cardmember you can expect some help. but what you might not expect, is you can get all this with a prepaid card. spends like cash. feels like membership. good morning from new york. i'm steve kornacki. rescue operations continue in bangladesh where nine more survivors have been pulled from the collapse. the u.s. terrorism official confirms to nbc news that the mother of the alleged boston marathon bombers was put on a u.s. terrorism database in the fall of 2011. more on boston in just a moment. i'm joined by jordan fabian, political editor at "fusion." lorella praeli, director of advocacy and policy for united we dream. ryan enos, political scientist and assistant professor of

government at harvard university. pino, communication direct kwor for the conservative hispanic grub the libre initiative. pop the gain of eight senators reaching a compromise and key republican lawmakers lining up behind the bill. practice senator marco rubio appeared on a record shattering seven sunday morning talk shows to make the conservative case for immigration reform. on the monday after rubio's media blitz came the boston marathon bombings. the four days later, senate judiciary hearing iowa republican senator chuck grassley began raising questions about how potential weaknesses in u.s. immigration laws may have been able to -- the attacks to despite acknowledging the immigration status wasn't even known yet. >> given the events of this week, it is for for us to understand the gaps and loopholes in our immigration system. while we don't yet know the immigration status of people who

have terrorized the communities in massachusetts when we find out it will help shed light on the weaknesses of our system. how can individuals evade authority and plan such attacks on our soil. >> when the committee reconvened the past monday grassley and new york senator schumer, one of the key advocates for immigration reform, got into this heated exchange. >> ways to improve the bill, offer amendment when we start markup in may and let's vote on it. i say that particularly to those pointing to what happened. terrible tragedy in boston. and as a -- i would say an excuse. for not doing a bill or delaying it many months or years. >> i never said that! >> i didn't say did you. >> i never said that! >> i didn't say you did, sir. >> i didn't say -- >> would days later rubio himself suggested he was open to denying student visas to immigrants from muslim countries. sentiment he stood by the following day. >> you opened the door to

perhaps not allowing muslim students to receive student visas in this country. did you mean that 24 hours later? >> yeah. there are indicators that people are coming from parts of the world where there are dangerous people living and plotting against us. that should be a factor in determining whether we allow people to come here from there or not. >> so -- in this whole immigration reform saga, this -- this version of it at least, because we have been down the road before, a few years ago, ended up going nowhere. in the saga there have been a few, you know, moments where everything stops. and you think of maybe it was month or would ago when marco rubio, chuck schumer went on the sunday shows and said we are close to a deal, marco rubio said wait. not even close, you know. there are issues here. it seemed like what marco rubio was doing, sort of making sure he had cover on the right. cover in the conservative base. and to go forward. we seem to have reached another one of the moments where brakes are being applied. again, with conservatives saying that, you know, some of them,

you know, as we said with chuck grassley, rand paul comes to mind, you know, using the boston bombings, you know, the boston bombers were in this country legally under the current immigration system. i'm struggling to see any lessons from that that -- anybody hethat feel that boston should be affecting the debate? >> the boston bombings -- the current system is broken and we immediate to take a second look at what the current policy. there's nothing wrong with taking a bit of time, being more careful to see where we went wrong, if there are any flaws that could have led to the unfortunate circumstance. i'm not saying that the boston bombings, you know, have anything to do or should stifle immigration reform. but -- it is wakeup call. definite wakeup call. it is not working. we are working on this monster bill. let's make sure everything is in it. you know. >> the question that -- judy, you might be able to speak to this. the question with immigration reform is what is happening

within the conservative wing of the republican party. the last time six years ago when there was a push for reform it was conservatives who revolted and republicans, you know, said we want go forward with this. democrats. you know, i wonder right now, do you -- is your sense that anybody raising concerns about boston like rand paul this past week, is that a genuine concern on their part or is this conservatives who want to stop this latching on to something that they think they can use to stop them looking a week or two ago? >> this time around there is political will, maybe where there was than as much in 2004, 2006. i will tell you what, i don't think it is an excuse. i think there is a good opportunity to double-check. you know, cross their ts and dot our is. i hi we can do it. >> it is interesting to me. it does feel different this time around. it certainly felt different, you know, lee weeks ago. i guess if you look at the process that -- would have to

play out here, senate, already have the bill. it is -- committee hearings on it and talk. i think john mccain said that -- he expects or wants to get 70 votes or more in the senate. it speaks to the issue that is -- bedeviled washington this year. if you want to get anything big through, get a massive majority in the senate and massive majority in the senate and isolate house republicans and you force them to bring something to the floor that maybe the conservatives and party don't want. you know, jordan -- do you have a -- do you think that 70 votes he is talking about could materialize? >> i think it could. it will be difficult for them to wrangle up the votes. going back there to the earlier point about boston, i don't think that this debate is going to or this terror attack will derail the i shall knew any way. like in 2001. you haven't seen any fence sitters aside from rand paul really go out there and say, well, boston, i got to put the brakes on this. mike lee, after committee hearing, said that -- opponent of the bill, said, look, this is just an excuse.

the issues of the immigration system existed before boston and will exist after boston. i think that -- you know, it is a weeks go by, this issue is going to go past and i do think they have a chance to get 70 votes. it will be tough, though. >> i mean, i think they are going to be -- smaller number of people that will want to stand in the way regardless. and we have seen this even before the boston terrorist attack. we saw how there were people who -- in committee, judiciary committee, who are writing letters to the chairman lahey saying we are going to need, you know, the same amount of time people needed last time around. that was three years of debate. you know. 100-plus committee or -- testimonies at committee hearings. i mean, so there is going to be people who are going want to stand in the way and block immigration reform from going through. i do think that our coalition stronger today than i think it was two weeks ago. i think we have seen individuals from both sides -- both aisles of the political landscape come out and say this is the reason

why we need to work immigration reform. it is not a reason to derail it or to prolong it. >> i guess -- you know, i guess -- either we are going to have immigration reform or not. there's all sorts of variations of immigration reform and i think one of the outstanding issues here, big outstanding issue, we have the gang of eight compromise in the senate. will is a bipartisan gang that has not released their ploon the house side. there's talk that that plan, you know, the path to citizenship in the senate bill right now stands at about 13 years. the house is -- that -- hints coming out of the house, 15 years there. you also have the chairman of the judiciary committee on the house at a very conservative republican -- bob from virginia, saying he wants to break this up into a peace meal thing. and, of course, concern there is -- among advocates, if you do that, you break it up and have a separate vote on path for citizenship. that makes it a lot easier and more likely there will not be a path to citizenship so you have this big split between the house and senate that's going to -- reconciled still. >> yeah.

i would love to hear more from the congressman what the plan is to move lou with a bill. he said he wants to do it piece by piece and open to taking comprehensive bill but the gang of eight and the house is working on and try to figure out how to -- you know, how to bring those together. but i don't think any republican in the -- in the house wants to take five different votes on immigration. i think for us the concern is that you start breaking them up into a vote for stem, what's that mean about the 11 million documented people in this country? i'm almost certain there is going to be a desire to do a stand-alone dream version but i'm not so sure about, you know, when we start talking about a pathway to citizenship for my mom, and -- our members of our community. >> that's interesting -- an interesting distinction. we have the dream act which is -- vote a couple of years go, did not get through if will is a separate dream act, separate dream act legislation now, separate dream act vote, comprehensive reform, seems like the track for the -- dream act

going to be faster than the track for comprehensive reform. does that raise any issues for families? >> yes. i mean, i think that the -- the dream provision, dream part of comprehensive immigration reform now, has a different pathway to citizenship. much shorter. five-year pathway to citizenship under the gang of eight and senate bill. i think that the -- dreamers on the ground have made a commitment to our families and we said last november 600 of us met in the international congress and said we are on this fight for families and we want a pathway, road map to citizenship for 11 million people. and we do not want a standalone dream act. right now we are not even considering about trying to persia -- standalone dream act in the house or in the senate. >> a point to remember why republicans got behind this in the first place. that's because -- yeah, policy sense. it makes political sense, too. it is hard to imagine them wanting to break things up. gain the same sort of political capital being able to move through a comprehensive bill or can gain all the political

points of la teen companies and other people behind immigration reform. >> yeah. it would seem -- there's -- two issues. the -- broad problem of the republican party has with latino voters. also this sort of tension within the republican party where there are some very loud and very prominent voices who are saying stop and not citing boston. they are citing something else and we are going show you what that is after this. sundays are the warrior's day to unplug and recharge. what if this feeling could last all week? with centurylink as your trusted partner, it can. our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and dedicated support, your business can shine all week long. [ male announcer ] we all have something neatly tucked away in the back of our mind. a secret hope.

