[ applause ] it's hard. so when we've got the mom of two of our troops who is working hard out there but is having to wear a coat inside the house we've got a problem. and it's one that could be fixed. and katherine is not alone. devlin smith, watching today from her home in california, wrote me about her hunt for a new job. since she was laid off 13 months ago, she sent out hundreds of resumes, she's volunteered and done seasonal work and doesn't want to just be sitting around the house. she's been taken online courses to learn new skills. without unemployment insurance though she won't be able to pay for her car or her cell phone which makes the job hunt that

much harder. and devlin wrote to me and said, i wanted nothing more than to find a new full-time job and i've dedicated every day to that mission. i'm asking you to advocate for me and millions who need our extended unemployment benefits to make ends meet. so i just want everybody to understand, this is not an ab straks. these are your neighbors and friends and family members. it could at some point be any of us. that's why we set up a system of unemployment insurance. the notion was everybody is making a contribution because you don't know when the business cycle or an economic crisis might make any of us vulnerable. this insurance helps keep food on the table while dad is

sending out resumes. it helps mom pay the rent while she's learning new skills to get a new job. it provides that extra bit of security so that losing your job doesn't mean of to lose your house. everything you've worked so hard to build for years. we make this promise to our fellow americans working hard to get back on their feet because when times get tough, we're not a people who say, you're on your own. we're people who believe that we're all in it together. we know there but the grace of god go i. [ applause ] so that's the values case for this. that's the moral case for this. there's an economic case for it as well. independent economists have shown extending emergency unemployment insurance actually helps the economy, actually

creates new jobs. when folks like katherine have a little more to spend to turn up the heat in her house or buy a few extra groceries, that means more spending with businesses in their local community, which in turn may inspire that business to hire one more person, maybe cathy. that's why in the past both parties have repeatedly put partisanship and ideology aside to offer security for job seekers with no strings attached. it's been done regardless of whether democrats or republicans were in the white house. it's been done regardless of whether democrats or republicans controlled congress. and by the way, it's done multiple times when the unemployment rate was significantly lower than it is today. and what's important to keep in mind also is that the recovery

in a big country like the united states is going to be somewhat uneven. there are some states that have a 2.5 unemployment rate and some places that may still have a 7, 8, 9% unemployment rate. the people living in those respective states may be working equally hard to find a job but it's going to be harder in some places than others. now, two weeks ago congress went home for the holidays and let this lifeline expire for 1.3 million americans. if this doesn't get fixed, it will hurt about 14 million americans over the course of this year. 5 million workers along with 9 million of their family members, their spouses and their kids. now, i've heard the argument that says extending unemployment insurance will somehow hurt the unemployed because it zaps their motivation to get a new job.

i really want to -- i want to go at this for a second. [ applause ] that really sells the american people short. i meet a lot of people as president of the united states. as a candidate for president of the united states, as a u.s. senator and state senator, i meet a lot of people. i can't -- i can't name a time where i met an american who would rather have an unemployment check than the pride of having a job. [ applause ]

the long term unemployed are not lazy or lacking in motivation. they are coping with the aftermath of the worst economic crisis in generations. and in some cases they may have a skills mismatch, they may having doing a certain job for 20 years and suddenly they lose that job. there may be an older worker, may have to get retrained. it's hard sometimes employers will discriminate if you've been out of work for a while. they decide, well, we're not sure we want to hire you. we would rather hire somebody who still working right now. so it's hard out there. there are a lot of friends and neighbors who have lost their jobs and working their tails off every single day trying to find a new job. as the job market keeps getting

better, more and more of these folks will find work. but in the meantime the insurance keeps them from falling off a cliff. it makes sure they can pay their car note to go to that interview. it makes sure they can pay their cell phone bill so that if somebody calls back for an interview, they can answer. and katherine explained this. katherine in the letter that she wrote to me said that do folks really think that cutting this benefit will make someone hire me? that's not how employers are thinking. letting unemployment insurance expire for millions of americans is wrong. congress should make things right. i'm very appreciative that they are on the way to doing just that thanks to the bipartisan work of two senators. a democrat from rhode island,

