good morning from new york. i'm chris hayes. mitt romney is expected to pull in as much as $3 million from a series of fund-raisers in the hamptons today, including a $50,000 per person event at the estate of conservative billionaire david koch. first sitting member of congress to enter into a same-sex marriage yesterday. a ceremony officiated by daval

patrick. congratulations to them both. life in the desister era. they lived in a house in colorado springs for the last 24 years. the wildfires there are expected to be fully contained today after burning for more than four weeks. when the waldo canyon wildfire exploded out by his house, they evacuated. the fire reduced their home to a foundation of ash. here's what he said about it in a video produced by climatedesk.com. >> hard not to think about the 23 years lost in that house. it bothers me when people say this is junk science. i'm convinced this planet is warming and that this is part of the result of that. the west is a tinder box.

it's so early in the season i'm terrified for everybody in the west. if this doesn't tell us that now is the time for the debate, i guess nothing will. >> weather is terrifying and incomprehensible. even today with all of our progress and technology and all the things on the earth we can bend to our industrial will a single storm can knock out power for more than 3 million people, as it did last week in d.c. and the surrounding states. the last century of modern life snuffed out in an instant. storms and wildfires come and go and summer heat waves come and go and our atmosphere does all kind of freaky things. but if you take a step back and survey the wreckage of the bizarre, extreme weather just this year, nearly impossible to avoid the conclusion that the planet is screaming out an obvious message.

climate change is here, the wolf is at the door. hit 95 in new york city and 105 in washington, d.c. 107 degrees, 107 degrees in st. louis. at least 60 people have died due to this heat wave and this year alone we had a staggering record highs. look at this map. these are the places that reported record monthly highs in march and these are inrecord monthly highs for may and for june and these are the monthly records set for july in just the past seven days. and the reason we didn't run through a maps of days because all of those maps look the same, like this. oh, yes, you will hear people say, can we really say that climate change is causing the disastrous weather we're seeing? it's a fair question. my friend david roberts points out that it's entirely the wrong question. the broad question is the

increase in carbon in the atmosphere and the carbon change it's producing making more extreme weather more common. the to answer to that is yes. uses a good anology to describe the relationship between climate change and the increase in extreme weather. >> imagine a baseball player who has been taking steroids. this baseball player steps to the plate and hits a home run and, yes, the question, was that home run due to the steroids? if you look at the number of home runs he hits over a season when he's taking steroids and compare that to a previous season he wasn't taking steroids only then you can figure him he is only able to hit a home run and the chances of him hitting a home run are greater. >> oft aen funded by the fossil fuel industry that has to sew doubt among americans that our carbon emissions are warming the planet.

reminiscent to discredit the robust and sustained medical evidence that smoking causes cancers and kills tens of thousands of people every year. eventually enough people sat in hospitals with dying relatives to realize the truth. that's where we are right now. the question is, will we see it? one of the problems is that climate is abstract and weather is tangible. most of us don't know climatologists but we do know weathermen. the conduit for which we get the information about our weather. experts we recognize and see them in the street and we know their names and trust them. as "new york times" documented many are robust that the increased carbon emissions are warming the planet. one of the co-founders of the weather channel denounced global warming a as a scam. in a survey for climate change communication conducted in 2010, of the 571 tv meteorologists they surveyed only 27% agreed

not just that climate change was unproven but a vast conspiracy. occasionally you see meteorologists go on tv and make their views on this known. which is why it was a breath of fresh air to see wrc chief meteorologist doug kaemerer say this on the air last friday. >> you showed the temperature for the last couple days. all in the 90s. are we at an unusual pattern and this is what we can expect of the summer or does it mean anything at all like that? >> i don't think it means anything, jim. one thing this does say, i was on the radio talking with some of the folks from wmzq and they said, doug, is this global warming? if we didn't have global warming, we wouldn't see this. i think this is because we would have seen 101 and 102, but not 104. we have set all-time records all across a portion of the country.

>> he is no more an authority on climatology than any other meteorology. he is expressing a view. and it was not a political statement. but the industry of denial i just mentioned and the conservative media that amplifies its message michelle malkin attacked him in an a column and when a producer requested that video, wrc, which is an nbc owned and operated station declined to share it and declined to comment when we asked why. climate change is here. but for us to have even a shot of future heat wave victims and the reality of drought stricken farmers and on and on we have to wake up to the peril that we already face. for that, we will need many more everyday people to state the obvious, again and again, until it sinks in. my guests today to tell us how

we make that happen, right after this. i ever think i would have heart disease. she just didn't fit the profile of a heart event victim. she's healthy, she eats properly. i was pushing my two kids in a stroller when i had my heart event. i've been on a bayer aspirin regimen ever since. [ male announcer ] aspirin is not appropriate for everyone. so be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. i know if i take my bayer aspirin i have a better chance of living a healthy life. [ male announcer ] learn how to protect your heart at i am proheart on facebook.

[ mmid gradencer ] learn how to protect your heart dark roast forest fresh full tank brain freeze cake donettes rolling hot dogs bag of ice anti-freeze wash and dry diesel self-serve fix a flat jumper cables 5% cashback signup for 5% cashback at gas stations through september. it pays to discover.

we have esta arma, sunny mann, senior fellow studies and the brooking institution, which sounds quite agust, joan walsh, also author of the upcoming book, which i am really looking forward to "what's the matter with white people" she is also salon.com's editor at a large and author of "heat wave."

it's great to have you all at the table. we're talking about weather and climate and the kind of weather that we've been seeing, not just in the last week where we had this heat wave. heat waves happen, they happen under all sorts of conditions, but, to me, one of the reasons i wanted to have you come in, eric, there's two tracks that i think we have to start thinking about what the next few decades of american life are going to look like, which is, "a" working on one side to reduce our carbon emissionss drastically and our global carbon emissions and the other is planning for disaster because we're going to have a lot more of those and we've seen in your book, "chronicle of the heat wave in chicago in the 1890s." >> little more than 700. >> the hammer of disaster does not fall evenly on different

populations. >> disasters discriminate and heat waves do. they pinpoint certain people and certain places. we know with a high level of certainty who is going to be affected and how to allocate resources. we just don't do it very well and we don't invest much in preparedness. >> what do we know about how this goes down? >> well, i call my book a social autopsy because, in fact, the social stuff mediates the impact of weather. the neighborhoods and cities that are most affected are not just poor, but they tend to be depleted urban areas and places that lack viable public spaces and that draw people out of their homes and into contact with each other. the people who are most vulnerable are older. they tend to be icelets, more male than female. that is very interesting to me. i wrote a book about "the rise of living alone" and women are more likely to live alone but less likely to be isolated.