that thing we've always wanted to do. it's not about having dreams, it's about reaching them. ♪ an ally for real possibilities. aarp. find tools and direction at aarp.org/possibilities. progressive direct and other car insurance companies? yes. but you're progressive, and they're them. yes. but they're here. yes. are you...? there? yes. no. are you them? i'm me. but those rates are for... them. so them are here. yes! you want to run through it again? no, i'm good. you got it? yes. rates for us and them -- now that's progressive. call or click today.

ryan was talking about the importance of republicans getting onboard and address the problems they had with latino voters. there are prominent republican voices saying don't listen to people like ryan. it is a rap. >> have you about 10 million illegals. 7 million of them will vote

democrat. republican party is finished. it is a mathematics. this is a disaster here for the republicans to support amnesty. they are signing their own death sentence. >> there. rush limbaugh laid it out the typically nuanced fashion. have you 11 million undocumented. if you make them citizens, we see the latinos favor democrats and -- 11 million votes for democrats. that's it. democrats win every election in the future. is that right? >> absolutely not. i -- if we were to run through all the problems of that argument we could spend all day here. i will go with two. first of all, all 11 mon undocumented immigrants in the u.s. are not going to become full citizens. they are not all going to get legal stat us and among those that get legal status not all of them will want to spend 13 years getting full citizenship. also, not all undocumented immigrants are latinos, asians, africans. i think that -- you know, at the end of the day, maybe, you know,

top of my head, would be 1 to 2 million new democratic voters. republicans should be more worried about the 50,000 u.s. born latinos automatically citizens and turned 18 here every month. those are going to be what is driving the latino voting bloc into the next decade. >> so harry, political numbers cruncher, writes for "the guardian," he went through this step by step. he talked about what just said, jordan, first of all, a fifth of the undocumented are not latino. many of them are asian and asians are concentrated in california and washington. when you are talking about the political impact that's concentrated. he also cites that the last time we had real immigration reform in 1986 we had ronald reagan and amnesty. over 3 million who were eligible for citizenship, only 40%, 23 years later, only 40% had gone through that process. apply that and apply the fact that, you know, not everybody votes, half the people vote, he got down to 3.5 million in the year 2028.

passed it right now this wouldn't affect anything until the year 2028. which says to me, you know if there are deeper problems, it gives them time between now and 2020. >> it was chuck schumer who said if the republicans hadn't fixed the latino problem in 13 years, they have a much bigger problem on their hands. >> let's make it clear. immigration is not the only thing that matters to latinos. there is education and health care. the economy and jobs. let's not focus immigration is the only way to get the latino vote and even once they become eligible to become citizens, the numbers show a lot of them don't even go through the process of becoming citizens. most of them when they come here, they want to work. they want to prosper. that's why i think this bill is for because have you 11 million people living in the shadows and let's legalize them and let's try to get them working and try to get them paying taxes. and i love the fact that you know, it addresses young people because they are the future of the force in this country. it is about the economy.

if we don't prep those kids sxej indicate, become viable citizens of the coun awesome contributors and -- you know, futures, then not too solid. >> you get to an interesting point there when you talk about this sort of broader attitude you finally poll latinos about. role of government and the safety and their basic attitude towards what government should be doing. and it is in conflict right now with this tea partization, you know, of the republican party. which basically wants to -- reduce the safety met. significantly. reduce spending on all sorts of social programs. and -- seems like -- i'm trying to figure out what the republican party could do right now because if you move to where latino voters are, and other voters are, on those sort of issues of the role of government, republican party is alienating what is right now. base. an aging, you know, white population, more conservative white population that -- the very programs and ideas the republican party has to embrace to get the new coalition.

i don't see how that's resolved now. >> an for point. the republicans might have to move away the tea party for other reasons. a lot of e reasons latinos are in favor of an expansive left wing income, they are low mc. they are democrats. and -- as latinos move up the economic ladder and become citizens, things like this will not stay that way. they might move more naturally into the republican camp. of corporation, they may not move into the tea party part of the republican cam and may move in that direction. you have to think about things like income and economics and where they are politically. >> similar slags tremendously for. people assimilate to this country and realize this is the land of opportunity, for real. there is an opportunity to study, opportunity to open your business to not depend on the government and that the government sometimes, although goods intention, gets in the way and watch to be able to provide for our kids and we don't want big taxes, big regulation, getting in the middle of that. yes. you know. maybe at the beginning that's why this process is going to

take a while before they are eligible. asimulation is -- asimation is key to this. that's why speaking the language and learn being the culture is extremely for. >> you raise the issue of simulation and that gets to a study that ryan did and looked at -- tend to focus and talk about the ct, political impact, comprehensive reform. rush limbaugh and others. you know, can this be more votes for democrats? there is a flip side potentially that has to do with simulation and we are going to ask ryan to explain that after this. [ agent smith ] i've found software that intrigues me. it appears it's an agent of good. ge has wired their medical hardware with innovative software to be in many places at the same time. using data to connect patients to software, to nurses

to the right people and machines. ♪ helping hospitals treat people even better, while dramatically reducing waiting time. now a waiting room is just a room. [ telephone ringing ] [ static warbles ] [ beeping ] red or blue? ♪ how did i know? well, i didn't really. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody...

that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor. we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% (testosterone gel). the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy, increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, should not use androgel. serious side effts include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting.

so...what do men do when a number's too low? turn it up! [ male announcer ] in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%. for those nights when it's more than a bad dream, be ready. for the times you need to double-check the temperature on the thermometer, be ready. for high fever, nothing works faster or lasts longer. be ready with children's motrin. . ryan, you did a study that made me step back. it is a wow, maybe i have been missing a huge part of the story when it comes to the political impact of having immigraon reform. and basically deals with the issue of is there going to be a backlash, a tribal backlash, among white voters, maybe even more liberal voters we never

would have thought had my problem with it? >> yeah. we didn't study it. there is a long history of it and people like reagan democrats and one of the reasons people became reagan voters was because of a backlash against some sort of racial mixing of inner cities and things like that. a long history. we wanted to do an experiment on it. scientific experiment to show these things happening. whether places that are experiencing latino immigration that hadn't experienced before by having backlash against the democratic voting. a blue state. whether or not the blue state looks right. we did a signtivics experiment like you might see if you are trying to show the drug did something. treatment and control. treatment was introducing immigrants, people that were supposed to be immigrants into the communities. boston area. for an extended period of time. >> these are communities sort of affluent, liberal. >> newton. the relatively affluent. boston suburbs are. they are very -- very liberal sort of blue places. we are essentially looking at white people in these -- in

these communities. that haven't experienced latinos moving into their communities. immigration. and this is a very small number of latinos. two. would latinos to train stations. people exposed to them every day. and -- then we look to see what their attitudes are towards immigration look like after they are exposed to the people for a few days. what you saw was that they said things like, well, children of undocumented immigration gets september back to mexico and reduce immigration from mexico and said that english should be made a national language. all those things moved in a significant direction away from these sort of liberal immigration values compared to a controlled group. >> you see, that's something that -- frustrates me. obviously asimulation, you know, is the ideal and like to think that, you know, we -- certainly hope that that's the direction of moving. when i hear that story i think of what happened in the south. especially in the deep south in the last 40, 50 years. after civil rights. and, of course, you know, pre-civil rights, dem rattic party dominated the south. one-party region. roosevelt got 90% of the vote in

south carolina like in 1936. things like that. what happened when you had civil rights, blacks sudnly -- voting rights, blacks able to vote and they -- they largely became democrats. whites fled the democratic party in the south. it has gotten to the point in the last election, you know, romney was getting 90% of the white voters. states like mississippi. have you two parties. racial lines. when i hear about a study like that, i just, you know, you know, makes me -- nervous. >> you know, that's were if the -- take a -- sign of the times. what's happening now. look at the -- representative young when he managed to say -- you know, the wetbacks, you know, wetbacks comment. it was pretty for him. even from the -- republican side, they were not happy because that does not make the party look good at all. and so what's happening is that this legislation is on the table right now. and it makes everybody just uncomfortable enough to work. because -- it addresses the

unions and addresses the, you know, undocumented workers. the employers. and dashboarder security. it addresses all the thingsha may make people, you know, think wise about saying your name to this bill. that includes, you know, the -- china sea. if there is an opportunity for a job for americans and considered first. have 30 days. employer has 30 days to post the job. so there are things in there that -- that some people pay say, okay, i can deal with this. >> yeah. a lot of the -- lot of the -- some of the things that sort of sink the -- last effort in 2007, i mean, part of it was a rebellion against the idea of amnesty and conservative base. there was also the unions and chamber of commerce sort of at loggerheads. that has been resolved. there's more of incentive for the republican party. i guess this was sort of an issue when they -- aaron u that self-autopsy a month or would ago. people probably forgot all