senator reed and conservative senator from nevada, senator heller. despite their differences they worked together on a plan to extend unemployment insurance at least for three months, temporarily while we figure out a longer term solution. and this morning bipartisan majority of senators agreed to allow this common sense provision to at least move forward in the process. the senate is a complicated place. just because they agreed on this vote, all they've agreed to so far is that we'll be able to have a vote on it. they haven't actually passed it. we've got to get this across the finish line without obstruction or delay and need the house of representatives to be able to vote for it as well. [ applause ] that's the bottom line. voting for unemployment benefits

helps people and creates jobs. voting against it does not. congress should pass it right away and i will sign it right away and more than 1 million americans across the country will feel a little hope right away. hope is contagious. you know -- [ applause ] when katherine has a little bit more confidence about her situation, when she finds a job she's going to be able to help somebody down the line, maybe who's also down on their luck. when congress passes a bipartisan effort starting here right at the beginning of the new year, who knows, we might actually get some things done this year. so after all of the hard work and sacrifice of the past five years to recover and rebuild from the crisis, what i think

the american people are really looking for in 2014 is a little bit of stability. let's do the common sense thing and do what's right. we're going to have to -- we're going to have to see action on the part of congress. and i'll be womeni willing to work with them every step of the way. help our businesses create more of the good jobs growing middle class rerequires and reduce inequality and action open more doors of opportunity for everybody willing to work hard and walk through those doors. when i was listening to katherine, i was just so struck by her strength and dignity. and i think people when they bump into some tough times like katherine, they are not looking for pity. they just want a shot.

and they just want to feel as if -- [ applause ] they just want to feel as if, you know what, as a part of this country, as a part of their communities, that if misfortune strikes, all the things that they've done in the past, all of the hard work they've done raising children and taxes and working hard, that counts for something. folks aren't suddenly just going to dismiss their concerns, but they are going to rally behind them. that's not too much to ask. that's who we are as americans. that's what bimt this country. that's what i want to promote. so thank you very much, everybody. let's get to work and get this done. i appreciate it. [ applause ] >> that was president obama

speaking from the white house and urging congress to pass emergency unemployment insurance for more than 1 million long-term unemployed americans. speaking one hour after the senate barely cleared a procedural hurdle that would pave the way to temporarily restore emergency unemployment assistance for 1.3 million out of work americans, president obama arrived at the lek tern and applauded today's progress. in a rare move last night the president personally reached out to several republicans in a bid to secure assistance for the long-term unemployed. this morning it looks like it may have helped. five republicans were needed and today six stood up. susan collins and lisa murkowski and ohio senator rob portman and new hampshire kelly ayotte. and dean heller who cou-sponsord

the bill. before the senate vote, minority leader mitch mcconnell tried to hold unemployment assistance hostage to a one year delay of the individual mandate. as with all things related to congressional rpz, things remain hilariously and irresponsibly unpredictable. another vote must take place before a final vote on the bill which is possibly later this week. then the legislation will travel down the rabbit hole to the lower chamber where speaker boehner said it will face resistance. in a statement he said one month ago i personally told the white house that another extension of temporary emergency unemployment benefits should not only be paid for but include something to help put people back to work. to date the president offered no such plan. if he does i'll be happy to discuss it. right now the house will remain focused on growing the economy and giving the unemployed the

independence that only comes from finding a good job. joining any now is squawk box co-host andrew roth sworken. why one procedural vote cleared by the hair of its chinny chin chin, what are the odds of it passing? >> we still have to clear the senate. i know this is a little bit complicated but the procedural vote they had was to start debate. they have to have a 60 vote threshold to end debate. to get there you have to maintain those numbers of republicans and that's not a certainty. several of the republican senators who voted for this extension have said they wanted to use this intervening period to find ways to pay for it and finding about $6 billion if you're doing a three-month extension, 25 billion if you're doing a full-year extension.

