because the next day the cap drafted a band ♪ he's the boogie woogie bugle boy of company b ♪ he wakes them up the same way ♪ you think this irs scandal is the biggest threat to the health care law? maybe not. guess who is against it now, unions. some of the same ones who helped the president push it. their gripes? the rising cost of health benefits. is this the proof that it's finally time to let the law flat line. hi everybody. i'm brenda buttner. >> weave all our guests. welcome to everybody. john, did the unions have it right this time? >> yeah. they finally have it right. i'm not sure how they didn't have it right before. this is something you would see

in junior high student council politics. it's hey let's give free pizza to everybody, no homework. when they say how do we pay for it, we'll get the rich kids to pay for the stuff. that's the basic equivalent. that's how shallow this is. you have about 20 million union guys, because they're in multiple employer plans about to lose their insurance or have to change insurance or downgrade their insurance and they're starting now to realize there are costs associated with this. it really kicks in january 1, 2014. that's when you're going to see an outcry. 53% of americans think they're worse off under obama care. i'm with that 53%. >> jonas, get rid of the health care law because we're finally seeing the people who were pushing it saying huh-uh, not so fast? >> the good old days before obama care, we had 10% unemployment and health care costs rising by the double digits for three decades. you can't be on the union side of this.

they have plans that are too costly and they should have to go to lower cost plans. that was one of the fixes. it makes the unions mad but the bottom line their health care plans cost too much money. that's one of the better parts of this agree bli not so great health care program. it's going to address the fact that people have too much insurance and consume too much health care because of it. it's as if your company bought you a $30,000 car insurance plan that paid for maintenance and everything on your car. you fix every ding, bring it in for oil changes every month and rack up costs. that's how the world works with health care. you have the $30,000 plan. they don't pay premiums. they consume a lot of health care. >> the bottom line is many of the union workers may be forced to change their insurance, to change their doctor which the president many times promised would not happen. is that a reason to get rid of this law? >> it's not a reason to get rid of it. it's a reason to fix the problem that the health care law has yet to address. that is how to make multiemployer plans not at a competitive disadvantage

compared to the health insurance exchanges. >> make it more expensive though? isn't that the issue? >> it doesn't necessarily are to make it more expensive if it's designed correctly. what we have right now is a situation where 26 million people who like their health insurance are probably going to be forced to change it, which is something that the law was not intended to do. it can be fixed if the administration is willing to do it. >> gary b, can it be fixed? would you see the administration dhoog? >> i do not, brenda. christian had a great phase when he said not intended. that's the story of this whole obama care. all the union people thought oh, okay, we'll support it because our cadillac plans will be -- >> what, wait? you mean we're affected by this? multiply that by about 30 million, brenda. everyone out there is saying wait, you mean our premiums are going up, our coverage is cut short? you mean, we're not covered at all? oh, by the way, all those

uninsured people we were going to protect, they're still going to be about 10 million uninsured. look what's happening in california, brenda. all the major insurers out there are declining to participate in the exchanges. so what you have out there is less competition and even higher premiums like you have in massachusetts. >> i want christian to have a chance to respond then i'm going to toby. >> you know, it's not that the unions are trying to preserve really expensive rich plans. what they're seeking to do is find a way to make health care affordable. and what's happening with the affordable care act is it's adding costs to them but it's not allowing them access to the subsidies. it's discriminatory in that intent. keep in mind, unions would much prefer a single payer system. it's not about preserving the luxuriousness of the plans they have, it's about making sure they compete fairly. >> not all of them. toby, the tax subsidies, that is the issue and who knows what

cost that is would add. >> well, i think the point we're missing here is that we're -- christian used which is the fix. because remember, if there's 20 million union members who woke up one day and even the president of one of the largest unions came out and said by the way, the math doesn't work and our expenses and cost would go up and we would get less care. when he caves in on them, hes to have a fix. guess what, brenda, who else wants a fix? there are other guys and the other people and all of a sudden a $200 million fix because a $500 billion fix and all of a sudden the fixes become -- if you have a 2700-page bill that you have to make a $200 billion one fix, that ain't the last fix. >> gary b, you want to get in there. go ahead. >> toby brings up a good point. why do we think this massive project is going to be unlike every other massive project

