order, they come out and bring you your chipotle. connell: there's restaurants that do that already. not a bad idea. thanks for joining us. we always appreciate it. melissa: "bulls & bears" starts right now. david: the biggest government mobilization since world war ii. congresswoman alexandria ocasio-cortez unveiling details of her ten-year green new deal today with the backing of many of her democrat colleagues in the house and senate. take a look. >> climate change and our environmental challenges are one of the biggest existential threats to our way of life. today is also the day that we choose to assert ourselves as a global leader in transitioning to 100% renewable energy and charting that path. david: pretty ambitious. the resolution has environmental and economic goals, including

get this, a government guaranteed job upgrade, guaranteed government job, an upgrade of every building in america, college education for everybody, health care for everybody, and the elimination of airplanes while they're at it in ten years. you can bet our panel has a lot to say about this. we have kristina partsinevelos, liz peak, gary kaltbaum and also joining us in a fox business exclusive from capitol hill, iowa senator chuck grassley, chairman of the senate finance committee, also serves on the senate judiciary, budget and tax committees. senator, what i didn't mention was she also talks about eliminating cows in the next ten years or at least cows, forgive me, but she said this, that pass gas. i don't know of any cows that don't pass gas. you come from a farm state. forgive me, but she says this. what do you think your farming constituents would say about it? >> it sounds to me like we have a member of the house of representatives who kind of

believes or knows this about food. food grows in supermarkets, not on farms. and the problem we have is only 2% of the people in this country produce food and know what it takes to produce food, and the 98% don't know as much about it as they should, and you get stupid comments like that. >> this is what representative cortez had to say on the investment and the dollars with the green deal. let's get to it. >> this is an investment. for every $1 that we spend on infrastructure, we get a return on that investment. for every $1 that we spend on tax cuts, we get less than $1 back. so this is about making smart investments and this is about making investments that actually generate returns. >> senator grassley, basically, she's saying that you give her $7 trillion, she will return

more than $7 trillion but tax cuts don't work. what is your take on that? >> the federal government consumes. it doesn't create wealth. the wealth is created in the private sector. the government is a service. it doesn't produce a profit. it doesn't create jobs that create new investment and new productivity that expands our economy. her direction would take us down the road of an economy that's pretty constant and how do you twi divide it up so more people have less. i'm interested in creating a growing economy where there's more for more people. >> senator grassley, if i could pivot to the upcoming investigations and conversations

about drug pricing. do you and your colleagues have any kind of plan going in, you are going to hopefully sit down with the heads of the drug companies. do you have a particular approach you are going to take to try and lower costs, that you are going to try and get them to buy into, or how are you approaching this? >> it sounds like a facetious answer and it's kind of a one-word answer, transparency. there's too much secrecy in health care. there's not enough information out there for the consumer to compare prices and make a choice, make a wise decision that's cost effective. by too much secrecy, you know when you go to a grocery store, you would pay the same for an apple as i would pay for an apple. when you go to take care of doctors or hospitals or you know, mris and all that stuff,

you don't really know. now, it's supposed to be out there and some regulations put it out there for greater transparency, but there's too much secrecy. within big pharma, within the pbms, and to what extent does a lot of these rebates help the consumer. there's $165 billion in rebates i think last year. how much of that benefited the consumer? i would think that we ought to be thinking about the consumer and for me, as a person that's chairman of the committee that has jurisdiction over medicare and medicaid, two very expensive programs, i got to think about what the taxpayers are paying maybe more than they should be paying. >> senator grassley, jonathan hoenig. thank you for being with us. aoc is gaining in popularity. the republicans traditional message of limited government, fiscal restraint, sir, you have

been in washington since 1980. why does that seem to be as unpopular now even with many on the right as it historically has been? >> you mean about the stuff i have been talking about, health care? >> that is the thing, limited government, fiscal restraint. the debt is as big as it's ever been, government is as big as it's ever been. you have been in washington for decades. why are you in effect losing the fight? >> we are losing the fight because we don't have the same requirements most states have, that you have to have a balanced budget. that's why i voted three or four times in the years i have been in the united states senate for a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. i served in the state legislature a long time ago, but we still have that same fiscal discipline in the legislature in iowa because we have such a constitutional amendment, and if you are asking me why we don't get back to it, we responded to gra a grassroots effort in response