we have a period of time now where it's a little tough to predict. will democrats call their bluff or find money somewhere and if so where? if it clears the senate, will that be kosher with the house? i don't know. speaker boehner has so far dismissed the two ideas put forward by house democrats to pay for the extension. so there are a lot of uncertainties left here. it remains to be seen if it will pass. >> andrew, it is shocking to me a question of pay fors. this is a new thing. 14 of the last 17 times there was an extension of unemployment insurance, it wasn't paid for. by the way it was also under republican presidents. there are wall street guys, jim cramer was on yesterday saying it is a no brainer to extend unemployment insurance. there are conservative economists who say you should not be tieing unemployment extension to the budget. why is this happening? and what of the republican party

at this moment? >> i think there's -- everybody you said is absolutely right. from an economic perspective, this is a growth program, more than anything else. that's what i think is getting lost here. almost a little bit of a language barrier. the republicans are talking about individual responsibility. the president is talking about trying to help the individual but really, there is a place in the middle here. and the place in the middle is sort of how this whole thing is framed about actually improving the economy, helping the economy. not about helping the individual, but helping the overall economy which then therefore helps the individual. i would think that argument would actually work with the republicans. it is not because i don't think it's being talked about in the right way. when you think we're going to lose 2,000 jobs, not gain 200,000 jobs, but lose them as a result of this, there's going to be an economic drag on the country, the republicans have made their whole argument forever that they are the party

of growing the economy. that's where this has to start and stop. i'm not sure that it's being talked about in sort of framed up in the right way. >> so, sam, to andrew's point about the framing, i thought the president made a really important point in his remarks just now. which is that the unemployment insurance helps people pay for the car bill that gets them to the job interview. taking away resources makes them less likely to be able to find a job. >> yes, i think something that gets confused in this debate is who this money goes to. to be a recipient you have to be out there looking for work. that is a precondition that presupposes that people aren't going to be lazy and not use this money and have it just have their own income. there is a line of argument with the rand paul types which said this is creating a hammock for people. i've talked to many unemployment

insurance recipients and that's ka cat gorically not true. is it disincentivizing them from looking within their fields? maybe. by and large this money gets shuffled back into the economy. it's a good stimulus, i know that's a dirty word but -- >> frankly, i have to tell you, if you think of it as a stimulus plan and trying to create growth, i would not be against hearing the president suggest right now, let's talk about infrastructure. you hear boehner saying what can we do to create more jobs, maybe side by side you propose something that has to do with infrastructure. maybe we have a conversation all over again and the president is interested doesn't seem to be talking about it, about corporate tax reform. he may not have the support of his party but if you have a little out there you may bring

the republicans across the line. >> and sam, i just -- at this point, it is now an election year. i feel like there is a general sense that nothing substantive will actually being passed and -- >> don't be such a cynic, alex. >> maybe it's just this warm los angeles weather making me so bitter. >> i hate you. >> to andrew's point, the president could -- if he mentioned infrastructure, he basically gets laughed off the stage. we're talking unemployment insurance, which should be a no brainer and may not pass the house. it is -- we are in unknown territory at this point. >> so what's happening here you have a set of policies that when you poll them, they are widely popular. including among members of congress by and large there's support for extending unemployment insurance. but then you have a whole separate problem, which is this idea that you have to pay for everything.

frankly, that's been the problem since 2011. so when you talk about infrastructure program, the cost of that could be somewhere between 50 billion or what people want, like $3 trillion, which is what people say is the needs of this country. if you have a program like that, it can be widely popular, but then you have to figure out, where does the money come from for it. until we get rid of the notion that you have to make sure everything is offset and i'm not sure where the congress is ever going to get rid of that notion under this president, that's the problem that faces lawmakers. >> i agree, but part of the pay for idea, everybody wants it paid for today. but part of the problem is the conversation is not about if we improve the economy, therefore we will have more tax revenue and ultimately be able to pay for it. it's the underlying message -- >> that's the only -- only mentioned when you're talking about tax cuts. dynamic growth is only mentioned

in tax cuts, but you're right. if you can say this will improve our economy and expand the tax base and almost pay for itself is what you're saying, then you have a case to make. no one is making that case, at least not on the progressive side as well as it should be made. >> before we let you go, dana milbank has a story in the "washington post" or maybe it was yesterday, and he asks where is the left's outrage? this is a huge issue for 1.3 million americans and goes back to the broader argument about the social safety net and yet you have not -- harry reid has been in front of this. there has not been the cry that one should expect from the progressive left or left in general over republican resistance and the fact the bill remains very much in jeopardy. >> i think there is a case to be made that democrats didn't do a very good job shepherding the unemployment insurance bill through congress. it was only brought up a couple of weeks before the deadline neared. part of that was because obama care was suffocating everything