about. the republican party tried to diagnose it. its problems. >> like you see the gop opportunity project and, you know, outlines this is what your party -- this is what the party needs to do to be relevant and be competitive and national elections. and in there you see they have to find out how to appeal to latino voters and they have to resolve immigration reform. so there -- the republicans are in this moment now where they can be on the right side of history or can choose not to. and there will be people holding them accountable. one of the things i love to talk about is like dreamers are such -- political force. right. like we organized, we have -- made political demands and one political -- like we have political wins without our ability to vote at this moment. we have not declared an allegiance to the democrats or the republicans. we hold senator rubio as accountable as we hold the president of the united states. and so -- how people act and how people -- how they come to the table on this issue of

comprehensive immigration reform which obviously is -- is of utmost importance to us, that will matter and it will have long lasting implications for us s sort of -- we were talking during the break, you know, and ryan was saying that the political sigh owns this is vote preferences party identity gets locked in basically. 2021. right. -- your point, i think is well taken. if one party is seen as hostile to the creamers now and other one obviously is sort of advancing their cause that might be -- might lock in preferences and going to be affecting, you know, elections. >> we are in a moment it is more than just dreamers. both republicans and democrats want to talk about dreamers right now. they are on the same page. dreamers should have a pathway to citizenship. dreamers, you know, we -- we are all kind of -- we are very political popular for both parties at this moment. i think what dreamers are looking out for at this moment is that -- how are you talking about my mom? how are you talking about my dad? how are you talking about my neighbor?

and that's -- that makes the key difference for us. >> we will pick that thought up right after this.

>> we are fired of being taken advantage of. >> i'm doing this for the greater good of everybody. >> in 45 years will we look back at today as the starting point of a struggle that may lead to a more decent wage for the millions of other people that serve for a living.

jordan, i rudely interrupted you. what were you about to say? >> i just think that the overall takeaway of this whole argument is that -- the republicans snead to start doing the work now and starting with immigration reform to -- tap into this growing latino voting block. in the short term will's tough consequences for them. they can risk backlash from the working class voters that moved over to them with ronald reagan. i think that just -- that's what makes it so tough for the party to wrap their minds around this at the moment. >> at the same time there were a lot of white voters that voted for obama this time around. latinos, maybe next time around, are not -- not going to be that happy with the democratic party. they haven't been that party with the obama administration at all. so -- it is kind of -- kind of -- oh, latinos are automatically going to vote one way or another.

these guys need to earn people's votes. both the democrats and the republicans. and that takes a lot of effort on the ground and doing your homework. and -- showing the party, you know, showing the people that, you know, you care. i think that has been definitely a challenge for the conservative party for the republican party and so there is a lot of homework to be done. especially there latino community. >> democrats get angry when i say that. the idea that inevitable march of democrats to victory, it is somewhat foolish. we have seen this before. talking about this before. people talking about the coalition roosevelt brought about in the '30s would never break apart. it did break apart in the is he 60s. democrats need to think about how to keep voters together in one coalition. i personally think policies stayed for that. they can keep it together but not anng do. >> i grew up when it was the republicans had a supposed lock on the electoral cole negligent 1968 to 19 8. mix only through bush sr. and now i'm hearing about the coalition of the asent dent for the democrats.

i can certainly see the argument that this is going -- could be a decade long thing that would be more than a decade. at a certain point hard for me to see one party is permanently going to have a advantage and other party won't eventually adjust. it is interesting. you know. president obama actually made a point this week i think is worth bringing up. lot of talk this week about george w. bush's legacy because of the opening of his library and a lot in that legacy that -- you know, controversial or disastrous but there is something that he was a little bit ahead of his time on at least within his party and -- president obama did -- you know, talked about it. we are going to show that. >> seven years ago president bush started a conversation about speaking to the american people about our history as a nation of laws and immigrants. even though comprehensive immigration reform has taken little longer than any of us expected, i am hopeful that this year with the help of speaker boehner and some of the senators

and members of congress who are here today, that we bring it home. for our families and our economy and security. and for the incredible country that we love and if we do that, it will be -- in large part thanks to the hard work of president george w. bush. >> so i -- look. this passes. i don't know how much credit bush deserves. worth noting he spotted this and karl rove spotted this a while ago. republican party's future is tied to making -- winning over latino voerts. look at the 2004 election, it seems like an eternity ago maybe. george w. bush got 44% of the latino vote hen. which is -- stagger when you look at mccain did and romney did. it was only eight years ago, nine years ago the republicans -- nearly 50%. >> i think -- you know, bush got all of the things that judy was pointing out, is attained outreach. he dealt with this community during his time as governor. he got all of this whereas, i think, someone like mitt romney

just -- didn't come naturally to him. bush was on the immigration issue all the way back in 2001. mine, he was talking -- behind national mike migration working group. and that all got derail. >> the first -- i think state dinner at the white house, when bush was president, fox, mexican president. >> right. he was on this a long, long time ag ago. it is amazing weepded up where we are now. >> his whole party, really, you know, his party was what killed this in 2006 and it does make me wonder if the conservative movement hadn't revolted, and if politics sort of landscape may look different today. >> reagan was the republican party that ushered into immigration reform. talking about it. these groups -- latinonot -- republican party in large numbers. it is more than just immigration. people said that. more than immigration that's doing this. republican parties need to think beyond immigration if they want to bring latinos onboard.

>> jordan fabian, lorella praeli, ryan enos and judy piano. what would america look like if republicans had complete control of government? that's next. thank you orville and wilbur... ...amelia... neil and buzz: for teaching us that you can't create the future... by clinging to the past. and with that: you're history. instead of looking behind... delta is looking beyond. 80 thousand of us investing billions...

in everything from the best experiences below... to the finest comforts above. we're not simply saluting history... we're making it. i've always had to keep my eye on her... but, i didn't always watch out for myself. with so much noise about health care... i tuned it all out. with unitedhealthcare, i get information that matters... my individual health profile. not random statistics. they even reward me for addressing my health risks. so i'm doing fine... but she's still going to give me a heart attack. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. to your table for a limited time! it's our seafood dinner for two for just 25 dollars! a handcrafted seafood feast made to share. first you each get salad and unlimited cheddar bay biscuits. then choose two from a wide variety of chef-inspired entrées like our new honey garlic crispy shrimp

or new seafood lover's linguini. round out your seafood dinner with your choice of either an appetizer or dessert to share! don't miss our seafood dinner for two, just $25 at red lobster, where we sea food differently. don't miss our seafood dinner for two, just $25 but i wondered what a customer thought? describe the first time you met. you brought the flex in... as soon as i met fiona and i was describing the problem we were having with our rear brakes, she immediately triaged the situation, knew exactly what was wrong with it, the car was diagnosed properly, it was fixed correctly i have confidence knowing that if i take to ford it's going to

be done correctly with the right parts and the right people. get a free brake inspection and brake pads installed for just 49.95 after rebates when you use the ford service credit card. did you tell him to say all of that? no, he's right though... if you wonder what politics looks like if the republicans won congress and the white house last fall all you immediate to do is look at north carolina. on monday the stat senate voted to make parents and families seeking well pair benefits take a drug test first. the test would cost applicants $100 up front and money that would later be funded for those who pass. two days after that, the state house of representatives passed a bill requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls. as protesters made their feelings known as the state capitol as they have when other states mounted attempts at voter suppression. both bills are expected to pass when they reach the other house. what makes north carolina worth paying close attention to right now is the fact that the state

has suddenly just in the last few months become a laboratory for ideology. it used to be solidly democratic, a long time ago. unlike other southern states it has not quite made the transition to republican. it was an historic moment in 2010 when north carolina republicans won control of both houses of the state legislature. the first time since 1870. those majorities couldn't do too much because the states had eight democratic governor. that was until last november when voters handed the governorship to a republican giving the party total control north carolina's government for the first time since reconstruction. unleashed and unchecked they steamed forward on an agenda that could pass for a wish list. personal and corporate tax cuts restrictions on abortion, cuts to education funding and increasing out of state tuition for state schools and ending public funding of judicial elections and potential rollbacks of local environmental regulations. state already blocked the expansion of medicaid under president obama's health care reform law. i want to bring in gerrick

brenner, executive director of the progress north carolina. linda garrou, and josh barro. this is what your world would look like, america if mitt romney had won and republican took the senate last year. i think what makes this particularly interesting is like lye we said in the opening, you had a situation in north carolina before this year that was similar to washington. where republicans had legislative control and you had a democratic executive in, you know, north carolina. the governor nationally president obama who could put the brakes on their sort of wild ambitions but removed the break in 2012 with the election of a republican governor. it is a republican governor that's -- name is pat mckrory. when he was running nationally he got a lot of attention for being a -- supposedly moderate and pragmatic republican kind of like mitt romney. and as governor, though, totally different story it seems like.