to the infrugality of spending in washington. i wish we would get it cranked up in the grassroots. you are in the grassroots. you are encouraging other people in the grassroots to raise that. i hope they get that elevated to congress so we can get more action in that direction. >> senator, this is kristina partsinevelos. i want to go back to your comment about the government providing a service. i agree with you in that sense because you need an environment where you have an educated and healthy working class population. however, although i think the green new deal is a very lofty deal, there's no details on how they can fund it, you even have some democrats that really aren't taking to it, nancy pelosi said it was the green dream or whatever they call it, clearly she's dismissing it a little bit. don't you think that this is an opportunity for the united states to move forward with green technology, or maybe we should be moving forward so we can take this technology and then market it around the globe, create jobs for millions of people within the country as

opposed to burning coal 100 years from now? >> we have been moving in that direction very dramatically since the 1980s. now, it doesn't show up nationally with a lot of our electricity, for instance, being generated by alternative energy, but you're speaking to the father of the energy tax credit. we are getting 38% of our energy from wind in iowa now. one company, midamerica, is telling us in five years, they are going to get 88% of their electricity from wind. but you can't just depend upon the sun always shining, the wind always blowing, so i always say you have to have a four-part approach to energy generally. one, we are still going to have to rely upon fossil fuels for a long period of time. we ought to have all the alternative energy you can think

of like your question implies. third, we are still going to have to have some nuclear, and nuclear is very clean, as you know. then lastly, we've got to promote conservation. i can tell you a lot of ways you can promote conservation. you got to have some of that. a lot of that's coming, some of it's coming through government regulation when you have more efficient home appliances, more efficient cars, et cetera, but you have to have a four-part program. you can't just have alternative energy be the sole reliant at least today. now, maybe in 2050, it will be a different story. >> senator, catapulting back to what jonathan was talking about, the general feelings about socialism and capitalism, socialism is still a dirty word in america. most americans by two to one think it's a dirty word but more and more people are drawn to it, particularly young people. does that concern you? >> you know, it's just a perfect example, we don't teach enough

history and learn from previous generations in america today, because we are too much interested in political correctness and i don't know how many other things we poison the people's brains in our k through 12 education and even in universities. you get the idea that the government's got the answer to every question. like 535 members of us in congress ought to have more brains than the other 300 million people in this country put together. and you know that and i know that's not true. but all you got to do is look to history. i'm answering your question. all you got to do is look to history and look at what's happened in socialism. in venezuela right now, three million people have left the country, people are starving to death. you can't get medicine. why would anybody in america want to recreate what's happening in venezuela? david: chairman grassley, we love your point of view.

we wish you would come back and talk to us soon. thank you so much for being here with us today. appreciate it. >> if you want me to come back, you ought to ask me more. david: we will ask you once a week if you don't mind. hope you're not shy. we will be asking you a lot. it's great to talk to you, senator. thank you. the dow dropping this morning after larry kudlow made some key revelations about the china trade negotiations right here on fox business. what he said that moved the markets, coming next. ♪ i've got to tell you something important. it's not going to be easy. quicksilver earns you unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase, everywhere. actually, that's super easy. my bad. to be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best

to make you everybody else... ♪ ♪ means to fight the hardest battle, which any human being can fight and never stop. does this sound dismal? it isn't. ♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth. ♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth. shouldn't mean going back to the doctoro just for a shot. with neulasta onpro patients get their day back... to be with family, or just to sleep in. strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1%,

a 94% decrease. neulasta onpro is designed to deliver neulasta the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems, allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. ask your doctor about neulasta onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card.

in honor of my dad, who was alzheimer's. i decided to make shirts for the walk with custom ink, and they just came out perfect. - [announcer] check out our huge selection of custom apparel for every occasion. you'll even get free shipping. get started today at customink.com.

