getting close to it. the growing land somewhere attacked that affect the primarily in ukraine. keep in mind this is all over. we'll concern coming number of ukrainian concerns and the power grid in the eastern european countries for the establishment there, keep an eye on it for you. this does seem to be widespread. alphabet, the parent of google is down after a two-point $7 billion fine. at issue is whether google place

cozy promoting its own product. if this sounds familiar to you, it should. it happened before with a number of u.s. tech titans here to make sense of how far this goes, charles payne big-money houston all-around smart guy. would he make of this? >> it out, they probably did it. [laughter] neil: i love getting charles and his a little bit tired. >> was then, and it's the dirty secret of silicon valley. they do anything possible, break every single rule in the book. they can get technology and find a way to get ahead. neil: the search engine benefits the google related product. >> you know well, let's see how vigorously they fight against this, but ultimately -- there's a big fine. >> coming into the week, we thought it would be a billion dollars to significantly higher than anyone thought. i don't carry the co not on a

pedestal somewhere holding a press conference saying hey, these guys do what they have to do and they take market share and crushed the competition. neil: they've got it in every region of the world than people might start thinking here in the united states you do some funky things. >> sure. the business model is a business model applied everywhere in the world. they will fight it and say we didn't do it, but ultimately i don't think they'll push back against this. i really don't. i'll be quite frank with you. i see this over and over again. smaller deals, maybe a $300 million will pay the sky. and talk world that's all i see all the time. it's not two-point 7 billion, but essentially the penalties come so late after the fact that the companies cut the position it wanted already.

>> look at these others. look at amazon, ebay. we are in a constant battle for these guys. >> this is a battle where if you bring a knife, i'll bring a gun. these guys are playing for keeps. the stakes are ultimately high. we are talking about conquering the world literally through technology. neil: you know, mark looked for 40% and said it will begin with tech. what do you think of that? >> i like mark. you amaze me of my favorite james bond villain. >> i don't want you to tell me what you did. having said that, i will say the yellow flags on technology. two weeks ago, cnbc gave us a platform, a one-hour platform. i thought it was disgraceful

because there is no one to counterpunch. the same day the video stock was up and collapsed and so did technology. when it happened on friday they saw little bit more monday morning. all of a sudden yesterday i think it might've had something to do with the supreme court verdict. remember, very few people were against president trumps travel moratorium in silicon valley. for the rallies to fall apart like that on things that have nothing to do with fundamentals, it is a yellow flag. they've had a huge run. if run. if they pull back, they pull back. neil: alright, buddy. thank you very much. i like it when you're tired. charles payne. the good dr. is in the house. dr. ben carson. but he makes meanwhile that the fight over health care and the tough love approach the administration is taking. he's got some very novel ideas after this.

neil: welcome, everybody. is it me or you notice a narrative to the mainstream media about the administration of tough love or talk a lot. your point of view that they've got a tougher health care policy much tougher than barack obama. when it comes to housing aid in any sort of idea that there's a new sheriff in town. at hud, he's a different of that. i'm talking about the former president from canada, dr. ben carson. thank you for coming. >> thank you, neil. neil: is looking forward to having you because all of this is coming together at the same time. you've been looking at the state of poverty, some heat not too long ago. i knew what you were saying. but this idea that you didn't want to make housing or public

housing to comfortable to aspire to something bigger. lo and behold republicans debating a measure her to medicaid have been too mean-spirited. there is a theme to this and that is our fridge that someone would dare come forward and said the government can't be the answer to all your problems. would you think of that in the heat you take the administration for holding that? >> well, i think it's important that we recognize we are a nation that is $23 in debt. we can give out the candy today and then say to the people coming behind this, too bad sorry we used it all up. or we can be responsible at this point in time. look at all the other nations that we are totally irresponsible. we can learn from their mistakes.

it's not so much a matter of being stingy. it's a matter of being responsible. we've already seen that, you know, running things in a more businesslike manner saves us enormous amounts of money. you look at continual care programs like permanent supportive housing for the homeless. we are finding a lot of savings already. you know, it's not that i don't believe in being compassionate with housing first, the only thing you should be thinking about. housing first, second and third. we take the homeless and put them in the shelter number one. number two, we diagnose why they are there in number three, we fix it. that's been really compassionate. over the long run, that saves us an enormous amount of money. neil: you got a lot of stuff when you're looking at public housing projects and noticed that it looked pretty nice. almost too nice. your argument was you don't want