far more men die during heat waves than women. there is a gender component to it. you also see real concentrations in big cities because of the urban heat isle that traps the heat. >> the highs so off the charts that are urban heat islands. >> another thing about the heat island, you can get out of the danger of a heat wave by turning on the air conditioner, but a lot of people in cities don't have air conditioning and because cities don't only attract the heat, but trap it. they don't get the evening, so they can stay above 80 degrees at night and that could be a death sentence. >> one of the things that i think is interesting and important when we're thinking about how we're going to change the social attitudes of the country about this and cope with the coming disaster era and mitigate climate change is just the fact that when, you know, it was snowing in washington and

there was heavy snow like you saw on fox news. how gore is wrong. there is a tendency to not want to commit the same logical error for people who do, this is to me, as he said in the video, if you can't talk about it now, this is what our present and future look like. then, what can we do? >> we did have a problem that it was described exclusively in terms of global warming so you could be mocked and laughed at when you had snow storms and the drudge report which is champion. >> every cover of the drudge report for -- >> right. i'm also struck, too, by the way you showed michelle malkin, the right wing has two modes, they have outrage about certain things, if you can say the wrong thing, i won't say anyone who has done that recently. so, there's outrage that comes at you and you should be taken out of the public square and then they have mockery. that's what they've really done

with climate change. to go back to what i was saying, we didn't call it climate change fast enough because it isn't just warming. it's fires, it's floods, it's hurricanes, it can be extreme cold and it's these weather extremes, but it is also warming, so, this is really happening. >> and, thomas, i mean, what we've seen and this is what you chronicle in your book, is just the way in which a certain sector of american politics has really radicalized in regular ways and grown more extreme and more unified around an agenda that is extreme and a set of principles and brooks to not brook any place for the fact at hand. >> that's exactly right, yet, we're not supposed to say that. that is all of the norms in the reporting world and in the punditing world are to say that there are two sides. and surely, those who criticized

the possibility of climate change have to have their air time, too. so, what you have is a sort of idiology zelistry taking over a party that in the past and not so distant past was the center of constructive thinking on matters pertaining to the environment and we could then carry it on to fiscal policy and many a other matters. >> yeah. esther. >> i have two issues with this. i was thinking about the point that you made in terms of the right and radicalism and then i always think, if the right has that radicalism and that outrage and that mockery, what do we have as a progressive to mitigate against that? >> data. i showed you maps. >> exactly. and the maps don't make it work. >> i know. >> we like them. >> so, this is my thing that i think that the question of

framing. how do you make this issue land on the ground and in the lives of people in a way that doesn't make it feel like, frankly, it is a group of white people talking about something that is disconnected from the rest of the world. my family is west african. for me, global warming and global justice -- >> let's also be clear, the same point that eric made about what communities are going to have it the worse in the u.s. >> do those communities feel that in that way? does it connect to them in that way because i think part of the challenge is, part of the challenge is the political paralysis is the success of the right. and the left, i think, has been political cowards. because if you're going to accept that we are in this moment of disaster, then how are you going to frame it so you're not sitting consistently. if all you have and all you're going to argue we're sitting in this politicalized radicalized

space, we're condemned to sit here for a very long time. >> see a moment like this to have this very conversation, the bubble does burst from time to time. there is a bubble in washington, d.c., whether you're a republican or a democrat this week, you probably didn't have power. you're probably very hot and you're probably concerned about that. we tend to have a really silly way with dealing with the risk of crisis and disaster in this country. we haven't invested properly with infrastructure and the grid goes down. shouldn't that be an issue that transcends party lines? don't we all have an interest in infrastructure? >> that seems to me like a starting point. republican or democrat, you want air conditioning in the summer. you don't want storms to knock out your power for a week. let's talk about that and edge our way to the maps that we're showing up. i want to bring in an amazing

prophetic voice on this issue right after this break. a paintm "that looks hard" to "that didn't take long". let's break out behr ultra... ...the number one selling paint and primer in one, now with stain blocker. each coat works three times harder, priming, covering, and blocking stains. let's go where no paint has gone before, and end up some place beautiful. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. behr ultra. now with advanced stain blocking, only at the home depot, and only $31.98 a gallon.

with two times the points onake lunch dining in restaurants,ch? you may find yourself asking why not, a lot. chase sapphire preferred. there's more to enjoy.

>> is america prepared for climate change and its effects going into the future? >> we are seeing the change in weather patterns and we're seeing what already has been a very difficult summer. >> is it climate change? >> you have to look at climate change over a period of years, not just one summer. you can always have one abnormal summer but when you see one after another after another, then you can see, yeah, there's a pattern here. >> that's janet napolitano talking about the wildfires in the context of climate change. a reporter asking her that question. i want to bring in bill author of the book "eaarth." founder of 350.org. good morning, bill, great to have you. >> very good to be with you, chris. >> i've been following you on twitter and your writing. you have been the person most

for forthrightly telling us the case that the weather is telling us something. i want you to start out by defending that as a legitimate, as essentially legitimate deduction and not as propaganda. why is it different than the drudge report showing, you know, snow storms in washington, d.c.? >> look, you know, i wrote the first book for a general audience about global warming 25 years ago now and, so, i've gotten to follow this for a long time and i know the science pretty well. what's amazing about what's happening now is that it's exactly what the climatologies have been telling us have happened and exactly what's been happening with more and more regularity in more and more places around the world. 350.org works in every country on the planet except north korea. we have a good sense all the time of what's happening and it's the same kind of thing place after place. the real tell, though, here is that, you know, even the people who used to fund this kind of

climate are giving up on it. the ceo of exon gave a speech last week in which he said, yep, you're right, global warming's real. he went on to say, it's an engineering problem with engineering solutions and we'll just move our crop production areas to some place not so hot, which is ludicrous. you know, that's the tell. anybody that pays any attention to this knows that physics and chemistry are carrying the day and, you know, as powerful as the right wing talk machine is, it's not as powerful as fiphysi and chemistry. >> james a hanson who is a sort of pioneer in this field. we have this amazing testimony that he gave. this is him testifying to senate national committee. in 1988, he says, we notice a clear tendency in our model for greater than average warming in the southeast and united states.

greenhouse effect if our model is approximately correct such situations may be more common in the next 10 to 15 years. so, there is this match now. you can go back and actually look at the record. how do you connect -- >> that's right. >> how do you connect, bill, this is the conversation we're having here. first of all, facing up to the fact that this is what your book is about. even if we get our butts in gear to reduce our carbon emissions, we'll have a different-looking earth and different climate and different weather and how do you connect that to what is happening now for people to make that tangible. that's the frustration we all have thin this conversation, making it tangible. >> two models here. adapt to that which you can't prevent. you have to have cooling centers in big cities now because we're going to have heat waves and it's impossible to prevent that.

mantra 2, prevent that to which you can't adapt. everything that we're seeing around us now is the result of a planet that's warmed about one degree. but the same climatologists who told us that would happen say unless we get off coal and gas and oil very, very quickly that one degree will be four or five degrees before the century is out and most of it locked in very, very soon. we need, above all else, to be working, working desperately to turn off coal and gas and oil and move to renewable energy. it's not impossible thing to do. technologically we know how to do it. last month there was a day in which germany generated more than half of its energy to solar panels from within its borders. that shows me that we can do this technologically. what we lack is political will. that's why we build movements like 350.org. you know, last year we managed to pull off the biggest civil

disobedience action in 30 years in this country, at least temporarily, slow down construction of these pipelines to the vast tarzans of canada. we're not strong enough yet, but we're getting stronger and if we can build that movement, there's some chance of taking on not exactly the republican right-wing talking machine, more getting at the people behind them. the wizards behind the curtain who are the guys who run the fossil fuel industry. >> bill, you say political will, but, of course, the problem is centered mainly in the republican party. when you wrote your first book and a bit before that, the republican party had prominent conservationist that would speak out against the kind of rhetoric that is coming from the extreme right wing, but now the party establishment has really embraced those extreme views. what's the way of returning some

