you have a chance to hear around me and his reaction to this. what is interesting is the president healthcare reform was modeled on them to murder -- on then governor romney's reform. >> that's why the new healthcare is just fine. you talk about the need for people to be covered for pre-existing conditions and the healthcare, the need to help subsidize people to afford it. so to be consistent, he really ought to say that we've had the message. it was the way to go. it is now in place for the united states. if you elect me, i will do more good things as i did in massachusetts. that wasn't his conclusion. >> but the reason he opposes, he says it was good on a state level. he did talk about how he wants to support states to be able to provide healthcare for people. the reason he is explaining his

rationalization for opposing president obama is that it is on a national or federal level. >> basically, there is something wrong with it. he has to say, good for massachusetts, good for the states, bad nationally. of course, what the act does is the act creates -- what congress saying, if states want to participate, if they want to help their own citizens meet this new tax mandate, then they can get money from the federal government. it really will be up to the states to do this, because congress really did go a long, long way to do what governor romney actually did in massachusetts, which was to leave its state-by-state. the exchanges that will be created in those states that chose to participate are going to be modeled in different places. california is not going to look like arizona. it just will be different. >> of course, we are summarizing. as you pointed out, there are more than 100 pages in the supreme

court ruling. what do you expect to also be picked out of the court ruling that we haven't touched on? >> well, i guess for the long- term, we think about this, what am i going to do in the fall if i take up the opinion? it's very interesting material about the clause, about the reach of the commerce clause. what it shows is that on the right on the supreme court, they want to rethink opinions that go back to the new deal. justice thomas was exposed about that. justice kennedy was explicit about that. chief justice roberts didn't go as far as the other four, but it is clear they are ready to re- think that. a book issued by the two rethink this. that something going forward that could have major ramifications for congressional power in all kinds of other areas. >> just to jump in, essentially, what does that mean? some people know about the new deal. in simple terms, what would

that mean? >> specifically, it is commerce power. to what degree can congress go ahead and regulate all sorts of aspects of our lives from washington as opposed to regulating state-by-state? that's the big difference. we have had a long period where congressional power has grown and grown and grown. that is what some people are upset about, because that's the core of the tea party argument. congressional power is too strong. if the hints in these opinions suggest a major shift in congressional power, that potentially could go to redress the balance between state power and federal power. that's what's so important about it. and it could be across a lot of different areas. >> double checks and balances could be readjusted. i just want to let people know. we are looking live outside the supreme court. after the ruling this morning, republican senator mitch mcconnell had this to say.

let's listen to his comment and get your reaction. >> americans want us to start over. today's decision does nothing to change that. the courts ruling that doesn't mark the end of the debate. it marks a fresh start on the road to repeal. >> so is this -- the republicans are saying that they see this as a mandate for them to be able to start the process to change or get rid of the president here. >> i agree with senator mcconnell. there is nothing in the supreme court opinion that restricts congress ability to change what it did, to repeal it, to make modifications, to improve it the way governor ron meet suggested. there is nothing about what the supreme court said that the restricts that. i think he went out of the way to remind everybody that they were not assessing the wisdom of the

legislation. they were simply acting as the umpire to assess the constitutionality. but there is a wide range of things that could be done to change, improve, repeal of portable healthcare. that's the debate that we will have in the next few months. we'll see their small change or great change. >> senate majority leader harry reid spoke this morning in favor of the supreme court ruling. senate passing the affordable care at was the greatest single step. affordable, quality healthcare for every person in america. regardless of where they live and how much money they made. >> the democrats seem optimistic that this will stand. from what we are hearing, this is still up in the air. >> well, it is up in the air in

the sense that it is within the power of congress to change it. but look at where congress is now. we have a house controlled by the republicans, the senate controlled by the democrats, and the president controlled by the democrats. so the house can do whatever it likes. it may be tomorrow that it will pass a bill, and then senator reid will take it and it will never see the light of day. nothing will happen. if by some miracle something happens in the senate, then president obama will take out a pen and veto it. nothing is going to change until january 20th. that will totally depend on the outcome across the country of all of the elections. will the house changed hands? will the presidency change hands? nothing will change until then. of all the things we are talking about today, i can be quite sure of that. >> a quick question from the mind of a legal scholar. what are the insurance companies