to make this too cushy where you never have the aspiration to leave or get out. i think that's what you are saying that it was interpreted by differently. >> actually, there was a times reporter in there with us and they think may be misunderstood what was going on. there were two different settings. one of the settings was a place where we rapidly cut people off the streets who have lost their housing. they were concentrating on making it clean and comfortable, but not making a cushy. instead, they use their money to concentrate on getting people into a point of stability and back into a permanent type of housing solution. that's what i was praising. in the other case it was a veterans administration. i said this is wonderful. the only thing missing is the pool table. they turned it around and say

just a bunch of. i'm so used to that. >> he did observe not too long ago, dr., that three to four times as many people are in need of affordable housing that were able to provide. given the fact you want to put a limit on what the government can and will do, and comment upon that operation was more people getting jobs, more people getting better paying jobs. but therein lies a lot of the jobs they are at a fraction of the force. have force. how do you change that model? >> that's correct. you are seeing that starting to change in wages going up. that's only going to continue as we begin to create a more friendly environment for manufacturing in this country and bringing jobs back from overseas and these things will

take care of themselves very effect delay. there is a whole host of things that can be done with public private partnerships which will create housing much faster than it has been in the past. these are the kinds of things we are looking at. creative ways of not only putting people in houses, but also fixing the communities and creating health care in low income communities so people don't have to go to emergency rooms and where you have the continuum of care so you don't have the seasons. these things save us enormous amounts of money. run it just like you do your house. >> are neither the housing secretary but i would be remiss given her medical background and her pioneering medical surgeon. when you hear how things being debated, rand paul in the white

house today talking about president trump, but the senate measure is very, very pricey. it's been scored so much so that 22 million fewer americans than a case where we kept obama karen tack will have to -- it's the best figure we have. do you think the government should still have a role in health care because a lot of conservative critics of the senate plan that you still have the government albeit on a slightly less bases controlling health care. how do you feel about that? >> the government is supposed to facilitate life and has to deal with health care to pursue the happiness, liberty. all of those are important things. there is a role, but it's not a predominant role. it's a facilitating role. i think the senators as they look at this, they will come to

recognize that this is much more facilitated of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness than what we had before. neil: a lot of people say maybe a little more. maybe not. >> it's a lot more. it's also not the final script. this is a very, very good start. a lot of things have been looked at. i think it's going to be tweaked. i would invite democrats to get involved in helping tweet it, too. we need to get out of this idea is scoring political points and think about what the real responsibility is to representatives of the people. >> all of this might be well and good but we still live in a heated environment secretary and i'm reminded of congresswoman maxine waters knowing full well your views on health care and other poverty is a state of mind. i know what you're getting at from that to advance. nevertheless, she said if dan

carson should take them apart to financial services. he's the ranking democrat. just itching for a chance to get in your face. would you think? >> you know, i that i'm here for a purpose and that purpose is to try to provide a nurturing environment to allow a lot of people to become self-sustaining and, you know, make america into the kind of place we all want it to be. i don't respond to politician who, you know, to say inflammatory things. >> i was hoping you would so i could go ahead. that's fine. the president has called for your head budget to be cut severely. i know you stated a goal not too long ago to say that no one would be thrown out of the street under your watch. but how can you be so sure the

tools that she want is to make good on that would be limited, right? >> i would say the proof is in the pudding. let's see if anybody gets thrown on the street. i would be very surprised. we will address that immediately if we see any such things. refer to take in all of that into consideration in looking at this. people are going to be supportive. it's the same thing with the new medical bill. people are saying they will be pushed off the cliff and things like that. nobody on medicaid, francis is being thrown off of it. neil: unit that i don't get upset when people say horrible things. i understand human nature. what they seem to be saying with this administration, maybe too early to make a sweeping statement is that this administration wants to roll back for the poor, for the

disabled, for those who need health coverage but are getting it. how is that notion how to lay may be giving your own life story but there is a reward in the thinking you're espousing. >> i would say that this administration is being responsible. you know, if you went to a bunch of little kids and you complained about this adult who was keeping him from eating olives to candy that they want and they would say what that means adult is doing. later on in life they would say wow, that person was really our friend. you know, we are looking at the big picture. not only what is going on today, but what has to go on tomorrow. is not the reason we have these sophisticated ring with big frontal lobe so we can think beyond what we see? >> we know that senator rand paul has just left the white house and he said used to eating

out here that they appear open to making the build better. are you getting the sense that there is a division growing between what the president is going to do and what the senate republican leadership is willing to do? >> i think in the end there will be consensus here, particularly as people begin to understand this is a work in process. i would offer to the democrat to begin to think about how we can make it work. not how it doesn't work. one of the things i find in washington people talk about what can't be done. the can-do attitude that made america great. neil: the tone in washington hasn't gotten much better.