else. but truth be told, they could have done a better job framing it in the leadup to the debate. we're now here and the benefits have expired and the question is, what do you do to make sure that the people, 1.3 million americans are going to get some sort of insurance. i think now is when people are starting to see a really good aggressive lobbying campaign. it's rare to call a republican senator, but his heart is in it i guess. >> you can expect something on the cloture vote and final vote if we get to that point. >> thank you as always and thank you to the huffington posts sam stein. >> opposing unemployment assistance is far from the only weapon in the gop's anti-poverty arsenal. we'll discuss the proposed cuts to food stamps and the war on the poor when senator chuck grassley comes up next. plus, the polar vortex spins

on with temperatures dipping well below zero in places like chicago. do not think about calling it climate change in front of some republicans. we'll look at the comments of one prominent lawmaker just ahead. [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus presents the cold truth. i have the flu, i took medicine but i still have symptoms. [ sneeze ] [ male announcer ] truth is not all flu products treat all your symptoms. what? [ male announcer ] nope, they don't have an antihistamine. really? [ male announcer ] really. [ dog whine ] but alka-seltzer plus severe cold and flu speeds relief to these eight symptoms. [ breath of relief ] thanks. [ male announcer ] you're welcome. ready? go. get it! [ male announcer ] can't find theraflu, try alka-seltzer plus for fast liquid cold and flu relief. hi boys! i've made you campbell's chunky new england clam chowder. wow! this is incredible! i know. and now it has more clams! [ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup. what? [ male announcer ] it fills you up right.

[ male announcer ] campbell's chunky soup. what? you wouldn't have it she any other way.our toes. but your erectile dysfunction - it could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any allergic reactions like rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about experiencing cialis for daily use and a free 30-tablet trial.

in the nation, what's precious to you is precious to us. so when coverage really counts, count on nationwide insurance. we put members first. join the nation. ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪ hostility towards extending unkploimt benefits isn't the only item on agenda. the gop also advocating massive cuts to food stamps. the farm bill, which is expected to be unveiled and approved in the next two weeks will likely result in $8 billion in cuts to the food assistance program, which is lower than the $39 billion sought by house republicans but double the $4 billion in cuts passed by the senate. the farm bill will put an end to the roughly 5 billion in annual direct payments to farmers,

something both sides will agree on but at the same time build crop subsidies for farmers, many of whom don't need them. it would lock in generous subsidies at a time when farm incomes have reached the highest level in four decades. chuck grassley, a republican budget hawk, who advocates cuts to both snap and wealthy farmers scalded those in his party who cheer the s.n.a.p. cuts but willing to give farm subsidies a pass. reforming food stamps yet coddling millionaires, he wrote, why should staunch supporters of foot stamps accept less if millions of farmers get to keep their golden goose from taxpayer. many of his fellow republicans would do well to adopt. if republicans want to shed their image as a party hostile to the least fortunate, they still have their work cut out for them. josh barrow assesses the

situation, gop anti-poverty agenda, cut food stamps and blork medicaid expansion and cut off insurance benefits, sure fire seller. senator grassley, thanks so much for joining us. >> i'm glad to be with you, of course. >> senator grassley, if the farm bill -- the farm bill we're talking about now, u.s. farmers receive $23 billion in subsidies and 14 billion of that goes to the largest 10% of farms. does that jive with your notion that millionaires should no longer be coddled? are you happy with the numbers as they stand in that version of the bill? >> what we're trying to do is on payments that are direct to farmers like if you have low prices and you make up some from the taxpayers for those low prices, then what we're trying to do is make sure that those programs are targeted towards

medium and small sized farmers. that's why for the first time i've been fighting for ten years to get a hard cap in so that the wealthiest farmers can't get more than that hard cap. because you laid out that the wealthiest farmers are getting most of the payments. let me quantify that. 10% of the largest farmers get 70% of the farm payments. by putting a hard cap on, we're going to direct the payments more towards medium and small farmers and i do that not only with the hard cap but i also do it by redefining what a farmer is. the government accountability office has reported that in some farming instances 16 farm managers were getting payments for the same farming operation. i limit that to one manager perform. by redefining who a farmer is, we're able to save $172 million