david: the president has indicated that he's optimistic with respect to a potential china trade deal, but, but but but but, we've got a, you know, pretty sizeable distance to go here.

david: white house economic adviser larry kudlow sending stocks tumbling as investors fear any negative news surrounding a china trade deal. while we expect high level talks to begin next week with robert lighthizer and steve mnuchin in beijing, president trump says there will be no meeting with president xi before the march 1st deadline. that's when the higher tariffs kick in. are comments like this a negotiating strategy, or are they real signs of trouble? what do you think? >> i think in general right now you are seeing a lot of investors that have priced in positive news coming before march 1st so that's the reason we saw this dip. i think that the concerning factor as you keep talking about trade, let's look at the economic data that's come out of china and germany. those are numbers we should really be worried about when we are talking about the future growth of america. in regards to this trade, long way to go. there's going to be some type of concession. maybe it will be more agricultural products that china will buy and that will help -- >> this is groundhog day. over and over again, we are almost at a deal, we are almost

at a deal. >> we did it with north korea, we did it with putin. >> but where is the deal? meanwhile, americans are paying $1 billion a week in tariffs. i asked peter navarro on this show where's the money come from? uh, a billion dollars. >> i agree. >> okay. the reason it's taking longer than it should or we would like it to is because they are not content to have just an influx of purchases of soybeans. they really are going after the intellectual property issues and things like that. i know you don't like the tariffs. i wish they would come up with a different way of trying to get concessions on this. robert lighthizer is serious about this and it has to happen. >> how do you change something that's been going on for so long, decades and decades? >> allowing companies to come into your country without forcing the 50/50 joint venture where they take all your intellectual property and copy it, basically. >> i'm also tired of the

undisciplined messaging. four times today they changed their story and when they saw the market down over 300 in the last hour, ooh, they came out and said maybe it's going to be closer to march 1st so they are watching every tick in the market. i just wish they would do one thing. shush. don't say another word. just leave it be, go into a room, get some deal done. maybe it's not going to be the greatest deal on earth, but call it the greatest deal on earth. just get something done, leave the markets alone. stay away from the messaging. keep kudlow in some room, not talking about it anymore, and then get something done. enough of this, already. david: they're doing it and you know, how many times -- >> two years. david: how many times have you told this administration to shush when they haven't done? i'm beginning to wonder, i'm seriously wondering, i agree with jonathan, this is harmful to u.s. consumers, to u.s. companies. >> farmers. exactly. david: but having said that, i'm wondering if the president wants china to suffer a little more. it sounds like he just --

>> that's ridiculous, though. david: he just said he's going to wait until after march 1st to meet with xi. that's after the tariffs go up 25%. you think he wants china to suffer more? >> the question is, gary, is china suffering or their economy slowing further, which we know is happening. does that put more pressure on xi to make a deal? i think that's kind of what the trump administration is trying to -- david: what do you think? >> i think it does. >> let me say, tariff man, he called himself tariff man. i will counter a little bit. who are the tariffs on? they are not on china. david: i agree. i agree. >> apple, harley davidson, every company, it's hurting their bottom line. if china was so desperate, how come we don't have a deal just yet? >> thank you, gary. i agree with you. yes. >> all we have been hearing for two years is they are desperate, their economy stinks, their markets are going down. meanwhile, they're not saying yes to anything. david: it's a communist country.

do they really care what the people think? the point is, it still has that communist political structure, where i don't think the common people who are suffering in china are really getting their views across, do you? >> i think the politics are going away from the leaders there. there was an article today, i believe in the "journal" about people are getting real upset and jobs are heading south and businesses are heading south. look, the guy won the election so i guess he figures he can be there the rest of his life. david: got to move on to possible independent candidate for president, howard schultz, giving us a look at what his 2020 campaign may look like. will voters buy into this? ♪ >> we talked about reforming the tax code. not with bumper sticker slogans but with tax cuts for the middle class. and small businesses, to spur hiring and economic growth. manat seem the same, but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs.

