minds of men every day in the receiving and release unit. here there's an ebb and flow of new inmates checking into the system while other inmates are there to pack up and move on. on this day, anthony nelson is going back to his food distribution company in lake tahoe after a year in folsom. and 23-year-old jesus acosta, a gang member from east l.a., is being released after serving four months. >> first name. >> i'll see you when you come back. >> i'll see you when you come back. >> all right. >> i'll still be there. >> you never know. that's why you've got to be careful. it's kind of good to know that you'll come right back if you're not on your toes out there. it's easy to get in trouble. you come right back. >> will they be back? young jesus has been in prison once before.

and for anthony, this was his fourth time behind bars. ♪ one day you'll find me on the main street ♪ ♪ i'll be the one who's looking square ♪ ♪ oh yeah >> if the goal of prison is to deter, punish, and rehabilitate criminals, maybe folsom is doing something right. in the past ten years, folsom inmates have provided about 1.5 million hours of community service. at that rate in a single year, the labor saves community agencies over $2.5 million. the true test is whether these inmates can continue using the skills they learned inside folsom to help their community once they are released. for msnbc investigates, i'm john seigenthaler

the cutting edge. let's play "hardball." good evening. i'm michael smerconish in for chris matthews. tonight, who is afraid of the big bad sequester? no one apparently with the financial markets and the dow near the all-time high and in fact, both plolitical parties my be more okay with the big budget cuts than you'd think. the democrats can cut the pentagon and their social programs and now president obama is convinced that republicans will pace the price for endangering the recovery and protecting the wealthy. but what if he is wrong? now to the audio tape, and you can hear antonin scalia calling the voting act a racial tite

element, and that phrase has angered his colleagues and may set up big left wing confrontations in the future. and plus, the march toward marriage equality got a big boost. the obama administration has joined the fight urging the supreme court to overturn proposition 8, california's ban on same-sex marriage, and look who just emerged from the mittness project? mitt romney who has just done the first tv interview since the election and do the republicans even want to hear from him? and the vote of transparency where it matters most. and the fact of the awe the to mattic spending cuts going into effect. we are joined by michael steele the former chairman of the are rnc and david cone from "mother jones." today, the president came out e

referring to the cuts referred to by the republicans as dumb. >> the fact is that not everyone will feel the pain of the cults right away. the pain though will be real. so every time that we get a piece of economic news over the next month, next two months, next six months, as long as the sequester is in place, we will know that the economic news could have been better if congress had not failed to act. and let's be clear, none of this is necessary. it is happening because a choice that republicans in congress have made. i have offered negotiations around that kind of balanced approach and so far, we have gotten rebuffed, because what speaker bay for the and toehner republicans have said that we can't do any revenue, not a dime's worth of revenue, and what more do you think that we should do? i am not a dictator. i'm the president. >> and on the other end of

pennsylvania avenue, we did not hear much hopefulness coming from speaker boehner either. david gregory sat down for an interview with him that will air sunday on "meet the press." >> as we sit down here, you have emerged from the meeting of the white house and no deal. take me inside of the white house, and what happened inside that room? >> well, we had a polite discussion and i asked senator reid and the president to come with a plan to prevent the sequester, and we have known for 16 months, and yet today, no plan from the senate democrats or the white house the replace the sequester, and over the last ten months the house republicans have acted twice to replace the sequester. >> in the end, you don't really see a pathway here that is open as you sit here? >> if i did, the meeting at the white house this morning might have gone better. >> michael steele, what strikes me is significant in that this

week there didn't seem to be any real effort to avoid it. it was all for show and came in tuesday through thursday and the house was gone by last night, whaen did they cut it loose and decide we can't save this? >> weeks ago. weeks ago. this drama has been unfolding for like the speaker said for 16 months, but everyone kind of came to the general consensus, ah, let it happen and we will deal with it afterwards weeks ago. both sides have an opportunity here to move this thing forward. the president instead of having the meeting today could have had the meeting on monday and sort of lead into what was going to happen at midnight tonight, but that didn't happen, because everybody and you set it up right, the democrats are going to say what they want about the republicans on this, and the republicans got the defense cuts they want. and everybody is looking at the end of the day, fine. >> and is it faux outrage then? >> i don't think it is faux outrage in terms of the impact it will have, and when the president says real consequences here, fewer food inspectors, and you know, 71,000 kids not into