sensible republican thinking and talking and opinion leadership to american politics. >> so, two quick answers here. one, the republican leadership will follow the day that the fossil fuel industry, that the koch brothers and others feel the heat and that's where we need to turn most of the heat. second, we can figure how to turn some of that political heat on. one of the things we're doing at 350.org this summer is a big campaign against the fossil fuel subsidies that the federal government pays out. it turns out that 80% of americans, republican and democrat and independent across the board think it's a poor idea to be giving federal money to the biggest, richest industry on the planet. even without climate change, it's obnoxious that we're paying them a performance bonus to wreck the planet. that is a campaign that can

begin to do some of this damage that we need to do. >> bill, i want to talk about this divide between meteorologists and climatologists, too. particularly as we watch this weather disaster before us. nd p? fight both fast with new tums freshers! concentrated relief that goes to work in seconds and freshens breath. new tums freshers. ♪ tum...tum...tum...tum... tums! ♪ [ male announcer ] fast relief, fresh breath, all in a pocket sized pack. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] what's the point of an epa estimated 42 miles per gallon if the miles aren't interesting? the lexus ct hybrid. this is the pursuit of perfection.

the lexus ct hybrid. it's time to live wider awake. only the beautyrest recharge sleep system combines the comfort of aircool memory foam

layered on top of beautyrest pocketed coils to promote proper sleeping posture all night long. the revolutionary recharge sleep system... from beautyrest. it's you, fully charged. at the top, bill with us. at the top, bill, i was talking about this climatology, meteorologist divide in terms of almost as a sociological divide. this distrust that they have from climatologists that i've seen from some of the reporting. this is some data we have on this that surveyed people's beliefs in human cause of global warming and american comes in around 46% believe that humans are causing global warming and

meteorologists come in at 19% which seems to me, really, a big, big, big part of the problem because that's where people are getting their day-to-day information about what's going on with their atmosphere. >> there's actually been some really good work going on recently. there's a group called forecast the facts that has been working with weatherman to try to get them to deal forthrightly. i think the biggest problem is the one that you alluded to in your opening with your local station in washington who would not give you the footage of the weather forecast. the local stations are terrified of the right-wing pressure on this and they pass the word down. all of that is going to come out in the wash because, at this point, americans can't help but see with their own eyes what's going on, the percentage of americans who believe in global warming is actually much higher than that now. it's gone up a lot in the last six months and that's because we keep having the most incredible

weather anyone has ever seen and more on the way. here's the story of the next two weeks. even as the heat begins, hopefully to break some today across the country, the drought across the grain belt of this continent is just deepening. a deepening, deepening by the day. we're watching each acre lose two, three bushels worth of yield and grain prices have gone up 35% and 45% in the last three weeks around the world because of our drought. corn can't really pollinate when it's this hot and this dry. that's just basic science and it's catching up with everyone's perception. >> bill, this is eric, let me tell you what an honor it is to be part of a conversation with you. i learned so much from your reporting over the years. it's interesting for me, my book is about the heat wave. we can generate a conversation about this in the summer when

it's unbearably hot and we experience this first hand. how do we sustain the conversation over time? this is not a hot weather issue. this is an everyday issue about an age of extremes. and i find that it's difficult to persuade americans that this is really something that we should care about. >> it's a little harder when it's not hot, but, unfortunately, reaching the point where there's something going on most of the time. here in vermont where i am today, we went through the greatest rain storm we ever had. last september. it washed half the state away. i dare say there's hardly anybody in this state who doesn't understand something is going on. but the other half of this is, this goes back to what esther was saying earlier. not just that we need to talk about peril, we need to talk about opportunity. if you want to figure out where you might find something to get our sluggish economy moving, again, well, the place is pretty obvious. if we were able to get serious

about putting solar panels on rooftops across america, all those people who are good at swinging hammers and don't have any more mcmansions to build would find themselves seriously back to work. this is where jobs are. it's where our society needs to go and where it can go, once we break the grip of the fossil fuel industry. >> bill, this is estha, i wanted to pick up on that point and ask you. how does the environmental activism movement take on that specific point. i feel like we are absolutely rooted in a discussion about peril, but the positives, the solutions the way in which folks on the ground can get connected. there is a narrative that includes them is where we fail. and as long as we continue to fail and sit in this politics of paralysis, how do you move forward? >> think about really wonderful operations like green for all or

like mild friend van jones who has been doing a tremendous job of mobilizing communities to man this shift towards, say, green energy. the biggest economic shift we could be making. imagine, also, that that is going on now around the world in place after place after place. we're not winning this fight yet. the power of the fossil fuel industry is so great. i mean, it is the most profitable enterprise human beings have ever engaged in, but this movement is building. we organized 25,000 demonstrations in every country over the last four years. that movement is beginning to grow to the size where it holds some peril for the fossil fuel industry and that's good news. >> one of the things that is fascinating here. what i'm hearing from you. two ways to think about getting to where we need to go on this issue. one is persuasion and one is power. what i'm hearing from you, it's

not a persuasion game at this point, but the planet is going to do the persuading and the weather is going to do the persuading and the public opinion will come to where people can no longer ignore it. the problem is power. the problem is centers of power that are in the most profitable enterprise and the human endeavor on the planet. i'm not sure i agree with that, though. i think that i worry a lot about this persuasion issue because it seems to me that the public opinion does play a role here and that seems like a big obstacle and i want you to address that right after we come back. west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com.

bill, left off with a question there persuasion problem versus a power problem. is it the interest and that you are related because the interests are trying to do a lot

to and i threw out there, you may be discounting a bit how central public opinion it seems to me in persuasion is to this. >> well, i mean, i don't disagree with you. i spend my time, much of it, writing books and organizing big demonstrations and that kind of thing. so, i think, you're right. and i think that there are ways that we can be doing this better to wit, the president of the united states gave a talk on friday in pennsylvania and the temperature was like 102 and 25 people passed out, not from his incredible charisma, but from the heat. and he managed not to mention global warming then or any other time in the course of this heat wave. it would help once in a while if people like that would say the word. all i'm telling you is that what's interesting is despite the power of the right-wing media and everything else,

two-thirds of americans or so understand that we have a really serious problem with global warming. every poll shows they're willing to do something about it. our problem at heart is the incredible financial power of this industry. the u.s. chamber of commerce, who spent more money on the election cycle last year than rnc and the dnc combined acts essentially as a front group, for instance, fror the fossil fuel industry. they filed a brief with the epa a couple years ago that said, you know what, you shouldn't regulate carbon because even if the scientists are right and the earth warms, they can adapt their physiology to cope with the heat. you know, that's a pretty extreme and radical idea of changing your anatomy in order to deal with this problem, instead of having the fossil fuel industry modify its business plan to deal with wind and solar. we've got to be calling these

people out and regularly, that's where the fight really is. >> i, for one, look forward to the future in which we all grow fans out of our shoulders. that will -- >> i live in san francisco and i think it's going to be good for us. we're adapting. a little warmer every year. i'm joking, of course. i was struck by how successful the tarzans keystone action as were. they jumped on the front page. they really had an impact. what other specific kind of issues are right for that and what did you learn from the success of that movement, which is not over. >> yes, we won a temporary victory, all environmental victories are temporary and this one temporary than most because big oil is coming back most and it was really interesting. one of the things we learned was that there were a lot of people out there willing to take real action. i mean, when we said, i sent out