some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.

jardiance asked: when it comes to managing your type 2 diabetes, what matters to you? let's see. most of you say lower a1c. but only a few of you are thinking about your heart. fact is, even though it helps to manage a1c, type 2 diabetes still increases your risk of a fatal heart attack or stroke. jardiance is the first type 2 diabetes pill with a lifesaving cardiovascular benefit for adults who have type 2 diabetes and heart disease, jardiance significantly reduces the risk of dying from a cardiovascular event and lowers a1c, with diet and exercise. let's give it another try. 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. a rare but life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the genital area could also occur.

stop taking jardiance and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, 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. isn't it time to rethink your type 2 diabetes medication? ask your doctor about jardiance and get to the heart of what matters.

we have talked about reforming the tax code, not with

bumper sticker slogans, but with tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses to spur hiring and economic growth. and i myself should be paying higher taxes and all wealthy americans should have to pay their fair share. i think we can all agree on that. david: the former starbucks ceo howard schultz continuing to make his case for an independent presidential run in 2020, saying that while the wealthy should be paying more in taxes, small businesses and the middle class need tax cuts. so has schultz got the right message on taxes? what do you think? >> i think he's got a pretty good message on taxes. i think a message that would actually resonate with today's concerns about income inequality and so forth. i'm not buying it but i think a lot of people are going to and on this and many other things, he is definitely staking out the middle ground. i think that's a very smart thing for him to be doing, whether it's immigration, tax policy, the green policy, et cetera. i think a lot of the things we were talking about earlier with the green revolution and so

forth, they will really look pie in the sky to voters who have rejected that in the past. i think he will make sense to people if they let him run. that's not a given. >> the man goes from being george clooney to freddy krueger overnight in the business world. it is amazing to watch people call him a fanatical centrist. now you are fanatical if you are a centrist who just wants efficient, effective government and maybe a lessening of government spending. hoorps here's my take. i don't think he's going to run. there's so much media and political pressure on him, i think he will stay for a little while, then back away and it's unfortunate because he's reasonable. what a concept, versus what we were just talking about a woman that throws pie in the sky and wants to take airplanes out of the air and put high speed rail in iowa. >> that's exactly it. left and right are both so out there now that someone who comes along really an american success story, true american dream story, like howard schultz, i

think if he's committed, you have to want this job. don't count this guy out. america didn't know what a latte was before he came along. he changed america. if he's committed he can change politics as well. >> i completely agree but right now, maybe he's doing this to promote his book. let's not forget he's on a book tour and hasn't officially come out saying he is going to run for president. a lot could change if joe biden comes to the table. we talk about how there are so many democratic candidates but i believe there is room for moderates. why not have so many people to pick from? if anything, it's been too often just two wealthy individuals or those that have campaigned successfully and you are left, you know, like many people during the 2016 presidential election, oh, i didn't want hillary so i voted for trump or vice versa. i feel like this is good for democracy. schultz, excellent example of american success story. if anything, we should question why do we use such a negative term around billionaire? why do we use that term so loosely when it comes to somebody's net worth? >> even he's said he doesn't

like to be called a billionaire. he's a little bit troublesome in many ways. the left and the right are so extreme, so off the reservation, he looks completely radical. >> he does stand up for himself being a wealthy man. he celebrates the fact he has been successful and celebrates the fact that in america, so far, we celebrate success. >> i think he wants to run but look, this marriage between the media and politics is just crushing. they can make you or break you. they are doing a job on this guy. look, right now, jfk and his tax policy could not run for president right now. everything has changed. the left has gone left, the right, i don't even know what the right is anymore. david: that's exactly, gary, why i think he made the great middle ground in terms of taxes because he recognizes that taxes can lead to growth, if you cut taxes, you will get more growth. that's why he's for tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses and yet, he addresses the point that you see in the polls that a lot of people want