thinking this morning after that ruling? in the insurance companies are thrilled. the health insurance companies are thrilled. why did they support this? they supported it because the deal was they got the potential for 40 plus million new policyholders. the federal government is going to subsidize a lot of those people. so the health insurance companies are totally healthy. they may say other things for politics, but the reality is they should be thrilled with this because the deal that they made is going to go forward. they started to make changes, started to plan for this going forward. in fact, you heard a few weeks ago that they were not going to make changes, even if this had been knocked out. for example, for children up to age 26. they weren't going to change that because it is now built in. they built the same. they are staying on course. they will be happy. now, other parts of the healthcare economy, things might change here and there. earlier we were looking at the stock returns. some companies it may go down because they won't make quite

as much money, but with respect to the health insurance company, this is a happy day for them. >> how does this compare to other countries that have more -- one would call more universal healthcare? >> well, we have built a very difficult -- the easy way would be to eliminate the restriction that you are to be 65. just say you are entitled from birth. we would have to pay for it. we would pay for it straight up of taxes. what the obama administration was trying to do was take a private industry approach, which is what governor romney did in massachusetts. he started with the heritage foundation idea, which was this could be done on the private side. to get the private insurance companies in the game, that is what leads to the competitions. what other countries have done,

national health insurance is paid for by taxes. other countries have different variations, but for the most part they just include it in your taxes and then everybody is covered. we have single payer. you don't have the complications of dozens of insurance companies. you don't have the inefficiencies created. you don't have profit making or advertising. you take all that out of it and deliver healthcare at a much cheaper cost than we have. we've gone with a consultative system, but today we know it's a constitutional system. >> we get to go back to washington outside the u.s. supreme court. allison burns is there in the middle of the excitement of it all. what is the feeling out there right now, alison? >> reporter: dave, the speech is on the steps of the core building are continuing. as you've been discussing, they decided to uphold most of the block. a fight about it most from the

supreme court across the street to the united states capitol building. within an hour of the ruling this morning, house republicans said they were going to schedule a vote for the week after the fourth of july break to repeal the health reform law. of course, democrats in the white house are going to be in the way. there was a loud reaction closer to the court on the steps. supporters of the law are overjoyed. chief justice john roberts ended up being the decider this morning. he joined with four of the more liberal justices to uphold a mandate that every american get health insurance or pay a penalty. he called that penalty attacks. critics of the law are serious. here is what -- >> that was allison burns outside the u.s. supreme court. we have a tactical problem. as she was getting into the meat of the description of what she was

saying. you heard some of what allison said. what are some of your thoughts? >> well, again, it's going to come back to the politics of it. we are going to hear a lot of things over the next little while about whether this was good or bad. part of the question is, i think people don't understand it well enough. i really think the obama administration really is to pull up its socks and do a good job of explaining all the good things that are going to come from this bill. i think they just assume that people understood it. it's really important to be able to understand it. i heard someone making a discussion the other day about saying the difference between medicare, which we were talking about before, is that everybody kind of understands medicare or you know somebody who understands -- who has benefited from medicare. everybody has got a grandmother. everybody has an odd has benefited. it would have been so much simpler to have simply ended the age restriction on medicare and to have gone to universal health care and not gone to this very

complicated system. as you know, you have to explain something complicated in a very simple way. this is extremely consultative. it is hard to get across why we've made all the choices and why overall it is a pretty good compromise. >> how would you say history will judge the supreme court in his ruling clique's. >> well, on this ruling i think if we focus on chief justice roberts, i think this really is going to be one of his signature opinions. this is one of the most important decisions in decades. certainly, it is up there with citizens united, bush versus gore, and all the other great opinions. chief justice roberts, i think quite clearly, separated out his own personal beliefs. he separated out his personal beliefs from his job as a justice to create clear lines, create a majority so that we can go forward. i do think he deserves a lot of credit for the opinion he wrote today. >> a lot of people were expecting that justice anthony kennedy was going to be the swing vote.