>> you are absolutely right. the governor is being controlled by businessman in north carolina and what we find with the republican reign in terror is contempt for mid and class and contempt for people that need hand sxwrout a hand-up and leg up on -- to achieve opportunities for them. the interesting part of what the republicans are doing, they are looking at our economic engines and going after our university system which is the pride of north carolina. most states would love to have a wonderful university system like north carolina. and then they are going after our cities. our economic engines. where -- where the jobs are being created. it is a really disappointing turn of events for those of us who worked so hard to provide opportunities in north carolina. >> and the expectation is -- you know, we had the voter i.d. bill clearing one chamber and had

this welfare bill clearing another chamber. expectation is these are both going to clear both houses and be enacted. is there anything at this point that you can see stopping that? >> i mean, the few things that can stop that is ongoing national attention and ongoing media attention. shows like this. and the work of the local folks on the ground. this really speaks to not just what's happened politically in north carolina and also speaks to the type of funding that's happen order the ground of the network of state groups by folks like art pope. the business man behind all the dollar stores in north carolina. >> talk to me about art pope. "the new yorker" did a write-up on him a couple of years ago. he's sort of the -- runs the -- chain of like wholesale stores in north carolina. lots of money. and he went in in 2010, legislative elections when the republicans won control and basically they -- poured money into the state senate race. >> poured money not only to the state senate races but into a network of local organizations. and many cases, will is a lot of

national groups now coming in and trying to help and support the amazing work progress now and others are doing. what they did at a local level was funded an array of think tanks and local groups and advocacy groups on the ground and nation lally to remake north carolina. he funded the takeover of the house and in so many ways operating it like -- kind of an old school big plantation where -- these legislators have to do his bidding and in the state house. >> art pope now has a position in -- the governor's office is that right? >> that's correct. i believe he is the budget director. it is really eye i don't think that you buy the election and then you become the person who governs. i guess one of the things i wanted to say is that one of the most terrifying aspects of this is that -- the -- folks who have taken control are now trying to rig the rules so they can stay in control and pass the time when they have a majority.

and -- as you said north carolina is -- has been a moderate southern state. >> when you say that, what specifically is being done to do that? >> there are two things. one is the voter i.d. law and the other taking -- the proposals that are having it passed would probably will pass cutting back early voting and taxing the parents of students and who voted, colleges, which is admittedly in order to put states in play on a partisan basis and the -- eliminating sunday voting which is -- used as proportionally as african-americans and then the other piece of it is redistricting. the -- the state votes pretty much evenly democrat, republican and as you said president obama won it and not from a partisan standpoint but from an analytic standpoint it is tilted. it is tilted so that the -- of the 13 republicans -- of the congressional districts, nine of them are held by republicans. and the republicans have a supermajority in the legislature. and that's because they drew the lines in such a way as to really

maximize their control of the state for the next ten years. unless the -- the lawsuit which is about -- brought by the southern coalition should be successful and should redistricts the state. >> redistricting was done in -- when you still have democratic governor, she had no actual role in the process so she couldn't be a check there. i want to talk more specifically about the voter i.d. issue which is -- hot right now. that's right after this. my mother made the best toffee in the world. it's delicious.

so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. i never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ robert ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to legalzoom.com today and make your business dream a reality. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side.

right now i want to bring in reverend william barber. he is the president of the north carolina naacp, major figure in the protests wednesday at the state legislature. reverend, thanks for joining us. so -- i wanted to just -- for us to establish we have the -- in all of the likelihood right now, the voter i.d. bill that will be passed by the other chamber and signed by the governor. this has happened in other states and there are various restrictions on voting achievements.

can you outline what exactly are the restrictions on voting that are in this bill? >> good morning and thank you so much. when you really look at this, how -- context you have to put tonight, what we are seeing in north carolina is a -- extreme ideological mean-spirited tea party backed attack on people in this state. it is almost as though they want to be known as the george wallaces of the 21st century. it is kind of like the white southern strategy being revisited with the 21st century twist. had started out at the beginning of the legislative -- they cut 500,000 people from medicaid, health care. decided not to take it. 165,000 people that cut out of unemployment. and now they are attacking voting rights. they also decided that they want to go after labor rights, want to put impediments in the constitution for labor rights. cut 900,000 working people's earned income taxes, effectively raising tax owes the poor. so they could give a tax cut to

23 wealthy families. now they are going after voting rights. voter i.d. that they have passed in the house is more restrictive than south carolina and alabama. they will not allow people with impediments to still be able to vote as south carolina does. and they have denied private school i.d.s as a form of i.d. in this state. so schools like wake forest or duke university students or shell students, they are -- would be denied. 89,000 private school students in this state. and this voter suppression is -- poll tax disguised as voter i.d. the same legislature, steve, last year, the most race based redistricting plan that we have seen since the 19th century and they are planning to roll back same-day rej strigs and cut sunday voting and they are saying that if you are a fell son and paid your debt to society you have to wait five years and then -- after that, you have to apply to the local or -- election board to get your rights back. we are seeing an extreme attack

of race based class based attacks because this crowd is afraid after brand-new elective happen something the south the demographics are saying that and they are afraid of this new electorate and new america. they know they can't win with the broad electorate. now what they are trying to do is create structures of public policies and that were hurt and mine ports and african-americans and the poor. they are trying to put impediments in the way of a broad elector and not allow to it stand. >> well, yeah. you say that -- you won't allow it. i have seen reports that you are maybe planning some sort of civil disobedience campaign. maybe, you know, this company weak. can you tell fuss you have anything planned there? >> well, we -- we have a two-pronged strategy. when the deal with this kind of right-wing southern strategy, you have to have a ground-up approach. we have great groups like the southern coalition. leading our legal piece. now we have advancement project. southern. judith brown.

advancement. we are putting together powerful legal strategy because we believe all of this is unconstitutional but -- both at the state constitutional level and you have to have a strong grassroots movement. we have an organization in the naacp 100 branches and 147 members of our coalition called the people's coalition. and we are tonight meeting at the united church of christ in durham to call this state to prayer and protest and to nonviolent civil disobedience. tomorrow between the hours of 3:00 and 6:00 that we will be in action of clergy and students who will engage in a form of pray-in, protest, we will not allow them to do this in the dark. we will not allow them to do this without the whole world and the whole country seeing what they are doing. and -- saying to our friends and around the country, if you really want to change the nation, you have to change the south. you can help us on the ground and help us because we are raising -- this is -- drawn a

line in the sand. they have cross ad moral line and crossed a constitutional line and we are going to continue to protest both in the streets and in the courts. because what happens in these southern states has the dramatic impact on what happens in the nation. >> reverend, very quickly, we are going to be up against a break here but if this bill ends up being, you know, implemented sign bid the governor, are you prepared for a legal challenge. >> we are more than definitely, definitely. that's what -- i set a two-prong strategy. legal strategy and an organizing strategy. we believe that this bill that they have passed violates section one of north american constitution, section 6. the legislature can't even do what they are doing in terms of determining who can vote. we believe that violates the 24th amendment and creates a poll tax and believes the fundmently against the 15th amendment of the constitution. and -- really, steve, finally, we have to understand what's going on. i think that the broad

electorate that brought president obama into office and even in 2008, gave him north carolina, scares everything out of people who want an electorate and know we are in the middle of a kind of a third reconstruction and see fusion politics, blacks and whites. and labor and faith and young people come together. lgbt like never before. they know they can't win in that context. they want to rig the election. but we are not going to allow it. we will fight it with everything we have from the ground up. change north carolina and change the south. we are going to change the nation. >> all right. reverend william barber of the north carolina naacp. thank you for joining us. i want to find out how north carolina became a republican -- after this. what if you could shrink your pores just by washing your face?