the letter with naomi cline and would you come to washington and get arrested. i had no idea what to expect. this was well before "occupy" 1,200 people plus showed up to get arrested in the biggest civil disobedience action in 30 years taught me that really the possibility of that kind of mormilitant movement is there. i think one of the next frontiers for this may have to do with looking at divestment from the fossil fuel industry. you know, reminiscent of what happened in the apart tide movement a quarter century ago. we have to go after that financial power. >> bill founder of 350.org. thank you for joining us. really appreciate it. eric, great to have you here, as always. come back soon. what we should take away

from this week's follow up on the supreme court ruling on health care, right after this. with the spark cash card from capital one, olaf's pizza palace gets the most rewards of any small business credit card! pizza!!!!! [ garth ] olaf's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! put it on my spark card! [ high-pitched ] nice doin' business with you! [ garth ] why settle for less? great businesses deserve the most rewards! awesome!!! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? a great clean doesn't have to take longer. i'm done... i'm going to read one of these. i'm going to read one of these! [ female announcer ] unlike sprays and dust rags, swiffer 360 dusters extender gets into hard to reach places

so you can get unbelievable dust pick up in less time. i love that book! can you believe the twin did it? ♪ [ female announcer ] swiffer. great clean in less time. or your money back. ♪ did you know honey nut cheerios is america's favorite cereal? oh, you're good! hey, did you know that honey nut cheerios is... oh you too! ooh, hey america's favorite cereal is... honey nut cheerios ok then off to iceland!

mitt romney was forced to back track this week after coming under intense pressure from conservatives to call the individual mandate at the heart of the affordable care act a tax rather than a penalty. the supreme court ruled that it's constitutional under authority to levee taxes and immediately left on that justification with some falsely labeling the mandate, "the largest tax increase in american history." on monday eric fernstorm refused to call the mandate attacks saying the own health care in massachusetts would be labeled a tax, as well. >> the governor has consistently described the mandate in massachusetts as a penalty. >> two days later, after being barraged by the right, romney did a 180. >> the supreme court has a final word and their final word is that obama care is a tax.

so, it's a tax. >> the tax versus penalty capped a week of political fallout over chief justice john roberts' decision to join the four liberals on the court as constitutional. jan crawford reported based on two unnamed sources in the court that roberts initially voted with conservatives in the court to strike down the mandate. the vote switch was evidence that it was motivated by political and the other major finding in that case that expanding medicaid is constitutional. at least seven republican governors have now said they will refuse to implement the medicaid expansion in their states, potentially leaving more than 2.3 million americans uninsured in those states alone. joining us at the table is normal orenstein and the resident scholar at the american enterprise institute. first question for you, out of the decision there was an

interesting debate that happened i think among progressive and other journalists. about whether we would see republican governors refuse the medicaid money. i was on the side that said, of course, they'll refuse it. genuine debate and, you know, i was right, but, just saying, but how, but there's a question of whether they're actually going to follow through on that and how long they can hold out. but how surprised were you or were you not by the fact that you have all these republican governors saying they're going to walk away from, 100% full paid for in three years and then 10% chaired cost for ensuring people up to 33% of the poverty line? >> how can anyone be surprised but it is a decision that has nothing to do with actually running a state. i was just with mitch landrieu, the mayor of new orleans who was

a terrific student of mine talking about what this would cost new orleans. when you take people off the medicaid rolls, they go off the emergency rooms. this is not only something that is given to the states for free for three years but when you want to opt out, but it will cost the states money. a decision made for partisan and ideological and political reasons and these governors deserve condemination for it, i believe. >> why is it the case that the normal mechanics of political accountability are not functioning? shouldn't it be the case that you would be scared to walk away from in the case of louisiana, i'm looking at the number here, $8.9 billion in federal money because, if you do that, presumably, you will be punished by the voters. but they are making a political calculation that they will not be. what is not working that that is the case? >> those people are not their voters. the people affected by this horrible decision and who are

going to suffer terribly are not their voters. they are so invested in proving to their slightly higher income. people may fall into this category and not know it. for now they have this ideological thing going that the problem with the economy, too much government spending and we have to cut it in every way possible. people feel good about that, as long as they're not one of the people going to be thrown off medicaid. >> if they're not their voters, they're presumably somebody else's voters or they should be. that is the point, right? you should have to, we are not talking about, we are talking about people who make 133% of poverty, households. the party line is low, i think it's lower -- >> it's shameful. >> 130% of the poverty are people struggling to get by and voting rates among that are lower than people say making $100,000 a year, but there's still voters there. >> these, these republican

governors were elected in 2010. they're not off until 2014. they're making a statement now. they're hoping romney will be elected president with the republican congress and much of this will be disabled, if not absolutely repealed. so, it's a calculation about where things will stand when they have to face the -- >> there's another point here. it's not just refusing the medicaid money. many of these governors are playing a game of chicken by not creating exchanges in their states, which mean physical they don't move forward now, the federal government will step in. it's a calculated gamble that they can use this to attack obama care and achieve that political victory. but there's another point to be made here. these are poor voters in this case. the ryan plan to cut medicaid by 20% and turn it back to the states will hit the elderly and those of us who have parents or

grandparents in nursing homes. the single largest component of medicaid. just wait until you get that cut and instead of having one nurse's aide for every six patients, there will be one for every 60. >> even the notion of poor given the economy that we're in is a shifting spectrum. it's no longer what people divine as poor, which is -- but i think it's also the other point is this. while the republicans are making this calculated, political gamble, the democrats are engaging in a battle of whether this is a penalty and a tax and it's the wrong fight. that's my point. it's absolutely the wrong fight. they need to ensure that folks understand, this is the party that doesn't want you to have something, not just you need your grandparents need and your grandparents will need. the point is, while one side is making a political gamble, what are the democrats doing, not to offset that argument, but to speak to the people. >> let's talk about the political movement. i don't think most american's

c conceptions of poor, unless then maybe i'm wrong. we will be right back after this break. i read an article... well, i read the majority of an article online about how older people are becoming more and more antisocial, so i was really aggressive with my parents about joining facebook. my parents are up to 19 friends now? so sad. ♪ i have 687 friends. this is living. what!? that is not a real puppy. that's too small to be a real puppy. [ male announcer ] venza. from toyota.

it's about time we made our homes work for us. so let's make our dryers do the ironing. have our fridges cater our parties. and tell our ranges to whip up dinner. let's plug in to summer savings before they're gone... ...without wasting an ounce of energy with smart machines that turn housework into house play. more saving. more doing.

that's the power of the home depot. right now, save $600 on this maytag french door refrigerator, just $1,598. hello from new york, i'm chris hayes. with me, we have esther armah, thomas mann, "it's even worse than it looks." msnbc political analyst joan walsh and norman walsteen. we are talking about the fallout from the health care decision which has played out through the week on a number of different fronts. two, most interestingly, the republican governors in seven states, it looks like, saying they're not going to take this medicaid expansion because the court ruled that states couldn't

be forced to do it with the threat of losing all of their medicaid. and these are some familiar names, rick scott in florida and scott walker in wisconsin and nick a nikki haley in south carolina. you can't walk away from 100% funding and $9 billion in the case of louisiana, without getting hit for it. i think what's interesting who the republicans are representing or who they're concerned about. one of the other things we are seeing happen at the same time, there is a great "times" article about this. let's remember, the republicans ran on $500 billion in cuts to medicare as the one sentence description -- >> of obama care. >> of obama care. particularly for norman thom because you have this book about this kind of ideological extremism. we concede too much if we say it's ideological extremism.