head start until september, and 21% of the salary cuts for federal workers impacting local economies, and that is real. i have to call out boehner, because he is playing a dirtier game than the president p. i just need a plan. and give me a plan, mr. president, and give me a plan mr. senate majority leader. and the democratss in the senate yesterday voted for a plan and got 51 votes, and it did not pass because the republicans filibustered, but there is a plan. the president for 16 months has been pushing a plan. closing the tax loopholes and put that money to deficit reduction and have a different set of not indiscriminate cuts is his plan. >> and do you accept that criticism? >> and boehner is saying where is the plan. there is a plan, but he does not like the plan. >> that may be true, but the house put two plans on the floor, and they were vote on, and they weren't voted on in senate. you know, the, yeah, the senate

voted on a plan yesterday, but david, you have to start some place, and the problem is that the democrats don't want to start where you need to start, and that is having an honest conversation about what are are you prepared to cut, david corn? what are you prepared to cut, president obama? what are you putting on the table? we have given you $16 billion in january of new revenues with no cuts. so show me some cuts, and then we can start about how serious you are. >> let me tell you something, 16 months ago the president against the desires his own party put things on the table, change the cpi for social security and cuts for medicare, and -- >> what were the specific change on cp snishgs what was the number? >> and these were the numbers pass bed tween jeantween gene s >> and it suits both of their objecties.

chuck todd put it beautifully, and he noted it in "first read" this morning, yes, both sides are kicking and screaming publicly and yes, they will impact people's livelihoods, but if you are a republican and you want to cut spending, you are getting it, and if you a democrat who wants to reduce the defense spending or ensure that all of the cuts aren't targeted only at social programs, you're getting your wish. and for these cuts to come exclusively from social spending. so michael steele, you are shaking your head and these people are back to the districts saying, we cut spending. >> well, chuck, he has framed this perfectly, and that is why i said, they settled on this perfectly, and the histrionics and the drama that kids won't get educated is about nothing. >> well, it suited their

interests. >> i agree with the political analysis, but the problem is that this is about the most immature way to approach real problem s th problems that we have in the country. i do believe, and you can go to people like norm ornstein or thomas mann who are centrist and said are from time and time again that the republicans and the obstructionism and the conflicts within the republicans' own side have made them tougher partners to get involved in a deal with the president. and that is where we have been for the last two years and now, and boehner is asking for the plan, because he can't really cut a ocompromise. >> let me put a period on this, we are not going to move beyond this conversation and the one that we saw unfolded this week until both of them realize that the stuff stinks. >> what is that going to take? it is going to take the realization and it will be in 30 to 45 days when the cuts start to trickle into the economy and people begin to efeel it, and te

president is playing a gamble here, because it is not going to be falling neatly on the republican's lap, but on both sides. >> and sorry, michael, but if you look at the what the public says about how to solve this sort of stuff -- >> well, today, and we will see what they say in four weeks. >> but for the last year, they have been backing the president's approach. >> guys, this is what baffles me, what the market is doing. if the economy feels the cuts, the market is not scared yet. the dow closed under 14,090 which is inching toward the record of october of 14,18 164, and i think that the masters of the universe on wall street have it figured out and they are three steps ahead of us, and why aren't they nervous? >> didn't we learn in october 2007 they are not three steps ahead and they don't know what they are doing or talking about and the irrational exuberance and don't you remember that? well, they have gotten used to the fact that washington has the

manufactured crises, and one cliff after another and are worked out in a temporary basis and at some point that might stop happening. >> michael corn and david steel, we appreciate you. and what antonin scalia had to say about a voting rights act, and that it is a titlement, and we will hear him speak about it. this is "hardball," the place for politics. ition, energy, and can help you keep a healthy weight. campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do.