is this tougher than you thought coming in and the environment tougher than you thought coming in, and that people have it out for this president, have it up for this cabinet, how about for you? >> i knew it would be tough. the presidential campaign toughens you up considerably. in this talk, but then again i have led a tough life. every time someone has said to me this can be done, if i listen to it i wouldn't be here talking to you today. we think about what has to be done and how it can be done in what resources can be used. i'm finding a lot of resources on both sides of the aisle. we sit down and talk about what goals are. people can get behind them. granted i'm sorry about that. to think the president does getting his own way with the tweeting are coming back and

saying to the house manager maybe it wasn't intended that way but maybe the senate will come up with something that a lot of people feel the president doesn't necessarily have their back. >> i would put it this way. he's the president. he won against enormous odds. that means he's got something going for him. he's a smart guy and has a good political instincts and i think he loves our country. neil: i'm not trying to get you in trouble, but do you think sometimes you get sidetracked on this staff or tweets that iron about the issue at hand, the whole comey stuff that he gave dragged in and target them for nasty stuff. >> sometimes he may say

something coming out, but he may not have wanted to say or may not have set it in political terms. but that's because he's not a politician. neil: would you tweaked? >> i use facebook. neil: you are one of 2 billion now who do. congratulations. any sense you have right now on the health care measure if it doesn't go through and they don't iron out their differences, can you even get the housing initiatives you're trying to plan to get more millennial comment that her comment is all about stopped if we don't see this done? >> no. we are working hard on finding ways to look at things that have gotten in the way and move those things out of the way. regulation after regulation on top of each other which has created the labyrinth that's very hard to get through. we are taking those detours and

that's going to happen regardless of what happens with health care. i really do think the senators are going to be smart enough to recognize what the alternatives are and maybe you don't get everything in point. maybe it's not perfect the way you want it, but it is progress. it is progress in moving in the right direction. to simply say let's go back to obamacare when we see that it's going off the cliff is pretty irresponsible. neil: secretary, a real pleasure having you. >> always good to be with you. neil: maybe someone is listening to the secretary there because we just got wind of this development, something the doctor was talking about a possibility to make it and getting everyone together in hashing this out. be here now the republican senators have been invited at

4:00 p.m. to work on health care with president trump. suggesting that the senate health care is getting pushed probably after the july 4th recess. nevertheless, the administration getting personally involved. the fact this has been pushed back until after the recess, they don't like that one bit. they are selling off big-time. more after this. investment and wealth management firms in the country. discover how we can help find your unlock.

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™.

♪ neil: stocks trending down, though not as down as they were before. the moment to respond to the vote in the senate could be pushed back until after the july 4th recess. there had been hoped that maybe they could get this vote on at least a procedural vote, the first step to the actual vote before july 4th. apparently not looking like it will be the case. we do know all republican senators, has been waiting to hear from mitch mcconnell, the senate later who we are told was okay to approve of the even less concerned about that sort of thing than paul ryan would be in the house until the vote or they are. the reading was that mitch

mcconnell is little bit more flexible on that. you can kind of pushed legislators to go ahead and approve something they are and call them out. that does not appear to be the case right now. we'll hear his plans on how they will go to the white house because republicans right now are feeling the pressure from the president. something that might come up in the 2:00 p.m. briefing at the white house of what role the republican leadership will play to be in concert with the president. already rand paul treating out they will be leaving the white house. the president was open and he wondered whether the leadership in the senate was as well. we will get a better idea that the fact this is going to be pushed back, the knee-jerk response was stocks have been up about 20 to reverse that done 63. now down about 43. largely the tit-for-tat movement by movement on the prospects for

health care getting down. with a passion that is pretty much everything else. a little more after this.

neil: all right. you want it, we have it. i have a feeling trish regan will have a lot happening in her hour. waiting to hear from mitch mcconnell. a number of senators passing by the microphones. mitch mcconnell will outline a

plan, 52 republican senators will meet at 4:00 p.m. eastern time. rand paul my guest on "your world" in a couple hours. push seems to get something done, even if not done before the july you 4th recess. it is getting pushed back. stocks selling off. trish regan. trish: investors don't like that. after having been up earlier. neil cavuto thank you. senate republicans abruptly delayed vote on health care bill until after the 4th of july. we'll hear from the white house, as possibly mitch mcconnell, you see a live picture coming from the white house. we believe we have a live picture there outside of the senate hall. mitch mcconnell may be speaking on this as well. looks like they were not able to get anything done by the 4th of july. are you surprised? i'm not. i'm trish regan. welcome, everyone, to "the intelligence report." here we are just learning president trump will meet with