taken by government? they can't build one mile of highway and come in on budget. they couldn't build a parking center for the kennedy center to come in budget. all of these things, the big dig, whatever, they're all like 100, 200, a thousand percent overbudget. toby talks about the extra costs. brenda, we haven't seen the tip of the iceberg yet. >> john layfield, what would happen to the economy if we were to get rid of this law? >> look, i think it helps the economy. we look at some people who simply can't afford it so they lower their workers to 29 hours, get below the 30-hour threshold which will play out over time. that obviously hurts. we're talking about fixing something. this is insane. you're talking about fixing something that hasn't even been implemented yet. it's like having a game plan for a sports game and all of a sudden before the game starts, you go hey guys, this plan stinks. we've got to change it. that's before playing a single play. this has not been fully implemented.

we did nothing for health care reform. all we did was add people to the rolls. >> jonas, could you weigh in? >> if someone doesn't propose a better plan, there's no use to going back to the old system. that wasn't a pro hiring plan. companies still had to pay for people's health insurance. look, there's people with too much insurance, believe it or not. some of them aren't in unions and they cost more than single payer plans and are more beneficial. i don't think union members who negotiated these plans want to switch which doesn't have the dental coverage and other coverage wlu work at an investment bank or union. they have the plans that are tax deductible to the company. it is a ridiculous to carve out. it's widely consumed so much health care. this has to be fixed. unfortunately, we didn't address the issues. we extended the private system that currently exists. it's a little bit worse. i don't think going back to the other way will make more hiring out there. >> jonas, we're only talking about insurance here. that's what this plan is all about.

only about insurance. you're talking about one end of it. we have done nothing to work on the problem and that is health care. >> that's right. >> well, the problem is health insurance. people have health insurance and they can consume as much health care as they want with no real cost to them. there's no incentives to be healthy. that wasn't addressed. >> you're basically fixing the health care insurance. they basically -- thestem, the same tax deductions exist. >> hold on. toby jump in there and let us know what you think what happened to the economy. >> speaking about the economy. remember, health care consumption is about 20%. 2-0, 20% of our economy by 2015 when obama care kicked in. now, if we were to take these massive inefficiencies and these massive expenses that we know are going to come, those were going to be invested, i don't know, let's say in capital, in businesses, in solutions, in private market solutions, then not only would the economy be

better off. but to layfield's point, every employer who now has a job act that says we're only going to have 29 employees, they say i'd like to staff the way i'd like to. now i'd i will. now that will add 2 million jobs if we got rid of obama care. >> last word. thanks guys. two key officials at the heart of two major scandals. one is on paid leave, the other is up for a promotion with more pay. guess who is footing the bill? neil and the gang uncovering a new money scandal inside the scandal. that's at the bottom of the hour. up here first -- after the disaster, the recovery. but now some are asking would we save lives and tax dollars by relocating rather than rebuilding? >> [ musick ] i knew there were a lot of tech jobs

available out there. i knew devry university would give me the skills that i needed to make one of those tech jobs mine. we teach cutting-edge engineering technology, computer information systems, networking and communications management -- the things that our students need to know in the world today. our country needs more college grads to help fill all the open technology jobs. to help meet that need, here at devry university, we're offering $4 million dollars in tech scholarships for qualified new students. learn more at devry.edu.

hi everybody. we're live from america's news med quarter. i'm jamie colby. we're getting a first look at the exact moment a bridge

collapsed in washington state. check out this surveillance camera at a nearby car dealership where two cars are seen plunging 50 feet after a portion of the bridge fell into frigid waters of the skagit river. that happened thursday night. miraculously, no one was hurt. an over-sized freight truck hit part of the bridge causing that collapse. check this out as well. >> we have rs 27 main engine. we have liftoff. the united launch alliance. >> the newest military communication satellite blasting off from cape canaveral overnight. it will track the earth's rotation 22,000 miles above the equator. it will take several months to settle into orbit. i'm jamie colby. back to bulls and bears. keep it right here on the fox newschannel. victims of that terrible twister in oklahoma out cleaning up this weekend. as they start making plans to rebuild their homes and businesses, toby, you say it