[ female announcer ] neutrogena® pore refining cleanser. alpha-hydroxy and exfoliating beads work to clean and tighten pores so they can look half their size. pores...shrink 'em down to size! [ female announcer ] pore refining cleanser. neutrogena.®

the act of soaring across an ocean in a three-hundred-ton rocket doesn't raise as much as an eyebrow for these veterans of the sky. however, seeing this little beauty over international waters is enough to bring a traveler to tears. we're putting the wonder back into air travel, one innovation at a time. the new american is arriving. hello from new york. i'm here with gerrick brenner, executive director of the progress north carolina.

pen did a hair, linda garrou. we got a good run-down from reverend barber about, you know, what exactly is objectionable about, you know, voter i.d. and all of the other attempts to sort of mess with the election system in north carolina. i guess what -- whatever we have these issues come up, whether it is in north carolina or nationally, the thing that i -- thing that i try to keep in mind is when you -- when you look at public opinion on this, sort of mass public opinion on the issue of voter i.d., reflectively most people look at and it say well, i have to get an i.d. for this and be shown my i.d. all the time. ing why shouldn't i have to show it at the polling place? and it seems like, you know, you come up against that and -- it kind of encourages this. >> certainly that's an issue for folks. and my statement to folks who asked me about that is -- set up a way for seniors and poor people, go to the churches and set up i.d.s if that's what you end up doing. so that -- that it is not a

hardship on people to -- to -- to be able to secure those things. the issue with an i.d. is that -- we have a right to vote. that's our constitutional right. >> the i.d. issue is really -- it is a solution and in search of a problem. waen don't have a problem in this country with in-person voting. more likely to see big foot and maybe we will see the state legislature down in north carolina talking about big foot next. looking at the other legislation. >> absolutely. >> it is not really a problem in this country. what we have a problem with is long lines. problem with some communities having good voting systems and good machines and others not. we have a structural problem in our system that's not about i.d. sxds i.d.s are not going to solve them especially narrowly tailoring what type of i.d.s, guns in some places. >> there is a -- there is an amazing stat. somebody said there were 18 million ballots cast in north carolina from 2000 to 2011. of the 18 million there were 22

cases of fraud. >> steve, the right wing is funding groups with names like the voter integrity project. going into legislative hearings on voterd. and they are having people come up to the microphone and accuse people, naming voters, by name, what county they are from, accusing them of voter fraud. but then when you go back and actually talk to the voters, you find out that wait, they actually voted legally. two days after the legislative hearing, the same group, voter integrity project, put up a website statement and friday -- 4:5 friday afternoon, saying that they made mistakes. they are promising an audit but promising a report. here we are weeks later. no audit or report. we have voter i.d. pass the house. >> i mentioned the -- when you -- sort of poll mass opinion, again, it is reflexive. sure, we need a -- wondered watching this play out over the past few years if the response from the left, you know, sort of practically speaking, you know, i can understand statistically it is not a problem. practically speaking, it is --

the response wrong and should the response maybe be more, you know, let's have some sort of i.d. but let's put the burden tirely on the state to provide the i.d. to individuals. so right now all of these i.d. laws put the burden on the individual, is there a way maybe to have some sort of state issued i.d. where the sburd entirely on the state to do it? is that -- should that be something the left is thinking about? >> let me just say that this is not about i.d. this is about a narrow restrictive form of i.d. that has been precisely crafted to exclude students and seniors and people of color. and, you know, veterans. and approximately 600,000 people in north carolina don't have it. even though many people can say, yes, i have to show an i.d. for this or that, it is a -- a right to vote. so -- we believe that the system is -- working just fine the way it is. when people find out, like there was a recent league of women voters poll in north carolina and that asked voters if you

knew that this was being done to manipulate the system so that the same politicians could stay in office, then they are opposed to it. if you knew there was no problem with voter fraud, and that this was just to stop voting would you be opposed to it? they are opposed to it. if you -- it depends on how you ask the question and what information you sxroy when people find out what's going on, they are not in favor of this form of voter i.d. >> people are fixated right now on voter i.d. because the issue that the right has been pounding in north carolina for are the last two years. previous governor vetoes that the voter i.d. bill. if you look at the full spectrum of what they have planned, make it harder for voters to vote, it reveals what their motives are. they want to cut early voting back from 17 days down to 6 days. early vote sing extremely popular. more than half the people that voted in presidential election in north carolina, they voted before election day. they voted early. like reverend barber said getting rid of same-day registration, 97,000 people voted same-day registration.

they want toll i am nature voting on sundays. why do they want to do that? why sundays? well, african-american churches have a -- tradition of polls. the attack on student vote sing outrageous. there is even a bill to tell students that they have to go vote where their parents live even though they have been living on campus since their freshman year. they can't get around that legally. so what they do is they try to impose a poll tax on the parents saying the parents can't claim the student as a dependent on their tax returns. costing the parents $2,500. that's poll tax. >> this is in for us who are working nationally, it is so for. for people all around the country, who are saying i don't live in north carolina. why should i care about this? this is going to be the response all around the country to that rising american electorate that reverend barber talked about. coalition of black folks, latino, young people, women, gay folks, who all came together and turned out elected and re-elected obama. when you see the numbers from

this, you know, coming out in the spring, of -- who turned out, you are going to see once again a real uptick in black voting. you are going to see that -- black -- young people under 30 led their white latino and asian counterparts. not only in this election but in 2010 as well. and this is going to be the responses. their response throughout history. every time the new folks come into our political process, barriers are put up to stop their participation and we have to be vigil in north carolina because this is going to be part of the strategy all around the country. >> that is an interesting point. that was the talk nationally last fall. we had all these states advancing voter i.d. laws and suppress the obama coalition. some were stopped by the courts. if you look at the returns from 2012, there is not too much evidence that it suppresses votes. you could actually say in the context of 2012 it helped the democrats because of like you say it motivated people in a way that wouldn't be motivated before. i guess the test is going to come in a state like

pennsylvania where -- these things into effect in north carolina if this goes into effect, it raises all sorts of other issues. as we say vote i.d. is one of a number of issues where there is a tea partization of north carolina going on. i want to talk about, you know, how democrats are responding to that and if there are lessons from north carolina that could be applied.

there's a reason no one says "easy like monday morning." sundays are the warrior's day to unplug and recharge. what if this feeling could last all week? with centurylink as your trusted partner, it can. our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and dedicated support, your business can shine all week long.

north carolina really sets up in terms of how government is sort of structured right now. it is the nightmare for democrats anywhere in the country. it is the -- completely opposition party. the -- republican party controls the legislature and republican party controls the executive branch and republican party itself is controlled by the -- sort of tea party movement forces that have just -- sort of forced -- flood of far right legislation. you know, on to the scene and into the legislature and in many cases into law.

and i wonder if there are sort of -- you know, if you are the opposition in this situation like that, you don't actually have formal power in the legislative executive branch, you control anything, how do you fight it? how do you feet it for the next four years of the governorship? >> you work hard to make sure that people realize and hadn't taken much, speaker tillis allowed all kinds of absurd legislation to come to the floor. that's made north carolina the laughingstock of the nation. pokes all over the united states laugh about some of the bills that -- >> what are some of the bills? >> the nipple bill, if women uncover their nipples, they will be sent to jail. that's a really for issue. we have to watch that carefully. the state religion bill. other kind of bills. >> what would the state religion bill be? >> state religion bill would have -- go against the north carolina constitution. and declare that north carolina have their own religion. i vote for presbyterian.

it is -- i mean, all of these things are totally ridiculous. we have pat mccrory. he ran closely with democratic leadership. and in raleigh because we realized, again, that cities of the economic engines of our states and we have got to keep those things strong beneath our -- people employed. and that's how he got so much done. now he gets to raleigh and is totally controlled by the tea party group and speaker tillis has done nothing to stand up. again made north carolina a laughingstock. >> that's interesting. i don't remember talking about -- the speaker of the house of representatives -- you are saying basically facing the same situation john boehner is facing nationally. john boehner has the title of speaker but in terms of having actual power to control his party, you know, he seems to get two, three bills a year. if he can bring them to the

floor without his party, without his party revolt. >> he may not be a card carrying member of the tea party. there is a lot of momentum in that republican party controllinging the legislature and has a hard time controlling it at times. one issue that resonates is public education. north carolinians have a tradition of supporting public education and the governor and legislature are repeatedly sending up signs they don't support public education. the governor said things like -- questions the need for liberal arts education. and the united states senators suggested that we eliminate two unc campuses while the state's population continues to grow. and revenues are starting to come up a little bit. north carolina now ranked 48th in the nation in funding. ranked 46th in teacher pay. and there's proposals to bring in vouchers extremely unpopular with north carolinians and proposal to blow out the limits on class sizes. that is extremely unpopular with north carolinians. the list goes on. i mean, really trying to

privatize public education. it is going to be a problem for them. >> the legislators have no reason to listen to the folks that we represent. at the end of the day there are corporations and there are busiss folks behind these politicians. pope who essentially really is aiming in black and brown communities selling his products every single day and then -- you know, taking that money and going to, you know, push legislation and legislators that put our communities in harm's way. and so that at the end of the day this may not be a strategy of simply going after legislators but going after the corporations and the business leaders behind these politicians and the folks giving them the voice and ability to pass all these horrible pieces of legislation. and that impact the very folks that these business leaders need. >> corporate money and policy secret dark money in politics. perfectly set up where we are going. i want to thank gerrick brenner and pen did a hair, north carolina state senator linda gar

ro u, a rare chance. [ ship horn blows ] no, no, no! stop! humans. one day we're coming up with the theory of relativity, the next... not so much. but that's okay -- you're covered with great ideas like optional better car replacement from liberty mutual insurance. total your car and we give you the money to buy one a model year newer. learn about it at libertymutual.com. liberty mutual insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion.

staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. celebrex can be taken with or without food. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death.

patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit celebrex.com and ask your doctor about celebrex. for a body in motion. work the camera... work it! those hands. oooh la la!

what's your secret? dawn? [ female announcer ] dawn hand renewal with olay beauty improves the look and feel of hands in 5 uses. love it, or get double your money back. one thing we learned from the 2012 election is that the already gigantic role that money plays in politics is only expanding. the amount spent in presidential and midterm elections surged from $1.8 3w6 in 199815 years ago to more than $6 billion in last year's presidential senate and house contests. now, money does not always equal results. you can just ask karl rove about that. crossroads spoencht $100 million in last year's elections. according to the sunlight foundation just $1.29% of that money went to winning campaigns. regardless of the results, though, big money does absolutely set the terms of debate in washington. and there is a particular breed of outside spending that

hasn'tes -- so-called dark money. money that funds groups like cross kroeds gps. groups that don't have to disclose their donors because the debt pretending their spend is educational in nature and not political. now, however, a coalition of pension funds, politicians and advocacy organizations is calling on government to force corporations to give to those groups to disclose their political spending. believe it or not, it loose like they just might succeed. push began in 2011 when a group of ten legal scholars petitioned the securities and exchange commission to require publicly traded companies to disclose their political spending. one of those legal scholars, robert jackson of columbia on law school, explained how the new sec rule would work. >> the thing to keep in mind is that this leaves investors money. if the corporations that are being spent on this. you might know that sometimes manage verse their own political action committees, put their own money into and spend their own money on all kinds of issue

advertisements and would not be captured by my role. designed to have investors know when their money is being spent on politics. >> in the 20 months since that petition was filed with those first ten signatures, there has been a massive groundswell of support with help from major pension funds, democratic politicians and shareholder activists approximately half of a million people have filed comments with the sec in favor of the new rule. in this week "the new york times" reported that the sec could propose a new disclosure rule as early as the end of this month. proposal also attracted the attention of house republicans who last week introduced legislation that would block the sec from issuing any political disclosure regulations. friday kansas republican congressman kevin yoder argued a company's political spend sing outside sec's jurisdiction. >> sec has a broad set of responsibilities but their not broad enough to include the regulation of federal elections. sec is responsible for regulating capital formation, facilitating markets, and managing and is porting investors. role does not include monitoring

and managing elections. >> okay. i want to bring in josh barro, alexis goldstein, liz kennedy, counsel at the progressive demos and jesse eisinger. senior reporter covering wall street and finance for propublica and columnist for "the new york times." they chose to use sec. congress will not be acting on the use of dark money any time soon. it doesn't seem like it will be happening. have you to be creative if you want to tackle the issue now. and -- you know, on surface i guess what i hear about this, well, sure, if i'm a share holder in a company and -- company is giving to somebody i -- you know, do not like at all politically, i deserve to know that, don't i? >> i think that -- the thing is we have a lot of proxy votes on

this where -- pension funds and other advocates of the rule have asked share holders and companies to vote on whether they want disclosure. those votes can keep getting defeated and there are plausible reasons why shareholders may not want the political activity in the companies they invest in disclose. they are not necessarily ed tied. you know. the -- the political activity might ad advance profits but the public knowing about the political activity may not enhance the profits. so -- i don't think that dash i don't think it is obvious that it is in shareholders' interest to have this rule. and that's what the sec is supposed to do. supposed to protect the interests of investors to ensure that their money isn't mishandle. >> if the company is do something that's politically unpalatable or offensive to a wide swath of people but -- potentially helps the company's bottom line that protect it is share holders. >> right. even more broadly, there are all sorts of aspects of a company's business strategy that you might not want dis closure of to the shareholders because that manassas disclosure at the competitors and public. so i think that the dash you know, i tend to agree with the congressman, it is the purview of the sec fairly narrow. supposed to act in the interests

of shareholders. the way the petition is written up, an argument in the interest of shareholders disclosure. the real political reason people want this is that they think it is in the public interest and may be a perfectly good argument. i don't think it is a proper use of the sec. >> i think that if you have to see that, of course, it is in the -- best interest of -- investors and in, fact the sec is tasked not just with the authority but with the responsibility to make sure that there is this kind of disclosure of for risk factors to investors. to investors need to have the information that they have a right to and to make these investing decisions. and when companies are spending this kind of money in politics, we are seeing them really expose their companies to risk. we have business risks, legal risks and this is the kind of element that as you say, certain things, you know, the -- company doesn't have to disclose every single thing, but the company is actually already -- company required by the sec to disclose a lot morning simply basic profit ask loss statements already. they have to disclose exactly --

executive compensation packages. sec has taken steps in the last few decades to require -- in the campaign dealing with political spending by municipal bond traders and state and local authorities. so there -- have already made moves in this relevantm and this is really an outpouring of investors support. demand thing action from the sec. >> let's not forget this is a classic tactic that corporations will take which is arguing whether or not something is in the sec's purview, whether or not they are supposed to make a rule making. we had a rule called proxy access. a rule the sec made to give investors the power on put things on the proxy which is the thing that they mail out. so you don't actually have to show up at shareholder meeting which something that not every day americans who are decent investors in these companies can do. that got overturned in court because a number of business groups like the business realm table through sued by saying the sec does not have the right to make this rule making. this is one of a multipronged attack that's constantly waged

against financial reform. >> this is interesting because this -- gets to one of the tools being used by advocates for the sec rule and is a -- one of their allies here in their mind is anthony kennedy. supreme court justice who was integral to citizens united which is this horrible thing. there is a line from kennedy's opinion in 2010 where he basically held out what -- what's being sought here as a check on a corporate at activity. here is what he said from his opinion. shareholders can determine whether their political speeches advances in profits and citizens can see whether elected officials are in the pocket of so-called money interests. now, he wasn't calling specifically for the sr ec to get involved. but he was basically saying that this is -- information that shareholders, you know, can use to sort of restrain the political activity. you can and should use to restrain unlimited political activity that was unleashed bysy

sense unite. >> what we see there, really is justice kennedy assuming that this kind of transparency was already present. i mean, transparency is a bedrock business value. and it is a -- accountable democracy. so justice kennedy, another quote from the decision, says that you know, we have never seen a world in which corporations have unlimited ability to do independent spending but also have, you know, immediate disclosure through the internet and with a have you. and so that this will allow shareholders and the public to hold these companies accountable. of course, if they don't actually know what these companies are spending money on politically, then they don't have the capacity to exercise those kind of shareholder mechanisms of accountability the supreme court assumed would be in place. >> the sec, although, you know, newer organization that forget about walking and chewing gum. it can't walk properly. and -- we are washing disclosure.

disclosure largely is meaningless already. or misleading or at least contradictory. and the fact that the idea you would want the sec to be adding its -- to its responsibilities now when it is -- doing such a poor job of doing the basic task, you know, i hate to agree with the chamber of commerce. obviously chamber of commerce is making the argument in a cynical way but true the sec has a responsibility it is not fulfill. >> there is a point to be made. i'm in favor of this. this is for. i think this is the smallest thing that we could be doing. what are we talking about here? we are talking about corporate person and talking about this idea the corporations have such undue influence under our democracy. but there are other ways to solve the problem. we can try to make corporations more democratic institutions. because these are such powerful institutions that have so much influence over our democracy and they are unaccountable to anything but return on capital 37 we can try to make these

organizations more democratic from the inside out. but instead we are looking at this through this what i call -- not what i call. a neo-liberal framework and let the free market decide, let's have disclosures and investors will decide. instead of that, i mean why don't we think about making our democracy more democratic by putting democracy inside of these corporations that are only accountable to capital and not accountable to the peoples who lives when we have -- war mongering going on and instead we are just talking about disclosure which is in my mind -- >> and -- we are -- you say we are talking about disclosure. also talking about -- a sort of limited form of disclosure, too. we are talking about publicly traded companies that are basically giving to these trade associations and -- in groups like nonprofit educational things. we are not talking about, excuse me -- excuse me. we are not talking about individuals, we are not talking about privately held companies. it is sort of a narrow scope here. but we -- when we look at sort of the impetus for this

challenge, citizens united and sort of the rise of money disproportionate on the republican side, you have to consider the fact that in 2012 it didn't work for the republicans. i want to talk about that after this. of weight, c-max has a nice little trait, you see, c-max helps you load your freight, with its foot-activated lift gate. but that's not all you'll see, cause c-max also beats prius v, with better mpg. say hi to the 47 combined mpg c-max hybrid. i've always had to keep my eye on her... but, i didn't always watch out for myself. with so much noise about health care... i tuned it all out. with unitedhealthcare, i get information that matters... my individual health profile. not random statistics. they even reward me for addressing my health risks. so i'm doing fine... but she's still going to give me a heart attack.