not actually a debate over the size of government. it's not government gets bigger or smaller. it got bigger under bush and the republicans. i guarantee you. it's about who it benefits. a much different conversation. >> it is a much different conversation. but i actually think the ryan budget, which, by the way, includes the $500 billion in medicare cuts so that it's able to move things down and which would cut out virtually all of discretionary government, domestic government by 2050. they're serious about moving forward with something close to that and it would looeave an awl lot of the society, which means people who don't vote for republicans in this case in tatters. the cuts in medicaid they're determined to do and i think as a they were discussing earlier. based on their own misconception who ben fits from medicaid, not just poor people. they do want to turn medicare into a voucher program. if they win all the reigns of

power, it's going to be like a grand experiment. they will retreat from it because there will be an enormous public backlash. >> essentially here why the states on the medicaid expansion are the laboratories on that. will you face political consequences in a state like florida who have a lot of seniors which mean they're on medicaid, also. can you walk away from that money? >> can rick scott survive. will there be a front lash and a front lash that will prevent some of this and will we see it in 2012? >> a failure to learn the les n lessons of the rise of the tea party movement that came out when the affordable care act was being discussed. a failure of the democrats to go on the offensive about what this means to the electorate and to not engage in the party politicking that the republicans have become so successful at because they consistently hold every piece of legislation hostage using -- it no longer

matter if the facts are inaccurate or even if they believe them because at this point it's become such a successful strategy in paralyzing the democrats, that it's continuing to work. >> one of the things that i think we saw which was important about this medicaid announcement for the republican governors, there is a question, at what point does the battle end? the president came out and gave a statement, let's not refight this battle. okay, declared constitutional and the law of the land, but, no, romney's pledging to repeal it and the governors aren't implementing the exchanges. it's ceaseless battle. >> the real question you framed is how much of this is ideological and how much of it is strategic. >> exactly. >> we have seen and we illustrate in our book time and time again republicans take position positions that don't necessarily advance their ideological interests but their immediate political interests and that's what's going on right now.

the ryan budget waus amended so no medicare cuts that would be felt by individual recipients would come into effect for a decade -- >> ding, ding, ding. >> they put that off and the rest is just all that other spending that goes to poor people. >> that's the point. we're talking about, it's just really important how this conversation -- we're talking about the tea party backlash to the affordable care act as it was working its way through. the core there was not trend on me, big government. it was, you're going to take from the praart of the pie that now have. medicare and give it to someone else. this is a zero sung battle over the resources that are already in the federal budget. right, this is a battle over where that is going to go in the spreadsheet. >> one element of this. let's move beyond the health care issue for just a minute. what the ryan budget would do if

they got into power would basically cut discretionary spending on the domestic side by 25% or so and put it all back in defense. >> exactly. >> think about all of the implications of this because we're not just talking about money for poor people. it starts with that and we already see it in the farm bill with food stamps now going down so you can preserve subsidies for some of the farm groups and think about food safety. cut the meat inspectors by 25% and cut so when the e. coli breakouts occur, nobody is there to deal with it. there is a backlash against it. the federal employees that are being bashed daily, it will turn into a five-year pay freeze who are the ones on the front lines trying to operate with 25% fewer resources are going to be even more vilified for this and it will be a downward spiral. >> the one place where there has been genuine consistencies has been on taxes.

right, because, it's -- it was hilarious in, well, not hilarious, darkly comic in the lead up through the actual arguments because it was clear to me, at least, that the structure of the thing is a tax. whatever three letters you want to attach to it. but those three letters have such a to tammic power. i mean, they're so, so forbidden. they're so tabu you cannot say the words and it was so hilarious to watch this play out over the week, it's okay. tax, say it. tax. tax. it's -- but that is why they tie themselves into pretzel knots all week because that is the one place where the republican party has been incredibly consistent and discipline. >> and would act accordingly that is grover norquist tax pledge is the major pillar of the republican party. it also, realistically, happens to be the biggest obstacle to

doing anything about any of our serious problems. >> here's the "wall street journal" attacking, went on chuck todd's program to say, you know, it's penalty. because you wanted to preserve him, romney from being attacked to raising taxes. "wall street journal" said he's managing to turn the only possible silver lining in chief justice john robert' obamacare -- the campaign looks confused in addition to being politically dumb." here's rush limbaugh, this is rush limbaugh running with the critique of obamacare in quotation marks as a big increase. >> what we have been told by the chief justice of the supreme court and four liberals on the court, obamacare is just a massive tax increase. that's all it is.

oba obamacare is nothing more than the largest tax increase in the history of the world. >> the largest tax increase in the history of the world. it's overwhelming to hear that, isn't that? >> listen, it is just ludicrous the extend to which republicans will go to define things as taxes, destroying the rest of the world. it turns out that this penalty tax, i don't care what you call it, is a minor part of the financing of the affordable care act. >> it's not even -- it's negligible. >> it's a trivial part and, actually, justice roberts ' decision was well thought out. he said it can be constitutionally yet it provides the basis for allowing the mandate, you know, to proceed, even though congress didn't call it that.

he's not making some grand claim about it, other than that it's perfectly legitimate. >> but the trouble is, you end up with days and days of punditry. is it a tax break? you know, gleefully saying, look at mitt romney. most unsophisticated flip-flopper ever in political history. >> you say he did a 180 and i think it's now a 360. >> it was a 180 and then another 180. >> wait until next week, it will be a 720. i was struck first by the fact that rush limbaugh doesn't realize that horizontal stripes on a body like that are -- >> come on. that's a cheap shot. >> it's a real shot. but the other part of this is another failure of messaging on the obama and democrats' part. this, as a tax, hits a small number of people. the big problem with it is, it's too small. >> that's the big concern. >> it's a big concern because you're not going to have enough of an insennive for people to get insurance. but it's being portrayed as a

tax on everybody and that's biting more than it should. >> at what point, at what point do the democrats learn that? the manner in which they have a really serious framing problem that consistently have that and it's allowing the republicans to get away without just really articulating what should be dismissed -- >> i think you're wrong this week because what ended up happening was the story of the week was obama care a tax, mitt romney is flip-flopping on the tax. so, i think that actually from just purely political perspeckive they played that pretty well. more on that after this break. maybe it's time to recharge the human battery. only the beautyrest recharge sleep system combines the comfort of aircool memory foam layered on top of beautyrest pocketed coils to promote proper sleeping posture all night long. the revolutionary recharge sleep system from beautyrest... it's you, fully charged. get a free set of sheets when you buy a select beautyrest mattress.

hurry, offer ends soon. fight both fast with new tums freshers! concentrated relief that goes to work in seconds and freshens breath. new tums freshers. ♪ tum...tum...tum...tum... tums! ♪ [ male announcer ] fast relief, fresh breath, all in a pocket sized pack.