there was even a cover article explaining how he could be the one person that could go either way. are you surprised that it was the chief justice? >> the chief justice is also one that people thought. i think the guess was that if the chief justice went with upholding the affordable healthcare that it would be as the six vote, not as the fifth vote. justice kennedy would have barred a jump and then chief justice roberts would go along as well. that's not quite a bit happen, but it shows you i think very much chief justice roberts taking that role in the sense of being the chief and really trying to play that role very, very seriously. it's not accident that he wrote the opinion. he's something special when he does that. the lead comparing opinion who is the senior justice on the left. again, it shows the gravity of the opinions. so 20 years from now or so when we are assessing what chief

justice roberts has done, this will be front and center. >> all right. fascinating. >> u.s. senator barbara boxer, and this ruling a victory. she says the decision is great news for the millions of californians who have already seen the benefits of this law, including the 6 million who now have access to free preventative health services. 355,000 young adults who now have coverage on their parents health plans, those 26 years old and younger, and 320,000 seniors who have received help in paying for their prescriptive drugs. she also says, we will continue to fight republican efforts to repeal these important health benefits. >> just a short time ago we were all sitting here listening to matt romney as he responded to what the supreme court said. let's listen to some of the criticisms he made. >> you might imagine i disagree with the supreme court decision, and i agree with the dissent. what the court did not do at its last day in session i will do

on my first day if elected president of the united states. what the court did today it was say that obama care does not violate the constitution. what they did not do was say that obamacare is good law or good policy. obamacare is a job killer. businesses across the country have been asked what the impact is of obamacare. three quarters of those surveyed by the chamber of commerce said that obamacare makes it less likely for them to hire people. >> as we've been telling you, president obama is due to speak. we understand he's walking out as we speak. understand he should be speaking any moment. we have the president? >> earlier today the supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the affordable care act. the name of the healthcare reform the past two years ago. in doing so, they have reaffirmed the fundamental principle that

here in america in the wealthiest nation on earth, no illness or accident should lead to any family's financial ruin. i know there will be a lot of discussion today about the politics of all of this, about who won and who lost. that's how these tend to be viewed in washington. that discussion completely misses the point. whatever the politics, today's decision was a victory for people all over this country whose lives will be more secure because of this law and the supreme court decision to uphold it. because this law has a direct impact on so many americans, i want to take this opportunity to talk about exactly what it means for you. first, if you are one of the more than 250 million americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance. this law will only make it more secure and more affordable. insurance companies can no

longer impose lifetime limits on the amount of care you receive. they can no longer discriminate against children with pre- existing conditions. they can no longer drop your coverage if you get sick. they can no longer jack up your premiums without reason. they are required to provide free preventative care like checkups and mammograms, a provision that has already helped 54 million americans with private insurance. by this august, nearly 13 million of you will receive a rebate from your insurance company because it spent too much on things like administrative costs and ceo bonuses and not enough on your healthcare. there is more. because of the affordable care act, young adults under the age of 26 are able to stay on their parents health care plans, a provision that has already helped 6 million young americans. because of the affordable care act, seniors receive a discount on their prescription drugs, a discount that has already saved more than 5 million seniors on medicare

about $600 each. all of this is happening because of the affordable care act. these provisions provide commonsense protections for middle-class families and they enjoyed broad popular support. thanks to today's decision, all of these benefits and protections will continue for americans who already have health insurance. now, if you're one of the 30 million americans who don't get have health insurance, starting in 2014 this law will offer you an array of quality, affordable private health insurance plans to choose from. each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options. if states can come up with better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that too. i've asked congress to help speed up that process and gives states this flexibility in here one. once states set up these health insurance marketplaces, known as exchanges, insurance companies

will no longer be able to discriminate against any american with a pre-existing health condition. they won't be able to charge them or just because you are a woman. they won't be able to build you into bankruptcy. if you are sick, you will finally have the same chance to get quality, affordable health care as everyone else. if you can afford the premiums, you will receive a credit that helps pay for it. today the supreme court also upheld the principle that people can afford health insurance should take the responsibility to buy health insurance. this is important for two reasons. first, when uninsured people who can afford coverage get sick and show up at the emergency room for care, the rest of us end up paying for their care in the form of higher premiums. second, it is you ask insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions but don't require people who can afford it to buy their own insurance, some folks might wait until they are said to buy the care they need, which would also drive up everybody else's