we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

the opportunity to swap a higher calorie snack for a delicious 90 calorie yoplait light. ♪ [ female announcer ] just one swap a day helps keep the calories away. yoplait. it is so good. like other precious things that start off white, it yellows over time. when it comes to your smile, if you're not whitening, you're yellowing.

crest whitestrips whiten as well as $500 professional treatments. guaranteed. crest 3d white whitestrips. we are talking about the sec is maybe close to approving a rule that would force publicly traded companies to disclose their political giving and what that really are talking about here is a publicly traded corporations that have given to these trade associations and trade associations pool all this money and go into target erases presidential senate, house, whatever, or giving to groups like karl rove's crossroads where they -- again, do the same thing. karl rove had a lavishly funded group last year but that gets me to something i wondered about. so much attention was paid in 2012, the crossroads to karl rove, and to this unprecedented money he had. weigh mentioned it in the open. he basically lost everything. he won a few races but all these competitive senate races he went into, lost him.

are we -- is there a point where maybe there's too much emphasis placed on money at least at the practical level? >> i think that this is a reason why we are seeing the chamber of commerce in groups like that fight this so hard. they realize the power of the force of the state and realize the power that is a -- if a light shines on this, public won't vote just based on the candidate that has the most money. i think they have a reason perhaps to be scared about this because it is proven that, you know, when this is reported on, when we have things like, you know, 47% video that's leaked and when we have transparency about what is going on, sometimes the public doesn't just vote with the money. i think that's part of the reason we see such pushback on this idea. >> i also would eye -- would like to keep in mind 59% of the victorious candidates -- candidates spending, were able to outspend their opponents. when we say money didn't mean everything -- >> you have a cycle will where you get elected to the house and often from a safe district and fund-raising is easy. you get a token opponent and -- i can't -- tell the cause and

effect. >> regularly see these lavishly spending candidates like meg whitman lose. money is not the all-powerful force that it tends to be. the other thing about corporate rapt spending is you are largely going to find them buying both sides. this goes to the point that -- you were making earlier which is that they change the conversation through limiting what is possible. what -- so there -- narrowing the washington argument about the -- you know, the areas in which to consider policy. that's -- that's for. but what you are going to find when these companies do disclose this is that they are buying both sides and it is going to be canceling each other out and not particularly that interesting. >> i think -- >> in companies like exxon have been totally 100% the republican party. >> not always true. >> more specifically i think that to bring the back to the question about the sec rule, we could have large conversations about all of the dynamics and money in politics and what that means in terms of policy making in the country.

really here we are talking about disclosure. you said earlier that we are a wash and disclosure actually a lot of companies already provide this information. some of these voluntary disclosure policies don't work out as well as we would like. what we are find sing that companies may be taking a certain policy, certain position, publicly, for example lot of big health insurers were publicly in support of health care reform. when we have these inadvertent disclosures we saw that aetna was providing $7 million to -- >> see inadvertent disclosure, how does that work? >> what i mean is that there was -- disclosure form that they wrote, that they had -- contributed $7 million to if i -- the chamber. this was not information they meant to disclose. ended up going online some -- >> irs. >> administration i have error. >> i would only differ to say it

was supposed to be confidential on the irs site. aetna has voluntary disclosure policy with their shareholders they have entered into and yet this kind of political spending was not disclosed under. my point was just they are play -- trying to play both sides of the game publicly saying we support these positions. we have publicly stated values and policies. perhaps for tolerance. then some of their political spending is diametrically opposed to that. investors have a right to look into the decisions. it is material to certain investment decisions. >> i'm confused by the end of the statement. i can understand why this is a matter of public concern. why someone that's shopping for a health plan may be concerned about that. i don't understand how the -- how the aetna shareholders were necessarily harmed by that outcome. i would just go back to the proxy votes we keep seeing proposals put before shareholders, do you want more disclosure of the political spending by the company? they keep going down? and so i think if this -- if the case is really so strong that this is in the interests of the

share holders, the companies have, disclosures, i don't understand why the shareholders are declining that opportunity. it suggests to me this is, in fact, not to their advantage and not -- therefore, not properly in the pursue of the sec. >> of course, first of all, political disclosure resolutions are far and away this year and last the number one question shareholders are being able -- are bring asked to vote on. will are 120 corporate disclosure resolutions on the ballots. that is not even counting companies just this year like qualcomm that after these petitions, resolutions, were filed, voluntarily decided to disclose this information. and the votes are actually receiving an average of 29% in favor of these disclosure resolutions which is a huge threshold really. 30% about a third of investors voting this way is really a strong outpouring of investor support because of the way that the proxy votes often happen. and -- you know, this is also

management recommending a no vote and frequently -- you know, iss and other -- proxy advisory firms recommend frequently that these -- big groups are just vote along management. >> i would -- information from the proxy votes, institutional investors. they are a feckless and greedy lot. they don't want to spend any money on this kind of stuff. they want to just simply invest like the index. and charge the fees and not get involved in these kind of disputes. they don't even vote their interests when they want to split. chairman or -- ceo. barely ask for information on executive pay. so, you know, you are not getting any good information out of that. but i return to the issue of the sec which is not an organization that's working in the -- for the benefit of shareholders now. investors in general. they don't police the markets properly.

they don't have adequate disclosure. mary jo white is coming into an agency that's really largely incompetent and overwhelmed and underresourced. so -- do we really want this to be a priority? i would argue that, you know, wading into an enormous political fight now when they are dependent on congress for funding is would be a disastrous idea for mary jo. >> that's -- i want to pick that up in the next segment. the idea of if not the sec, where, for people that want this dis closure? if the sec does, as recording suggests, go ahead and implement the rule, practically speaking what will that mean? can febree even the toughest odors? to find out we filled this car with smelly trash, left it under the hot desert sun, attached a febreze car vent clip, and let in real people. it smells good. like clean laundry. like driving through beautiful tropical... palm trees with like fruit hanging. i wish my car smelled like this. [ both laugh ] i could sit in this all day. [ laughs ] proof. febreze car vent clips eliminate even the toughest odors.

another way febreze helps you breathe happy. boom. heart attack. the doctor recommends bayer aspirin to keep this from happening to me again. it's working. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. it can happen to anyone. talk to your doctor.

lookin' good, flo! feelin' good! feelin' real good! [ engine revs ] boat protection people love. now, that's progressive. call or click today. [ french accent ] antacid! sorry, i have gas. but you relieve gas, no? not me... that's his job. true. i relieve gas fast. [ moaning ] a little help?

who's the gas xpert? [ antacid ] it's gas-x. your day to unplug. who's the gas xpert? with centurylink as your technology partner, our visionary cloud infrastructure, and dedicated support, free you to focus on what matters. centurylink. your link to what's next. by the armful? by the barrelful? the carful? how about...by the bowlful? campbell's soups give you nutrition, energy, and can help you keep a healthy weight. campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. jesse was saying if you want to get this kind of disclosure, if you want to know which publicly traded companies are giving what amount of money to which groups the sec is the wrong avenue for it. the groups have gone to the sec because it is not happening with the irs, not happening with congress. where do you go if not the sec?