all right, we're talking about the fall out from the health care decision and the great penalty tax debate that

ensued afterwards and also the medicaid. i mean, the medicaid issue is the more substantive one. this fundamental problem that governments need to collect taxes. they just do. there's just no real government effort that has been so -- if you object, if you object to taxes, just almost, it's very clear, it's very unclear how you operate politics within that confine and it's not just that, it's not just that republicans say they want lower taxes, they always want them lower than they are now. that strikes me as a problem. >> it always has to be lower. so, you know, it's a one-way -- >> except for the unearned income credit. >> that's right, herman cain did want to raise taxes. >> raise taxes on those dead beats. i was thinking about in terms of

tom and norm's book, you have a nullification at every level. you have this determination to block obama by any means necessary. but they ultimately fail with the affordable care act. chief justice roberts lets them down and then you go out into the states and the red state governors are going to thwart him there and it reminds me of something that grover norquist said. i think he said, it, too, like harvard reunion and duval patrick was there. grover said what we do when we have democrats in power is we make it impossible for them to govern as democrats what we do whatever we have to, tax pledge, thwart it in every way and then it goes to what you were talking about before because the democratic constituencies are sort of like, why vote? >> can i play devil's advocate on this because i don't want to sit in this hot tub of consensus for too long here.

so, the idea that this kind of any means necessary nullification kind of thing. the problem, i'm not sure i disagree with that as just for a strategy. the problem is the thing they're trying to nullify, democrats, if something that republicans of massive piece of social legislation and republicans pushed through that i thought was genuinely a threat to the country's future and its character and was awful and terrible, i would want democratic politicians at every level to reject it, to fight it, to not give up and to keep fighting and to challenge the supreme court. right, exactly, but is it -- are we expressing envy or condemination when we talk about republicans being so determined in this respect? >> it's a different matter. not just nullifying laws that you think are just terrible. it's nullifying everything, including things that you believe would actually help the economy, but if it helps in the short run, you don't want to do that because you want the revolution now, it may cause some blood to be shed so that you can take over. >> i'm not a mind reader, but i

don't think, i don't think it's as disengingenuous as that. >> you don't think the republicans are as disingenuous about their political stratin terms of bringing down democrats and obamacare? >> you think it will be the case that the president's health care plan is going to be terrible for the country. -- >> do you believe the republicans think it will be terrible for the country? >> no, i think they think it's going to be terrible for the country. >> did that happen over a period of three or four years because a dozen republican senators were embracing that same health care policy not so long ago. so, doesn't that suggest some disingenuousness and strategic action on their part? >> i have suddenly become the republican at the table. >> when we think about implementation. when brown versus board of education passed about deseg rugrating schools it reflected

the same thing that we're seeing now. >> all deliberate speed, the three words in that opinion that set the stage for a lot of focus on the deliberate, not so much on the speed. >> exactly. the point that i'm making, one, i just find really challenging that the republicans genuinely believe this is terrible for the country. i don't think that's their interest at all. i think their political strategy around paralysis succeeds in consistently putting the democrats on the offensive. condemination is a fair one because i think the democrats, the democrats almost are envious of the republicans' willingness to simply stand their ground irrespective. >> the question is, have the republicans said, this is the big core question here, right, which is the republican party has operated in a way that is precedent in norms in terms of the institutional norms that v govern in the senate, particularly, and in congress more broadly and now in

governorships, et cetera. is that a case of them being more committed to their vision than the other side, or is there something that is really genuinely lost in a poisonous fashion in those institutions and i'm not going to let you answer that question. maybe after the break. we'll also talk about mitt romney's caribbean money.

this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs.

a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com. the obama campaign this week seized on new reports about mitt romney's extensive overseas. stoking the fire this time by a "vanity fair" piece detailing romney's rather opaque holdings in tax returns. the obama campaign seeing a further opportunity to for romney produced a new web video. >> i do not have a bank account outside of the u.s. >> i do not have a swiss bank account, i don't have an account

in the caymans. >> i don't know anyone i know that has an overseas bank account. >> where there's smoke, there's fire. >> based in the cayman islands, a bermuda based corporation owned by romney and a swiss bank aeblth that was listed in mitt romney's 2010 tax returns but was closed out in 2011 and then his i.r.a. that holds $11 million. a world where taxes exist to be evaded on a personal and corporate level. to me, the really interesting question here. there's this mitt romney clip where he is responding and this came up, obviously, in the republican primary and this is him in the republican primary debate and somewhat defensively responding to the accusations that he has been tax dodging to use a term, not necessarily tax dodging but try to massively reduce his tax exposure.

>> the issue came up about your dad and i'm saying it has to be 12 years, but why not release more years than just this year or rather 2010 and then an estimate for this year? >> that will be more than any other republican candidate and i'm not going to go gak back to dad's years, that was even before the internet. >> we'll see if he holds to that. he talked about not paying more than $1 more in taxes than he owes. >> do you think it's patriotic of you to stash your money away in the cayman islands? >> i have not saved $1 by having an investment somewhere outside this country. >> that seems to me, almost, certainly untrue. but the question to me is this moral question about -- is it, lots of things that someone can do.

leaving your cancer-stricken wife, for instance, for another woman we would say, sure, we should not outlaw that, but, also, doesn't reflect well on you. if someone who is the head of the tobacco company who was a tobacco executive ran for president and no, it's not the head of to be a tobacco, but there's some kind of moral issue here and that is the kind of issue here with the tax. what does it reflect about. what is our social sense of what the obligations are in terms of the tax code. is it that you do everything possible no matter how contrived or how complex to reduce your taxes or do you not do that? >> i am not sure i agree with you. on some political level, i think that people could be out there listening and saying, well, i take my mortgage tax deduction and i'm with that guy. i don't think i want to pay more than my share of taxes either. however, what people don't know is the extent to which he's going to avoid paying taxes. the industry that exists that is

not, that is off limits to people like us because we don't make enough money. there's the whole, not just a world view, there is that, but an industry devoted to helping, to tax avoidance and to avail yourself of all of that. we're having a national kind of teach-in on how the tax code has privileged the ultrawealthy with this man. >> i want to bring in quickly, steven moore, former president of club for growth. it's great to have you, steven, thank you so much. >> good morning. >> we talk about the tax avoidance industry, things like incorporating the caymans or bermuda or corporations that are called tax blockers that you set up so you can move assets through. do you think there's anything morally questionable in engaging in that kind of behavior. just matter of first principals before we get into the details. >> as long as it's not illegal. i don't think anyone is making the allegation that mitt romney

made illegal moves to illegally pay his taxes. i mean, i just think this whole discussion. look, the united states should be the tax haven country. we were founded as a country where people could come to pay less taxes and an indictment of our current tax system that rates have gotten so high and we are so uncompetitive. >> rates have gotten lower. >> rates have gone up and, in fact, you know, we're going to go up, way up next year if the tax bottom goes up. my point is, look, when you talk about this patriotic duty to raise taxes. i turn this around on all of you and say, wait a minute, all these liberals are running around the country, rich liberals say i want to pay more and you look at the tax returns, none of them have paid more taxes than they owe. why are you indicting mitt romney for not paying more taxes than he owes when all rliberals say they don't do that. all these left-wing groups that say we have to raise taxes on rich people. >> first of all, those people aren't running for president. >> that's true.