but with kids growing up fast, fighting seven signs of aging gets harder. introducing total effects moisturizer plus serum. for the ninety-two practices, two proms, and one driving test yet to come. she'll need our most concentrated total effects ever. she'll need our most concentrated so if ydead battery,t tire, need a tow or lock your keys in the car, geico's emergency roadside assistance is there 24/7.

oh dear, i got a flat tire. hmmm. uh... yeah, can you find a take where it's a bit more dramatic on that last line, yeah? yeah i got it right here. someone help me!!! i have a flat tire!!! well it's good... good for me. what do you think? geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

why a justice would classify the simple protected right to vote as racial entitlements

baffles me and offends me. >> welcome back to "hardball." that was texas congresswoman sheila jackson lee reflecting the visceral reaction to supreme court justice antonin scalia's comments referring to it as a racial entitlement, and he may have unintentionally ramped up supports and their resolve to protect the rights. this afternoon the audiotapes of the arguments were released by the court, so now the words that caused such an uproar can be paired with the voice. >> this last enactment, not a single vote in the senate against it. and the house is pretty much the same. now, i don't think that's attributable to the fact that it is so much clearer now that we need this. i think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. it's been written about.

whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes. >> joining me now are two people who were in the courtroom for the arguments. julie fernandes, a former deputy attorney general in the civil rights division of the justice department, and dale ho of the naacp legal defense and education fund who has worked on this case from the beginning. julie, take me in the supreme court. what was the body language? what was the vibe when they get into it? meaning justices scalia and sotomayor and kagan? >> i think that a lot of people were surprised to hear justice scalia refer to the voting rights act as a racial entitlement. i think that the language -- no one knows exactly what he was thinking, but the word entitlement suggests that somehow you are getting something that you didn't earn. for many of us we think of the voting rights act and the right to vote as sort of an equality mandate for all americans. it's an equality mandate, not

some kind of an entitlement, something that when the voters of texas -- and in texas, african-americans and latinos, federal courts found that they were intentionally discriminated against. their right to vote, section 5's ability to stop that, that's not a racial entitlement. that's american justice. >> i don't believe, dale, that voting is a racial entitlement. i don't know how anyone could make such a statement, but giving him the benefit of the doubt, it was bone-headed what he said at best. as i read the full context, he seemed to be saying we never unwind benefits that are given to a particular group demographic by way of example. is he right in that respect? >> well, first of all, i don't think he's right in that respect at all. i think what he's trying to say, if i can try to get into his mind, i know julie didn't want to try to do that. he's trying to articulate the argument that the plaintiff was making in this case, that racial discrimination is largely a thing of the past and, therefore, we don't need things like the civil rights act anymore. these are luxuries that have become in their view entitlements, and,

unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. we have, in fact, seen tremendous progress over the last 50 years, but we also see tremendous discrimination, and the right to be free from that discrimination when you're exercising the right to vote is not entitlement. it's an american birth right. >> we have to play for everybody the tapes because they're stunning. the two of you were there. justices sonia sotomayor and elena kagan, both new to the bench, gave some of the strongest push back to scalia's premise. here in an exchange with the lawyer representing shelby county, justice sotomayor directly challenging that comment. >> do you think the right to vote is a racial entitlement in section 5? >> no, the 15th amendment protects the right of all to vote and -- >> i asked a different question. do you think section 5 was voted for because it was a racial entitlement? >> well, congress -- >> you think there was no basis to find that -- >> may i say congress was reacting in 1964 to a problem of

race discrimination which it thought was prevalent in certain jurisdictions. so to that extent as the intervenor said, yes, it was intended to protect those who had been discriminated against. if i might say, i think that -- >> do you think that racial discrimination in voting has ended? that there is none anywhere? >> i think the world is not perfect. >> julie, was she speaking to him or was she speaking to justice scalia? what was going on? where was she looking when she said that? >> i think often the justices, and in this case likely too, they are talking to each other as much as they're talking to the litigants. >> using him as a means -- >> as sort of a prop in a sense, not a nice word, but just as an opportunity to have a conversation so they can talk to each other about what's really going on. but i do think i want to say what's really going on here are two things. one is there is a case to be made there is continuing voting discrimination in states all