would be safer if we helped them to relocate away from the tornado danger zones instead of rebuilding. >> yes, it would for a couple reasons. we look at california, we have active faults. you can't build a home on an active fault. we have place this is florida, places in the northeast where there's repeated hurricanes. here they've had three major tornadoes in the same basic valley in a ten-year period. they've had 20 over the last 100 years. i think it's time to do a little reality check and save some lives here. move these people, create a way to move out of this area. there's a lot of room in oklahoma and near this area. i think we've gone beyond the pail and have to think smart about this. >> john layfield. do you think that's smart? >> no. i disagree. these ancestors, they survived the dust bowl. they're hearty american people. toby is not saying anything different than that. he's talking been economic standpoint. what are you going to move ou to utah and have bob stoops coach

there? it's not realistic to transplant this many people who want to live there. i think safe house this is schools with a wonderful idea. you can't ask people to move out of southern new york because of a hurricane sandy that hit. you can't ask people to move out of earthquake zones. it's just not realistic to do. certain things need to be done, but not this. >> in fact, the population tripled in that area since 1970. more people are moving. they're not moving away. christian, where i grew up, we had earthquakes, new york has had sandy. there are problems everywhere with mother nature. does this make sense to talk about paying to relocate? >> yeah. i grew up in "hurricane central" in the jersey shore and toby comes from a spirit of a good place. it's not practical. every place has something. the nature of natural disasters are, they're unpredictable. we don't know when or how they're going to strike. just as easily as something hits

this area in oklahoma, the plains is a big section of the country. tornadoes are there all the time. the only response we really have is to be compassionate when something like this happens and to recognize that it's going to come at great cost. but that's something that we all pull together to make sure that people can rebuild and go on with their lives. >> gary b, relocate in instead of rebuild? what do you think? >> i think it's actually up to the people. look, i come at this from a perspective of personal responsibility. no matter where you live as others have pointed out already, whether it's california with the forest fires there or you live in florida with the hurricanes or long island with what they just had with the flooding, there's always going to be some danger. people can choose to live there or not live there. if they choose to live there, hopefully they'll do the right thing by building storm cellars or taking out appropriate insurance. it shouldn't fall back then on the government to say it's safe to live here, it's not safe to live here.

it's up to the people. maybe that community to decide if it's safe or not. >> jonas, the government regulates a lot of things. why not this? >> well, for one, i don't think a government relocation program would work any better than the criticisms about the government running anything. however, people have a right to live where they want but we don't have a right to keep paying for it over and over again. there's subtle differences here. california is profitable to america. they pay excess taxes into system like new york and new jersey do. oklahoma, they don't pay in as much as they get back in federal money. so to repeatedly be hit by areas three times in a decade and have fema right checks over and over with no tax penalty. i think what should happen an area that's repeatedly, whether earthquakes or hurricanes in florida, they have to pay this back into fema after a while and let that be the decision. fema tax -- we've been hit four or five times, however many times in the last few decades

and let the free market decide if they still want to live there or somewhere cheaper. you can't keep dragging on the federal government because you want to live in a place that is not economically feasible for everybody to live in, frankly. >> toby, final word? >> yeah. you know, i group up on the beach and had to build berms to keep water from coming in our houses. unfortunately, in hurricanes, you can do something but you can't do very much here. at some point these families, these lives at stake, i think, are too costly. >> all right. thanks, guys. of course, our thoughts and prayers are with all of the victims of the tornadoes. as americans hit the road this holiday weekend, millions getting smacked with higher gas prices. but is the key to relief right under our nose? we went out and asked people a simple question: how old is the oldest person you've known? we gave people a sticker and had them show us. we learned a lot of us have known someone

who's lived well into their 90s. and that's a great thing. but even though we're living longer, one thing that hasn't changed much is the official retirement age. ♪ the question is how do you make sure you have the money you need to enjoy all of these years. ♪

coming up, the house passing a

new bill that could be the key to lowering your gas bill by next memorial day. the fast food workers demanding

you might hear this when driving up to fill up this holiday weekend. pump prices jumping 13 cents over the past month and worries about high gas bills. one of the reasons that the house just green lighted the keystone pipeline. john layfield says that's not all it will help. what else? >> no. it's going to help america get off of foreign oil. especially oil outside of north america. i said it over a year ago on fox. that the minute the election was over, this was going to be approved. that's exactly what's happening. this is only about 200 miles over the -- you have 25,000 miles of pipeline. it's a stupid argument, a political argument. this creates american jobs. we control the oil now instead of it going to asia. it will lower oil prices