to raise taxes on the wealthy. >> we actually talked about that last week. i don't know if viewers were watching. we specifically talked about that, the fact there was a fox poll that came out saying they do support taxing the wealthy, those that make over $10 million, and of course -- >> they always approve raising taxes on everybody but themselves. >> i know. of course. of course. but that's how politicians work. they look at the polls, they look at what the people supposedly want, then they are like i'm going to give it to you. just like we saw today with trump and the white house talking too much when we saw the markets go down, oh, i'm going to give it to you, i'm going to give you a deal even though they haven't. >> it's messaging. to david's point, he's staked out this very centrist, acknowledging i don't want to raise taxes on the rich but he sounds completely rational and reasonable. david: i would wonder about your philosophy, that the government can't do much right. he does seem to have almost kind of a naivete about government and he doesn't recognize the way government has a tendency to

multiply into bureaucracy. >> he's a classic liberal. we shouldn't forget that in all this excitement about a moderate. what we are comparing him against -- i think the question is are primary voters on the democratic party, will they vote for somebody like joe biden or are they going to be incredibly wowed by aoc, kamala harris, et cetera. >> there's good government and then there's government that we are seeing right now at $1 trillion a year in deficits and $22 trillion which will hit any day right now and look, i say this a lot. our first $500 billion is going towards interest. that is an absolute sin and nobody's doing anything about it. maybe this guy would try to do something about it. david: send me a road map to that good government. i want directions, gary. thank you very much. the president making a lot of headlines with his economic messages during the state of the union, but what really resonated with the voters? we will be asking republican pollster lee carter. she joins us coming next. ♪ vanishing deductible,

you can earn $100 off your deductible for every year of safe driving? sing that. ♪ vanishing deductible, you can... ♪ ♪ earn $100... ♪ earn $100 off... ♪ off your deductible. ♪ deductible. ♪ for every year of safe driving. ♪ ♪ for every-- for every-- ♪ ♪ for every year of safe driving. ♪ what are you-- what key are you in? "e." no, no, go to "g." "g" will be too high. not for me. ♪ vanishing deductible. oh, gosh. sweet, sweet. want a performance car that actually fits your life? introducing the new 2019 ford edge st. capability meets power. in the first suv from the ford performance team. the new 2019 ford edge st

whooo! want to take your next vacation to new heights? tripadvisor now lets you book over a hundred thousand tours, attractions, and experiences in destinations around the world! like new york! from bus tours, to breathtaking adventures, tripadvisor makes it easy to find and book amazing things to do. and you can cancel most bookings up to 24 hours in advance for a full refund. so you can make your next trip... monumental! read reviews check hotel prices book things to do tripadvisor

david: president trump's economic message is from his state of the union getting a lot of applause from his party in the house chamber but how did the rest of the country respond? let's ask gop pollster lee carter, who has the dials on the voice of the voters. a lot has been made about the president's comments, his absolute comment on socialism versus capitalism. why don't you talk about that first? >> i think it's one of the extraordinary moments of the speech. i think it's absolute genius, political genius because if you did not agree with this point that he made on socialism it was almost like how could you not. you pan the audience, you see democrats sitting on their hands. you're like what? take a look at what he had to say. >> the united states, we are alarmed by the new calls to adopt socialism in our country. america was founded on liberty and independence and not government coercion, domination

and control. we are born free and we will stay free. tonight, we review our resolve that america will never be a socialist country. >> so you can see there, that red line was republicans, off the charts at moments. yellow independents, also very very well, very favorable. the blue line, those democrats, went pretty low. you can sit there and say how could they possibly have gone low. you're saying we are never going to go, be a socialist country. how could they possibly? here's what they said to me. when i asked them why, they said this is ridiculous. we are not socialists. that's not what we are. you are characterizing us socialist and i resent that. they were saying it's a negative characterization. they weren't necessarily saying they want socialism. that's what -- that was their response. >> if that blue line, the democratic line was so low even when the president was saying we are against government coercion, against government control, even if they are not on board with socialism as a term, why aren't