over the south and other parts of the country that's race-based that section 5 prevents, and the question is whose job is it to determine when that job is done? so that's both about the continuing need for section 5, but also the role of congress versus the role of the court. that's the conversation that they're having. and that's the conversation that's really important for us as a country to kind of get to. >> thank you julie fernandez and dale ho. do you ever wonder who are the percentage of americans who approve of the job that congress is doing? well, we found them on the side show. to find them you just have to know how to spell smerconish. this is "hardball," the place for politics. not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left.

i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested. but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem, that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce the risk of an afib-related stroke. there is limited data on how these drugs compare when warfarin is well managed. no routine blood monitoring means bob can spend his extra time however he likes. new zealand! xarelto® is just one pill a day, taken with the evening meal. and with no dietary restrictions, bob can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto® rivaroxaban without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. stopping may increase your risk of having a stroke. get medical help right away if you develop any signs or symptoms of bleeding, like unusual bruising or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding

if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto® if you currently have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto®, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver or bleeding problems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®. for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com.

back to "hardball." now for the "sideshow." first, how is this for an odd couple?

former nba star dennis rodman and north korean dictator kim jong-un. believe it. rodman and members of the harlem globetrotters made the trip to pyongyang this week as part of a documentary project. there was no guarantee that they would meet kim jong-un, but turns out the north korean leader was up for playing host. here is the pair sitting courtside at an exhibition basketball game which was capped off with a party at kim jong-un's palace. it gets better. it seems dennis rodman failed to brush up on his koreas before heading overseas. check out this tweet. maybe i'll run into gangnam style dude while i'm here. that, of course, is a reference to the south korean rapper psy. not surprisingly given the tense relationship between the north and the south, psy was not amused tweeting back, i'm from south, man. next, you may have noticed that every time a poll comes out about congress, their

favorability rating is embarrassingly low. here is the question though. who are the 9% or 10% or 12% of people who do give them a thumbs up? "the new york times" did some digging after their own poll found congress had a 12% favorability asking people why they liked congress. some people backed off their vote of support entirely instead using words like idiots and ninnies to describe members of congress. someone else said their response was an accident. while another said she just had surgery when she answered the question. overall though, the report found that the tiny group of congress lovers fell into one of two camps. they either blame president obama and not congress for the washington gridlock or they're just really optimistic that everybody is trying their best. for the folks who think congress needs to step it up though, there's stephen colbert's solution to the next budget crisis. >> i think i know why the sequester is not working. because it doesn't affect congress. the salaries of senators and representatives do not get cut.

so to congress the sequester is like a loan shark saying if you don't pay up, he's going to break your neighbor's legs. to prevent the next crisis, we just need a worse scenario. i say we suspend monkey above the floor of congress. no, an ebola monkey. if they do not reach a budget deal by the deadline, the doors to congress are locked, the rope is cut, and it is meal time in the monkey house. finally, how do we know that things aren't going well between president obama and speaker boehner? "the atlantic's" politics blog has the photo spread to prove it with captions after this tribute to rosa parks. first obama sends his furious laser beam eyes in boehner's direction followed by it's scarier in close-up, and later this is the exact body language a couple uses when they break up in a car.

coming up next, "your b business with j.j. ramberg." two, and one driving test yet to come. she'll need our most concentrated total effects ever. she'll need our most concentrated you know, from our 4,000 television commercials. yep, there i am with flo. hoo-hoo! watch it! [chuckles] anyhoo, 3 million people switched to me last year, saving an average of $475.

[sigh] it feels good to help people save... with great discounts like safe driver, multicar, and multipolicy. so call me today. you'll be glad you did. cannonbox! [splash!]