worldwide over time. >> christian, you see gas prices coming down with this? >> oh, goodness gracious no. even the owners and operators of the pipeline project acknowledge that the jobs created are only temporary jobs. while that's a nice boost, it's not a long-term boost. also, in terms of gas prices, this oil is destined for export to the global market, which is going to determine gas prices. this is going to be a drop in the bucket. it's not going to influence the global oil supply to a degree enough to lower gas prices at the pump. this is not a substitute for real energy policy, john. >> gary b., it does increase supply, doesn't it? >> you're right. >> exactly, brenda. i think kind of the anti-pipeline people are missing the point. this is just one small step. i mean, from this pipeline hopefully we'll have other pipelines. hopefully then we'll start to drill in anwar and open up all the resources that we have -- brenda, we did great things in a

small period of time. we landed a man on the moon in eight years, developed the atomic bomb in four years. we built the suez canal. if the president just said, this pipeline and a million other things are going to go in to making gasoline a dollar a gallon and we'll be there within eight years, i bet we could do it. you know what, this is symptomatic of the fact that we have an energy policy with one hand tied behind our back. >> jonas? >> those are all government successes. i'm for the jobs and also for the environment. the solution is more new pipelines. we have a lot of leaks from these pipelines and april lot of environmental damage. the answer is the government should say all the old pipelines after a certain amount of years should be refired and you have to build ones and we'll have jobs for years and years and less leaking and all this oil everywhe everywhere. we want to retire the old leaky ones. pro any new pipeline to help the environment and jobs. although that would raise gas prices with an ex fra cost.

>> toby, you think this would kick off lots of other pipelines and lower gas prices, huh? >> i hate to say, it would kick off, of course. john is right. it's not this pipeline per se. but it's another 100 pipelines. you have to understand that we can't put it on railroad cars. it has to go in pipelines, number one. number two, 21st century pipelines and jonas' point are fantastically better and safer and yes, we should replace old ones that don't meet the code. this is literally, forget about the jobs building pipelines. the energy industry would another million and a half jobs. that would have a trickle effect, service jobs of another 3 million jobs. we would raise the tax revenue from this at a point where we could pay off our deficit over time. there's no downside done intelligently here. >> last word. thanks, guys and special thanks to christian for joining us. >> thank you. fast food workers hungry to unionize. but are we all going to get

grilled because of it? why are twice as many people choosing verizon over any other carrier? many choose us because we have the largest 4glte network. others, because of our reputation for reliability. or maybe it's because we've received jd power and associates' customer service award 4x in a row. in the end, there are countless reasons. but one choi.

predictions. toby, you're up. >> the fast food workers have been going to shareholder meetings at wendy's and mcdonald's. if they're successful, prices will go up, yes. it's not going to stop mcdonald's. it's a worldwide company. i like the stock up 20%. >> i like mcdonald's not at this price for the stock. >> jonas? >> even though it caused a bridge collapse in washington. it gives the politicians excuses to spend money on infrastructure spider global infrastructure etf of 20%. tobin? >> i don't like that etf. >> procter & gamble brought back an old ceo to run things. stock already reacted positively on friday. i think it has nor -- >> jonas, bull or bear? >> i think it's safe stocks are

too expensive. >> john? >> j-lo is partnering with verizon to hit the latino market. i like verizon, i love j-lo. >> gary b., bull or bear? >> i like them both. but verizon at a lower price. >> neil is up next. well, whoever said that nothing is certain in life but death and taxes apparently forgot one little thin. a job, government. it takes a lot to get fired. when you are forced to step down, it takes a lot for you to lose your pay. welcome everybody. i'm neil cavuto. maybe the first tipoff should have been the s.e.c. workers caught downloading porn. most still kept their jobs. not that there's anything wrong with that. like the official at this center of this irs storm, refusing to answer questions and getting put on paid leave. and a key state department player in the benghazi mess getting a white house nomination for a promotion. we're not saying all government