and most of that goes to southern states and one southern state gets $52 million. >> senator grassley, i have to ask, for each step forward, there does seem to be a step back. the wall street journal reports we're replacing one discredited subsidy with another. some folks say while we're eliminating $5 billion in annual direct payments, we're also beefing up crop insurance and the u.s. is it on the hook for 65% of farmers premiums, there's a lot of confusion whether it is a confusion and millionaires don't get to be coddled in some fashion. >> when you do away with direct payments, you have $7 corn like over the last two years per bushel. right now it's down to 4.25 and i don't expect $7 again for another ten years and i'm a farmer and know the economics of farming. you can't be writing a check for

the farmers when corn is $7. we can't even do it when it was $4.25. and we're not going to have that program at all anymore. it's just a bad public relations for farmers and costly to taxpayers and we're doing away with it. >> senator, i have to ask you, as we have this sort of broad argument, just talking about unemployment long term benefits in insurance for the long term unemployed talking about cutting the food stamp program and how much is too much in terms of farm subsidies, there's a big conversation happening about who deserves what. who deserves piece of mind and insurance and leg up, what have you. the president made the point that after -- misfortune strikes, what unemployment insurance does is guarantee to the american worker that all of the work they've done counts for something. you could argue the same could be mapped on the idea of crop subsidies.

the crop may be good this year but may be bad next year. we want to make sure there's some kind of safety net for these farmers and robust engines of american growth. i guess why are this two different attitudes in your mind towards farmers and working class? >> there isn't. both programs as you mentioned, safe net for farmers and unemployed workers, they both started in the 1930s and been part of the social fabric of america ever since. >> so you would agree that it's important to have unemployment assistance? >> yes. without a doubt. but understand that what we're talking about at the federal level here is how much more the federal government should do than the states do. because the first 26 months of unemployment compensation is under state programs that's mandated by federal government. but it's run by the state. and so what we've been doing the last three years and in the years 8, 9 and 11, it was offset.

the question is this year offset, it's not any argument about unemployment compensation, but do you offset it, is in addition to the 26 weeks that is required since the 1930s under state law -- under federal law but states to administer. >> what would you say to your fellow house republicans right now as we look down the barrel of whether or not this legislation can pass? >> well, here's what i'd like to do, if you're going to get drk we have a divided government. nothing gets done in the united states senate if there isn't? bipartisanship. you can get things down in the house of representatives and republicans controlled it now. when democrats controlled it, it was the same there. it is necessary for boehner and the president to get together and decide how you're going to pay for this because otherwise you're not going to have it and i think it's legitimate when you have a $17 trillion debt that you -- that you offset this. now, the person you had on

before me in your previous segment, he says we've got to get this notion to offset, why do we have a national debt? we have a $17 trillion national debt because for so many years we forgot about offsets. we can't continue down that road anymore. >> senator grassley, i have to ask as we talk about all of these big questions and you've had a very firm and consistent stance in terms of budget and budget priorities. are you at all worried about the narrative in and around the republican party that they are increasingly deaf to the concerns of the middle and working class? i'm not just talking about snap benefits or unemployment insurance, minimum wage, the general argument of fairness. is that something that concerns you? >> well, what concerns me is sometimes the language used isn't the best. they get the impression that you just expressed, which i think is a false impression. republicans do have concern about the middle class and the

middle class is where we get most of our votes. wall street is pretty much a -- i would call it a political prostitute. they play both sides of the fence. big government, big corporations. wall street, big banks. it's the middle class that tends to be more intellectually honest and vote for the person as opposed to the political party. if they are true to a political party, they are true to it. we get most of our votes from the middle class. >> thank you for your time. >> you bet. thank you very much. >> after the break, subzero winter temperatures falling record breaking summer heat. the tell tale signs of climate change. but when you do not believe in climate change, calling it global warming makes your argument kind of sort of legit.

we'll explore one senator's weird science up next. welcome back. how is everything? there's nothing like being your own boss! and my customers are really liking your flat rate shipping. fedex one rate. really makes my life easier. maybe a promotion is in order. good news. i got a new title. and a raise? management couldn't make that happen. [ male announcer ] introducing fedex one rate. simple, flat rate shipping with the reliability of fedex. [ male announcer ] introducing fedex one rate. this is a map of the pressure points on my feet. i have flat feet. i learned where the stress was at the dr.scholl's foot mapping center. then i got my number, which matched the custom fit orthotic inserts with the right support. find a walmart with a foot mapping center at drscholls.com. i'm a believer.