democrats seemingly against the government that uses force against its own people? >> you know, that's a very, very fair question. >> just anything that comes out of trump's mouth -- >> they don't believe most anything he says. they say he's mischaracterizing them. they feel resentful of almost anything he says. i think these key little tweaks of moments, little glimmers of hope you can see they come around, that did happen in the speech. there were a couple moments where even the democrats gave him some credit. by credit, i mean gave him a grudging little nod. >> you are going to focus on socialism as a whole and we talk about all these ideas, don't you think the candidates wouldn't bring up, you can call them socialist or maybe not because they don't like that term but say far left ideas like medicare for all, don't you think they see some type of want for it in the market and that's the reason why they are bringing it up? i know there's your poll but other polls talk about the younger generation and i know the viewers are listening thinking they're not the ones that go to vote but eventually, they will be. we are turning towards being a

more open society that could possibly be open to some of these socialist ideas. what are you seeing? >> there's this huge shift i'm seeing right now in younger people and even in the left where it's no longer about trying to have individual responsibility, individual opportunities at the american dream. it is what can this country do for me. so when you see that, you are seeing people saying medicare for all. i want you to take care of my college debt. i want all of my health care taken care of. i want to know that retirement will be taken care of, pharma drugs, all these kind of things. they are saying it's not my problem. you take care of it, government. that's a very different philosophy. where the onus and control should be, we want it on ourselves. a lot of republicans are out there saying i want individual responsibility and accountability. how can that be for me. when you talk to younger folks, talk to folks on the left, they are saying this is the responsibility of a good government. they need to take care of us and are not doing it right now. that's a big problem. >> so when the president asked the country and congress to choose between grid lock and greatness, what did that look like? >> well, that was really

interesting because republicans, you will see in just a second, republicans loved that message. independents did, too. take a look at how democrats reacted there. >> we must choose between greatness or gridlock, results or resistance, vision or vengeance, incredible progress or pointless destruction. tonight, i ask you to choose greatness. david: they're coming together. >> at the end they had to go back. that was one thing. overall, republicans love the idea of greatness. independents, you can see were sort of positive. democrats somewhat lukewarm. here's the thing. a lot of democrats said they don't like the idea of american greatness. we shouldn't be better than anybody. we should be working together with everybody. that to me was quite shocking. like when did that happen? >> president obama kind of talked about exceptionalism as something we shouldn't really aspire to. america wasn't exceptional. every other country was exceptional, too. sorry, gary.

didn't mean to interrupt you. >> that's okay. the fact we have to defend capitalism against socialism when 2700 miles just south of where i'm sitting, there's utter destruction of the people and their hope, and it's on video, it's on tape to see, every single day, and we have to continue to fight against what is just so evident, i don't even know what to say when i see these lines go the wrong way. i don't know what these people are experiencing, what they are being taught, but something's going awry and we better change the trajectory or else. >> lee, i just want to go back to your point you just brought up, greatness and how you saw a difference in reaction. don't you think that almost goes against populism and against nationalism in a way when you are seeing the popularity of the term greatness not prevail and the second part, i want to say to women, because that was a huge part of his speech as well. >> yeah, i think greatness and exceptionalism do go in the face of populism in some ways.

however, in certain policies, you get very very closely linked and closely aligned. now, i do think it's really interesting, to your point, we should take a look at how the voters reacted to the women line because we were all curious how were they going to react, when you are sitting there and you watch were the democrats going to stand up, clap, were they not. they ended up getting on their feet. take a look at how the voters reacted. >> we have more women in the work force than ever before. don't sit yet. you're going to like this. and exactly one century after congress passed the constitutional amendment giving women the right to vote, we also have more women serving in congress than at any time before. >> there you have it. democrats even there, they went above 50. mark it in your books, folks. because it happened.