premiums. that's why it existed. we alternately included a provision in the affordable care act that people who can afford to buy health insurance should take the responsibility to do so. still, i know the debate over this law has been business. i respect the concerns that millions of americans have shared -- have shared. well, it should be pretty clear by now that i didn't do this because it was good politics. i did it because i believed it was good for the country. i did it because i believed it was good for the american people. you know, there is a framed letter that hangs in my office right now. it was sent to me during the healthcare debate. by a woman named natoma can feel. for years and years, she did

everything right. she bought health insurance, paid her premiums on time. 18 years ago she was diagnosed with cancer. even though she had been cancer free for more than a decade, her insurance company kept jacking up a rates year after year. despite her desire to keep your coverage, despite her fears that she would get sick again, she had to surrender her health insurance and was forced to hang her fortunes on chance. i carried natoma's story with me everyday of the fight to pass this law. it reminded me of all of the americans all across the country who have had to worry not only about getting sick but about the cost of getting well. natoma is well today. because of this law, there are other americans, other sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers who will not have to hang their fortunes on chance. these are the americans for whom we passed this law.

the highest court in the land has now spoken. we will continue to implement this law. we will work together to improve on it where we can. but what we won't do, what the country can't afford to do, is refight the political battles of two years ago or go back to the way things were. with today's announcement, it's time for us to move forward, to implement and where necessary improve on this law. now is the time to keep our focus on the most urgent challenge of our time, putting people back to work, paying down our debt, and building an economy where people can have confidence that if they work hard they can get ahead. but today i am as confident as ever that when we look back five years from now or 10 years from now or 20 years from now, we will be better off because we have the courage to pass this law and keep moving forward. thank you. god bless you, and god bless

america. >> you've been listening live to president obama speaking at the white house responding to the supreme court decision on healthcare reform. he said this is a victory for people all over this country. what's your reaction? >> well, i think he made an excellent speech. he did what i think they really need to do all the time, which is to explain why the act is good now, why the act is going to be good in the future, and what the ramifications would've been had this been knocked out. let's not forget there were four votes today make that speech

over and over and over again because i think he did a great job of explaining what is good now, what's good in the future, and then bringing it home by talking about that individual about what it meant for that particular person. that's the way you convey these things as a president. that is how -- >> we also need to point out, there is a lot of opposition to it as well. this is going to be a very serious fight for a long, long time. >> is a beautiful day. where do we want to go as a country? i cannot imagine anything more important than for governor romney and for president obama to talk about this in meaningful, serious ways days after days until the beginning of november. there's hardly anything to report. >> is something we will focus on. we certainly appreciate your comments and your time this morning. professor david levine. thank you so much. you can always go to ktvu.com for more information on the sprinkler healthcare ruling.

just go to the healthcare cap on the front page. >> we have enjoyed this. >> this was a special extended edition. we thank you for joining us. it has been quite interesting. >> it has. thank you for trusting ktvu. much more coming up on channel 2 news at noon. have a great day. we now resume our regular programming already in progress. the british rgin islands. love how the change is so instantaneous. and then he turns a translucent lavender lavender. >> instantly and they transform. >> if we weren't following along we would not have been able to find him. >> i love that he just came out to play. there is someone that is checking him out. >> it is crazy that i'm craving

calamari. >> there is a new superhero c coming to save the world, and he is going to fly, fly, fly. >> it's attention, you get to be the center of attention. >> there is another video im >> you have to jump, land, and roll right away. >> and he follows instructions well. >> yeah, he took is very seriously. >> it does help that his dad is a former boxer and a boxing trainer. and superheros do face their nemesis sometimes.

in russia, people are not afraid of heights, heights are afraid of people. >> whose theory is that? >> this guy has been clieping all kinds of high places in russia. he has been climbing this place i can't pronounce. >> i was waiting to say that. >> the shukaskia tower. >> he was born in seattle, lives in russia now, and has no problem trailing this giant tower. i can officially tell you he is not spiderman, because look who he spots on the way up -- >> these are weird videos.

i feel like now people in russia are making videos just to freak us out. >> why would that freak you out? oh, you are afraid of heights. >> they don't have any emergency rope. >> i'm sure they make emergency rope there. and they just go without because they're russians. >> that's our show, thanks for spending time with us, we'll see you next time for more "right this minute." ♪