is there anywhere else? >> i think tissue is that these companies that affect so many of our lives outside of the shareholders are not accountable to anyone but the shareholders. i feel like the only way to hold them accountable which is, i feel like we are talking about here, what we are talking about disclosure, we want to know where they are spending their money and want to know what they are influencing, you have to change them from the inside out. you have the look at ideas like determination, idea in germany that actually puts workers on the board of directors. it has been around since the '07s in germany. while i think this is for, i think we actually should do what we should absolutely go to the sec and ask for disclosure, this is a multi-pronged fight. we have to think about what are we talking about here? we are talking about the fact that corporations are only accountable to their shareholders even though they affect the lives of so many people who never consent to be affected by them. >> i have to say i would push back to say that this is absolutely the appropriate role for the sec. and this is really a position that business has supported as well. it is really non-controversial

that political spending should be disclosed. the uk has been requiring their companies to disclose their political spending for years. the committee for economic development, lot of meeting business voices absolutely support. >> there are a -- >> businesses that do not. >> of course there are. this is not a monolithic instance. the commissioner of the sec last year gave a very -- used his time to get a big speech to the sec in support of this role. we have seen over half a million americans and american investors going to the sec requesting that they make this role. i think that it is really -- it is the appropriate role of the sec and it is for for american investors to know how their money is being spent in politics. mine, america should be place where everyone has an equal chance the and an equal say. right now investors have no chance to say anything about the political spending of their corporations might be involved in. because they just don't know about it. and that's something the sec has the power and responsibility to

rectify. >> i think had is the sort of thing that would probably be the purview of the electoral commission. not doing any of the things -- >> still doling out fines from 1984 presidential election, i think. >> right. yeah. literally, i think. recently. >> john glenn was fined. >> as you noted earlier, for example, the sec wouldn't touch privately held companies. if the issue, and i think this is a real issue, we need broader disclosure of money in politics, then the sec because it can only get publicly traded companies is actually a very limited solution to that. and i think that what -- i mean, when you look at people like art pope, the story, i think, is arguably more about high net worth individuals and privately held companies than it is about the publicly traded companies because republican traded companies are hemmed in in various ways in which they can engage in politics. they have to be more consensus institutions and play both sides. maybe the way they are spending money is more effective than the way privately held companies would spend money. i think that -- the -- we do

want some sort of broader disclosure regime. it is for the public interests and not for shareholder minutes carl smith is in -- on the show and we -- we asked him this week about the issue. he raised an interesting point that gets to what you are saying where is if you have this rule in place, you will have -- companies that are a little bit more maybe moderate, little more practical about how they spend their money. they are going to be extra sensitive to the political considerations in this atmosphere. they are going to back out. the art popes of the world, more extreme elements, ideology, giving their money, that's only going to ramp up their influence. >> you have to start somewhere. you can't not do something because you are afraid after byproduct happening. to the point about whether or not this belongs in the sec or not, again, i think this is larger issue and this is absolutely not a panacea. investors should have complete information. investors should know where their money is being spent. >> all right. what should -- what should we know for the news week ahead? my answers are after this. [ jackie ] it's just so frustrating...

♪ the middle of this special moment and i need to run off to the bathroom. ♪ i'm fed up with always having to put my bladder's needs ahead of my daughter. ♪ so today, i'm finally talking to my doctor about overactive bladder symptoms. [ female announcer ] know that gotta go feeling? ask your doctor about prescription toviaz. one toviaz pill a day significantly reduces sudden urges and accidents, for 24 hours. if you have certain stomach problems or glaucoma, or can not empty your bladder, you should not take toviaz.

get emergency medical help right away if your face, lips, throat or tongue swells. toviaz can cause blurred vision, dizziness, drowsiness and decreased sweating. do not drive, operate machinery or do unsafe tasks until you know how toviaz affects you. the most common side effects are dry mouth and constipation. talk to your doctor about toviaz.

i decided to go on strike today because i'm tired of being taken advantage of. >> by doing this for the greater good of everybody. >> you have to wonder in 45 years, will we look back at today as the starting point of a struggle that leads to a more decent wage for the millions of other people who served and cooked food for a living. there are other new players

in the media landscape as well like super pacs. you know that sheldon aid sen spent $100 million of his own money on negative ads. you've got to really dislike me to spend that kind of money. i mean, that's oprah money. [ laughter ] >> you could buy an island and call it no-obama a for that kind of money. [ laughter ] sheldon would have been better off offering me $100 million to drop out of the race. [ applause ] >> i probably wouldn't have taken it, but i thought about it. michelle would have taken it. you think i'm joking.

>> so for those of you who were too busy watching the rockets thunder playoff game, that was the president at the white house correspondent's dinner being funny on the subject we were talking about, dark money in politics, big money in politics. what should you know coming this week. after congress go ahead, the federal aviation administration suspended all furloughs of air traffic controllers caused by the sequester. the president is expected to sign the bill as early as tomorrow. the furloughs had been in effect for less than a week. the inconvenience of waiting around food courts was so severe that washington found it necessary to act immediately. while air travel will go back to normal, poor people across the country will continue to suffer because of the sequester. food pantries are have closed and teachers and health workers furloughed. 70,000 children will lose access to headstart programs, 125,000 families will not get rental assistance and the fda will have

to cut food inspections. the willingness of congress and democrats in particular to restore spending for those who don't need it likely spells doom for those who do. he writes that "what democrats said friday, in any case where the political pain caused by sequestration becomes unbearable, they will cancel that particular piece of the bill and leave the rest of the law untouched." . the pain of sequestration will be on those who lack political power. some unwilling to end the sequester love to warn that government is crippling the economy. you should know that according to a new report from goldman sachs, the deficit is "shrinking rapidly." the report finds that the deficit was over 10% of gdp in 2009. but it's estimated to be 4.5% this year and is expected to cheap shrinking. changes due partly decreased spending but mainly brought down by rising tax revenues. it turns out that our runaway deficit is running the other

way, which means now our politicians can funnel all the passion they brought to the deficit debate into finding work for america's jobless. in theory at least. finally, you should know that the body of sunil tripathi, falsely accused being a boston bomber read it was found in the providence river this week. he was missing since march, but after police released pictures of the actual suspects, his name was mentioned frequently online as people tried frantically to solve the case. we don't know yet how he died and we may never know. but you should know, how well-intentioned the search to find the bombers were, there are consequences for accusation. woont to find out what my guests think you should know for the week ahead. >> there's going to be monetary policy action both from the fed and european central bank. central bank has been less dysfunctional than legislature, even though the sequester will continue for the foreseeable future, the fed will probably indicate that it's going to

continue with the asset purchase program that it said it might ease off earlier. the european central bank is probably going to cut rates. this is a silver lining even though we can't get fiscal policies to grow the economy. >> you should know that the house will soon decide whether or not they want to gut a piece of wall street reform called the swaps push-out says that swaps and derivatives have to be held from separate accounts. two democrats, jim hines from connecticut and david scott from georgia are co-sponsoring this gutting of this important wall street reform. if you think we should have risky derivatives separate from fdic money and you live in georgia or connecticut, you should tell the representatives that they're voting the wrong way. jim heinz from the gold coast of connecticut. >> you should know that this week may 1st is international labor day and a great opportunity to consider the

plate of the low wage and low income workers that you referred to, some of the long-term unemployed. we see in new york city fast food workers, hundreds of fast food workers are out on strike. we obviously, the workers in bangladesh have been demonstrating against the unsafe working conditions that they are forced to toil in. so we should take this opportunity on wednesday of mayday, international labor day to contemplate what it is, the kind of conditions that the people that make our clothes and serve our food are working under and whether they meet our standards for kind of the common human dignity that we really all share. >> jesse? >> i'm looking farther ahead at whether there's actually going to be a coalition of republicans and democrats to go after the big banks. we saw last week brown and vitter, senator from ohio and senator from louisiana, democrat and republican, come up with a very strong big bank solution. the question is, whether this

actually develops into a coalition of political potency or not. my thanks to josh barro, liz kennedy, jesse eisinger of. we'll be back next week on saturday and sunday. up next is melissa harris-perry. on today's mhp, the debate over genetically modified foods. is it better? that's on melissa harris-perry coming up next. we'll see you next week here on "up." my moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. i decided enough is enough. ♪ [ spa lady ] i started enbrel. it's clinically proven to provide clearer skin. [ rv guy ] enbrel may not work for everyone -- and may not clear you completely, but for many, it gets skin clearer fast, within 2 months, and keeps it clearer through 6 months. [ male announcer ] enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events, including infections,

tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. before starting enbrel, your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. you should not start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have symptoms such as persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. if you've had enough, ask your dermatologist about enbrel. what that's great. it won't take long, will it? nah. okay. this, won't take long will it? no, not at all. how many of these can we do on our budget? more than you think. didn't take very long, did it? this spring, dig in and save. that's nice. post it. already did. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. dig in and save with vigoro one-quart annuals, four for just ten bucks.

and you'll dump your old mop. but don't worry, he'll find someone else. ♪ who's that lady? ♪ who's that lady? ♪ sexy lady ♪ who's that lady? [ female announcer ] used mops can grow bacteria. swiffer wetjet starts with a clean pad every time, and its antibacterial cleaner kills bacteria mops can spread around. swiffer gives cleaning a whole new meaning. ♪ lovely lady all your important legal matters in just minutes. protect your family... and launch your dreams. at legalzoom.com we put the law on your side.

this morning my question. how does talking about women change the immigration conversation? . plus the trouble when ideology meets adoption. bird of pair daradisparadis. how i became latina. first, you are what you eat from your hd