>> was it the only time? >> it wasn't the only time in the speech but it was one of the highlights. david: we were also talking about the order. right as the democrats were on their feet cheering, the president brought up the subject of abortion and they felt kind of embarrassed to be up cheering at that point. >> that was the end of that. david: very well put together speech, i must say. great stuff. thank you very much. >> thank you. great to be here. great to see you all. david: conk is runnigress is ru of time to get a deal to prevent another shutdown. how close are they? the latest on the inside of capitol hill, next. incomparable design makes it beautiful. state of the art technology makes it brilliant. the lexus nx, experience the crossover in its most visionary form. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

and the army taught me a lot about commitment. which i apply to my life and my work. at comcast we're commited to delivering the best experience possible, by being on time everytime. and if we are ever late, we'll give you a automatic twenty dollar credit. my name is antonio and i'm a technician at comcast. we're working to make things simple, easy and awesome.

david: the clock is ticking as the deadline to avoid a government shutdown, another one, draws closer. a deal needs to be put forward by monday. is that possible? fox news senior capitol hill producer chad pergram joins us with the very latest. chad, how close are we to a deal? reporter: well, richard shelby, the chairman of the senate appropriations committee, one of the persons charged with putting together this deal, he says we are close but we're not quite that close. but he did go to the white house today to meet with president trump and when he returned, i'm going to read you precisely what he said. it's quote, the most positive meeting i've had with the president. that's a big deal right there. now, what we've learned in about the past hour or so here, this might be the pathway to getting a deal, is that the conferees on

this committee are trying to arrive at a number for border security, border wall, barrier fencing, whatever you want to call it, that's above $1.3 billion. they would go north of that number and then what the democratic trade-off would be is they would be able to impose restrictions on the money, maybe even going back and putting restrictions and strictures on what they spent previously for border wall and border security money. that's very important. they're not there yet. the reason the deadline is slipping to monday is they just don't have the text ready. it takes awhile to go through everything. i spoke with the democrat from california who is one of the appropriators and she said well, the old adage up here is nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to. here's the other clue that they are starting to get close. a lot of the members are starting to be circumspect, not willing to talk details, and when they get to that point, that tells you they are about to put this in because they don't want to screw anything up. >> this is gary kaltbaum.

we have been doing this awhile. the question is, if the president only gets like $1 billion, $1.5 billion when they have been asking for a lot more and it used to be back in the 20s, does this end up being a big loss for him politically as we move forward, especially if there's going to be restrictions on the money? reporter: right. here's the problem. when they were talking about that much money, they were saying okay, we want all the money for the wall, for all the years, when necessity dethey de appropriations they only deal with one fiscal year. we are still in 2019 and they will start for fiscal year 2020 on october 1 so they can ask for more. something else i was just told is that there is a little bit of money, we are talking in the millions, with an "m" as in mary, that they can move around from different pots of money, from already signed into law appropriations bills or things they are working on in this deal, without congressional approval. so there might be a little bit of agility there. at the end of the day the president doesn't get $25 billion, $26 billion for a wall. they would have to really take a

dent in the overall homeland security budget for the department of homeland security and that starts to question security and how viable it is to protect the country in other areas. >> chad, liz peak here. i think the last time i heard you, maybe yesterday, the democrats were basically going to cut back the financing for beds for border patrol, basically kind of leading us back to a catch and release solution to people coming across the border illegally. have you heard any update on that? reporter: well, the biggest problem that i have been told outside of the actual barrier debates right now is what they do with i.c.e. agents, i.c.e. beds and as it was put to me earlier, interior enforcement. how much money is spent there. that's a red line. these are kind of, you know, perennial issues that democrats and republicans fight over. that's not resolved yet. until they get that, that's probably going to speak to your question, what is catch and release, what are the provisions, and maybe those are some of those restrictions saying okay, we want something that is a little more lenient in that sense and that satisfies

the democrats. >> jonathan hoenig. you are a must-follow on twitter with this play by play from the belly of the beast. i always enjoy that. cut to the chase here. is the president going to be able to campaign on having gotten his wall, which is a central campaign promise that he made years ago? reporter: most likely. i mean, the president would be able to say i pushed and i got that, i shut down the government, people dared me, i said i wouldn't do it and look what i did and guess what, i got them to the table and i got it. by the same token, democrats might say, nancy pelosi might say we didn't put, do you see the wall anywhere in the text of the legislation? i was told early on in this process by someone very senior that they didn't think the letters w-a-l-l would appear in the text. and that's coming from the republican side of the aisle, no less. so it's semantics. do you call it a wall, a barrier, electronic frontier, you name it. >> it's funny. i was just going to say that, chad. semantics. that seems to be the big issue, the wall wording. overall, we saw it with the jobs