>> second of all, they're -- there's a distinction here between what tax policy is and individual tax compliance and even with individual tax compliance. >> you have to agree, though, chris, they're hypocrites. if they say they want to pay more taxes and they don't, that's hypocritical. >> i think we disagree on this. like al gore riding in planes issue. social policy is something you want to put in social contract is because it has the force of coercive law. the force of coercive law the way we pibind each other and ta are that. >> look, we have a military of the people who are patriotic. they don't, they don't join the military because they're compelled to do so. they do it because they think it's their patriotic duty. liberals think it's their patriotic duty to pay more taxes and they don't do it. if all the liberals who say they want to pay more taxes do so, we could reduce this deficit by a lot. >> you know that is a silly

argument. >> no, it's not. >> of course, it is. >> why would warren buffett pay more taxes? >> you think we're going to reduce the deficit on warren buffett having some kind -- >> rliberals say we can reduce - >> taxation is fundamentally not a voluntary undertaking. you can't say -- >> that's not true. chris, that is not true on the bottom line of your tax form, it says if you want to pay more taxes and reduce the deficit, you can do so. liberals don't do it. >> getting back to mitt -- >> the most incredibly hypocritical things. >> you want to talk about warren buffett. >> warren buffett is not running for president and you want unnamed liberals. tax return for the president for many years and we don't have the tax returns for mitt romney and in the course of compliance, i think there is a moral question here about is it at all unshamable if you lose every

strategy, is that just a squarely praise worthy thing? >> you know, i hate the tax code. i'm a flat tax guy. literally, chris, i think we should get rid of every single deduction and loophole and tax carve out in the system. i think incredibly simple. no tax dodges and i think everybody should pay 19% and we should be done with it. i've been advocating that for 25 years. everything you have been saying for the last half hour is one of the strongest cases for the -- >> but if you got rid of all of that, there is just no way that you still wouldn't have tax blockers in the cayman islands. >> that's not true. >> steven, i have news for you, if you have $250 million in assets, you'll find ways the legal loopholes to get away. >> you know what, chris, actually, when we cut tax rates in 1986, the last great bipartisan act that congress has passed in a long, long time, taxable income went way, way up. when you got rid of loopholes and you brought tax rates down,

guess what, more investment capital came to the united states. this is the problem we had for the last half hour. not a problem if we raise taxes on investment and raise taxes on people. that's not going to be a problem. that is going to lead to more tax evasion, less of it. >> all that happened under the bush administration. >> we dropped -- hold on one second. we dropped our top marginal rates, we had two rounds of -- let's take a quick break and come back to this in a second. ♪ ♪ lord, you got no reason ♪ you got no right ♪ ♪ i find myself at the wrong place ♪ [ male announcer ] the ram 1500 express.

♪ it says a lot about you. ♪ in a deep, hemi-rumble sort of way. guts. glory. ram. until i show them this. the new oral-b pro-health clinical brush. its pro-flex sides adjust to teeth and gums for a better clean. the new pro-health clinical brush from oral-b.

it's about time we made our homes work for us. so let's make our dryers do the ironing. have our fridges cater our parties. and tell our ranges to whip up dinner. let's plug in to summer savings before they're gone... ...without wasting an ounce of energy with smart machines that turn housework into house play. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. right now, save $600 on this maytag french door refrigerator, just $1,598. an advocate of a flat tax of simplifying the code. as an advocate of simplifying the code, don't you think it would be good for your cause to have mitt romney release more of his tax returns to show just how vastly complex the current system is?

shouldn't we see in all its particulars over the last five years, say, since he has been running for president, more or less, just what it looks like on the granular level. i think part of what this is, when you make the argument from the place of genuine good faith and justice for a flat tax, the people at the top were able to gain it. let's stipulate that's where you're able to make it from. shouldn't we see what that looks like up close? >> well, i think mitt romney may very well have to do that. i think that's something the political campaign is going to divide. voters are going to make that decision about whether to command and demand that mitt romney releases tax returns. i'm not an expert on this. the romney campaign tells me they released as much tax return data as normal presidential candidates have. but, you know, given how controversial his tax information has been, he will probably have to do that in the weeks to come. >> it's interesting. i was looking through the history of this, of course, his father famously released his tax

returns and released a lot of them to "look" magazine. and "look" magazine ran a chart. first of all, a huge amount of money to the mormon church, which is not surprising and effective rates in one year of almost 50% on an income of $270,000. kind of an interesting window and then that prompted richard nixon who the to release his tax returns. he had to release them for three and a half years. we have one year of mitt romney's returns which is half of what richard nixon had to disclose. >> steven, i get the sense that there is a belief here that if you reduce tax rates that it brings in more revenue than you would have otherwise. when i just don't see any history that supports that. but, also, that if you cut ta s taxes, that's the way to cut spending when as brute bartlett has told us pretty compellingly, the times when we cut spending is when we increase taxes like

in the 1990 budget agreement. >> i did a big study with richard on this and it is true that higher taxes do lead to higher spending. i think bruce bartlett is just wrong about this. one of the reasons, i heard your previous discussion about republicans being against raising taxes. i'm one of those people. to be a republican is to be against raising taxes and if democrats want to be the pro-tax party, that's fine. what we found in our study very clearly through every dollar of taxes that have been raised over the last 50 years, spending has gone up by $1.50. that's one reason why i don't think raising taxes is a good way. if you look in the '80s, as you know, one of the things reagan did is cut that top tax rate from 70% to 80%. in 1980 when reagan was elected, by 1990, $1 trillion of revenue. one last point -- >> tax increases after that

first year, stephen. >> what did you say? >> after six round of tax increases. we raised taxes in '82, '83, '84 and '86. >> did reagan cut taxes or raise them? >> he cut them in one year and then raised them in six years. >> the rates came down from 78% to 28%. that's a pretty big reduction in rates. the point i'm making, norm. i think you would agree with this. i do want more tax revenues to come in. we're not going to reduce this deficit just by fiscal triage and just cutting all these programs. we need to also have a lot more revenues and the way to do that is to increase the economic growth rate in this country. we're only grown at 1.89%. we're never going to get the revenues. >> we should all get be sitting in -- look, i will proudly carry the banner of pro-tax but not the banner of anti-growth. i also want robust growth.

>> those two things are contradictory. >> historically they haven't been. high tax rates and very profound growth. i mean, obviously. >> the big growth we had, look, look at the growth periods we had in the united states. the '20s we cut tax rates and john f. kennedy cut the tax rates and reagan cut tax rates and we had huge growth. >> you don't think it's the absolute level. you just think it's directional. >> the direction matters. 90% to 70%. >> that's exactly the one-way ratchet we're talking about. if it's always directional and you always have to cut taxes to spur growth, eventually, you have the problem the federal reserve has. you hit the zero lower bound of federal revenue. you can't keep directionally cutting taxes in one direction. wait, hold that thought, hold that thought, come back after this.outs and this is what inspires us to create new technology. ♪

technology that connects us to everything the world has to offer and vice versa. ♪ technology that makes lightweight stronger, safer, and faster than ever before. ♪ technology that makes electric electrifying and efficiency exhilarating. ♪ technology that doesn't just drive us, but drives progress. ♪ and driving progress is what we do every day. ♪ ♪

stephen moore, we're talking about taxes here. just in concept of tax returns. george w. bush released 17 years of tax returns during the course of his career. partly because of the complexity of the modern code and tax avoidance at the top, which i think is a big problem. one of the ironies here is that you're advocating a 19% rate, which would, of course, be a tax hike for mitt romney. we should be clear in 2010 he paid 13.9% effective rate and 2011 estimate. so, on that, i can get, i can, you and i can find a little sliver in the diagram of common ground, which is that mitt romney should pay more in taxes, right? >> you know, the problem with those statistics you put up, chris, you know this, that how does mitt romney make his money? he makes it through investing, through bain capital. he owns stock.

you're not including the money and if you include the corporate taxes. >> in the cayman islands so they don't pay any money in taxes. that's the whole point? why do you think they put them in the cayman islands? because they want the money to go to the beach. >> look, i don't know what he's doing with this cayman island money, what i'm talking about the investments he makes in the united states companies, those are taxed at the corporate level. have a corporate gains or new corporate tax or a corporate tax and no capital gains dividend. we shouldn't tax the corporate income tax. that's why those numbers are misleading. >> we're actually not, even if we are taxing those and there is a sort of philosophical debate on corporate gains. but in terms of the incidents of whether those taxes are getting paid, that's the whole core of the conversation. the point is that corporate taxes is a percentage of federal revenue have fallen down to 8%.

40% in the 1940s. huge industry of avoiding corporate taxes which is located in the cayman islands. that's the whole point. it's not getting taxed twice. >> chris, you and i are saying the same thing. yeah, we have the highest stat torally corporate tax rate in the world. of every country we compete with. >> i don't collect any of it. >> and we don't raise any revenue. now, i think we can all agree that is the essence of a stupid tax system. it doesn't raise any money and has high rates. that's my point about corporate reform. one thing barack obama should be talking about is fixing corporate system and getting our rate down to the international average and get rid of the shelters that we're talking about. >> we're agreeing on getting rid of the shelters. stephen moore, thank you so much. what we should know for the news week ahead, coming up next.

this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com. trick question. i love everything about this country! including prilosec otc. you know one pill each morning treats your frequent heartburn so you can enjoy all this great land of ours has to offer like demolition derbies. and drive thru weddings. so if you're one of those people who gets heartburn and then treats day after day, block the acid with prilosec otc and don't get heartburn in the first place. [ male announcer ] one pill each morning.

24 hours. zero heartburn. [ male announcer ] one pill each morning. sleep train's 4th of july sale dit's going out with a bang! through sunday, save on sleep train's most popular mattress sets. plus, pay no interest for 36 months on tempur-pedic and serta icomfort. big savings and interest-free financing? these deals aren't just hot... they're explosive! sleep train's 4th of july sale ends sunday. ♪ sleep train ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪

just a moment what we should know for the week ahead, first,

a quick update. earlier in the program i mentioned one of the co-founders of the weather channel called global warming a scam, i should note it is a sister company of msnbc. my book "twilites of the you k the weather channel is a sister station. i'll be discussing my book with the great lou burbank on wednesday, july 11th. at the commonwealth club in san francisco. get tickets, check out "the twilight of elites" facebook page for more information on upcoming appearances. what should you know for the week coming up? california will require students learn about gay and lesbian history. jerry brown signed a bill that required this. the gay rights movement has been one of the most remarkable inspirational and successful social movements our time. students have a whole lot to learn from it.

and if you're interested in learning more, i highly recommend the new book "victory." in the wake of the disappointing jobs reports, the houses has redoubled its efforts to wage against the president than pass efforts to help the sluggish recovery. there will be a vote to repeal the affordable care act, a vote to take away health care insurance from throat with preexisting conditions and kick those 22 to 26 off of their parent' health insurance. today, a coalition of activists from a broad swath will be crashing a swank party in the hamptons at the southampton new york home of right-wing billionaire david coke, a fund-raiser. it's rude, but peaceful, purposeful disruption of the ordinary rituals of influence that define our political system are necessary to jar us from complacency. a strange, embarrassing feature, that kissing the hands of

billionaires at private estates what candidates of both major parties spend so much time doing. sometimes showing up on someone's lawn is the only way change happens. and finally, you should know we'll get relief from the heat this week. the heat wave will break in cities like chicago and st. louis, we'll see things cool off. weather is distinct from climate and any discrete weather event cannot be said to be caused by climate change and climate will change and is already changing our weather by warming the planet. you should know we'll be seeing many more emergencies in the years to come. and there are things we can do right now to reduce our risk and what we're not doing. what my guests think we should know. esther arma. >> frank ocean, an r & d singer, came out early this week, and he's on the front cover of the arts section of "the new york times" today. and what he reminds us is that with all of the victories of the lgbt community there, has also

been an emotional cost and scars that are often not explored, discussed, in the world of policy, protest, and politics. >> and getting a lot of nastiness on twitter and also a lot of support. he's part of the odd future crew, whose lyrics have been very casual about invoking awful words to describe gays. embodied him this amazing cultural contradiction. >> you should know the house republican leadership to schedule the vote to repeal obama care as you mentioned in the wake of a bad jobs report and an imf report saying we need more stimulus now is not an exception, but the rule of this entire two years of republican rule. sometimes it's neutral and ineffective. sometimes it's down right harmful, like the renewed threat to challenge the debt ceiling.

take it hostage again. if anything could slow the economy more, that would. >> and that's really i think a worry some train wreck down the road that we're headed toward. joan walsh, what should folks know? >> 56% of americans wish that the republicans would leave the affordable care act alone, move on. >> stop picking on the affordable care act. >> even some who don't like it. so what they are doing is wildly unpopular and to get back to the framing discussion, the question, how do the democrats get people to understand. this is what they are doing, this is why you don't want them to do it. they are not listening to you. >> i agree with that and seen that pulling as well. in some ways, it's self-evident. i think the basic political dynamic here is every day the new cycle is not about the economy, it's a win for the obama campaign frankly, even if it's about a law that's been unpopular. i think in some ways you just

kind of say democrats, keep it up. >> right. >> norm, what should folks know? >> you should know if you live in a swing state like ohio or florida, to tire up the tivo, because the next week, indeed the next month, will be a flood of awful commercials from americans crossroads, gps, from the chamber of commerce, all in advance of a very good decision by the federal communications commission to require television stations to put online the identity of donors, starting on august 2nd. so the next month, you don't want to watch any commercials, you want to skip through them if you have any programs. >> the data is the add bind data. >> and finally we'll get the data are actually supposed to be there, but stuck away in the stations' back rooms and they rarely allow anybody access, even they are supposed to. it will be online and at the f.c.c. website. >> and important to see what these ad buys look like.

>> we should note, people benefit off the amount of money that will be spent on this campaign, local stations being one of them. >> stimulus. >> i want to thank our guests, esther armah, thomas mann, joan walsh and norman ornstein from the american enterprise institute. thank you, all. we'll be back next weekend, saturday and sunday at 8:00 eastern. a rare appearance by james c carville, right here on set. up next, "melissa harris-perry." is the republican party playing a jedi mind trick on the american people? things they didn't innocent a candidate in the primaries, now they have with their nominee to be and they'll make his candidacy work. plus, the word police. melissa asks why so much hand slapping. why is july 4th not the perfect time to celebrate your country, parts and all? melissa harris-perry is up next. stick around for that. and see you next week here on "up." building pass, corporate card, verizon 4g lte phone.

the global ready one ? yeah, but you won't need... ♪ hajimemashite. hajimemashite. hajimemashite. you guys like football ? thank you so much. i'm stoked. you stoked ? totally. ... and he says, "under the mattress." souse le matelas.