report that came out. the shutdown didn't have a massive impact on the economy. we saw unemployment tick up to 4% but it was a small thing. is this term national emergency popping up at all? have you heard anything about that? reporter: i will go back to something richard shelby told me. he said after meeting with the president today, would he still declare a national emergency and shelby said quote, i would think he would. maybe that's the agility where the president says all right, i'm going to move around some of these other pots of money without going through either what we call on capitol hill reprogramming or transfers, these are official things they have to sign off on in the house and senate if they are going to do it. at the end of the day, he can say you know, i got the money, you know, for a wall and i don't have to declare a national emergency. but he can continue to hold that, remember we talked about the sword of damocles on this program, hang that over congress as we move into the next spending cycle, perhaps the next spending cycle after that, and say where's that money.

i still need to get to $26 billion. david: we got to jump. but any chance, is it pie in the sky to hope for longer term continuing resolution? reporter: i talked to mitch mcconnell, senate majority leader. he said that's precisely what they are trying to avoid. he isn't too happy about that prospect. david: all right. chad, the smartest guy inside the beltway. chad pergram. it's a pleasure and honor to have you here. come back. could another tax cut be on the way? what one key white house official said about that this afternoon. want to stay for that. ♪ to be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing it's best to make you everybody else... ♪ ♪ means to fight the hardest battle, which any human being can fight and never stop. does this sound dismal? it isn't. ♪ ♪ it's the most wonderful life on earth. ♪ ♪

..

>> we are kicking it around. we are look at a few things that my wind up surprising folks. we are kicking it around a little bit, see how it feels. that's all i want to say.

david: larry kudlow is the national economic council director confirming the president wants to cut taxes another 10%. so what impact would that have on the economy? >> cutting taxes is good for the economy. but you have to stop spending. the government has to stop spending. the tariffs are a tax. unless the government stops spending, tax cuts only blow up the debt and the deficit. >> the whole point of possibly considering a tax cut is political. the tax cut never got any approval from independents and democrats. republicans could not sell the country on cutting taxes. but i don't think it's happening. sorry, sorry. i talked to people today who were in the tax field and they

said they didn't know a thing about it. >> they want to raise taxes on everything. they want to raise taxes on the cockroach that's runs across your kitchen floor. nothing is going to get done. if anything you will see proposals left and right that taxes go up in the next few years. >> you don't live in new york city, so don't talk about cockroaches. maybe republicans can talk about making the tax cuts permanent. is that something that maybe can pass? >> i think if they do anything, it would be for middle class americans. david: you would make those permanent. but what about starving -- you say we shouldn't have tax cuts unless we cut spending. >> no is talking about that?

gary, we try to shake the tree. but the spending goes on and on and on. >> we had a 90-minute state of the union and not one word on debt, deficits and spending. we'll see $30 trillion in a few years. >> why would he mention it when it ballooned under the trump administration. david: howard schultz talks about the debt. but when it comes to say where would you cut? no answer. i haven't heard it yet. >> so when the economic calamity comes, them blame big businessmen. of course. because necessity can't make the moral argument we need. >> when you say they, you are talking about the whole mainstream media. they are the ones who say the

tax cuts did no good. >> that's the direction we are going. david: thank you very much for being here. thank you for watching us. that does it for "bulls and bears." we'll see you next time. >> i think we are on a positive trajectory course the next 72 hours probably are very important. >> i hear they are working on something. and both sides are moving along. >> after the meeting with the vice president, i believe we have got some latitude. hopefully to conclude this. president trump: we need border security, we have to have it. it's not an option. liz: talk growing in washington that a deal could be reached within days.