i just served my mother-in-law your chicken noodle soup but she loved it so much... i told her it was homemade. everyone tells a little white lie now and then. but now she wants my recipe [ clears his throat ] [ softly ] she's right behind me isn't she? [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup.

the day building a play set begins with a surprise twinge of back pain... and a choice. take up to 4 advil in a day or 2 aleve for all day relief. [ male announcer ] that's handy. ♪ republicans can call it global warming or a hoax. it doesn't change the fact that climate change is real. a programming note for you and me, "now" is moving to a new time slot starting a week from today, january 13th. mark it. you can catch us each and every weekday at 4:00 p.m. eastern, starting next monday here on msnbc. when it comes to good nutrition...i'm no expert.

that would be my daughter -- hi dad. she's a dietitian. and back when i wasn't eating right, she got me drinking boost. it's got a great taste, and it helps give me the nutrition i was missing. helping me stay more like me. [ female announcer ] boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. all with a delicious taste. grandpa! [ female announcer ] stay strong, stay active with boost.

did you run into traffic? no, just had to stop by the house to grab a few things. you stopped by the house? uh-huh. yea. alright, whenever you get your stuff, run upstairs, get cleaned up for dinner. you leave the house in good shape? yea. yea, of course. ♪ [ sportscaster talking on tv ] last-second field go-- yea, sure ya did. [ male announcer ] introducing at&t digital life. personalized home security and automation. get professionally monitored security for just $29.99 a month. with limited availability in select markets. ♪

if you live in one of the 49 states experiencing freezing temperatures this week, you probably got the memo. it's cold. along with mittens and hot cocoa, there is one thing cold weather never fails to bring out. >> it looks to me like we're looking at global cooling. forget the global warming. that's my opinion. >> tis the season for climate change denial. tweeted the donald last week, this very expensive global warming bs has got to stop. our planet is freezing, record low temps and gw scientists are stuck in ice. last night even the senate floor was not immune to this strain of home spun sciency analysis. >> well, there's been a concerted effort of people to believe that global warming is taking place and we're all going to die and all of that.

at the same time, the evidence out there is just almost laughable. >> while disputing the 97% of scientists that believe climate change is the result of human activities presented some evidence. >> in january of 2004, i remember when al gore held a global warming rally in new york city, one of the cold eflt days in new york city in its history. >> al gore was cold. therefore global warming is a hoax. ahem. according to the logic of the distinguished gentleman from oklahoma, if the planet is getting warmer, how can it possibly be cold out? for one, the term global warming doesn't tell the whole story. scientists argue in addition to overall heating of planet earth, human initiated climate change is also contributing to extreme weather events. some scientists are already saying that the polar vortex issued in this current cold slap this week is a result of climate change.

furthermore, extreme cold in one part of the world may coincide with extreme heat elsewhere. senator inhofe did not mention that australia is experiencing record breaking summer heat. or that the average global temperature especially in the last 30 years, has been steady rising. and he certainly didn't mention that in 2011 his home state of oklahoma experienced the hottest summer ever recorded in u.s. history. but the only problem with sitting idly by and chuckling as members of congress fiddle around with their own high poj thes sis, things are getting worse. how many more sweltering summers must oklahoma suffer through before senator inhofe finally feels the heat. from surveillance reforms to a debate over privacy and security, the snowden effect has

been felt far and wide. we'll discuss party infighting and strange bed fellows when we return. [ male announcer ] legalzoom has helped start over 1 million businesses. if you have a business idea, we have a personalized legal solution that's right for you. with easy step-by-step guidance, we're here to help you turn your dream into a reality. start your business today with legalzoom. ♪ ♪ if i was a flower growing wild and free ♪ ♪ all i'd want is you to be my sweet honeybee ♪ ♪ and if was a tree growing tall and green ♪ ♪ all i'd want is you to shade me and be my leaves ♪ grown in america. picked & packed at the peak of ripeness. the same essential nutrients as fresh. del monte. bursting with life™.

her long day of pick ups and drop offs begins with arthritis pain... and a choice. take up to 6 tylenol in a day or just 2 aleve for all day relief. all aboard. ♪

all aboard. at a company that's bringing media and technology together. next is every second of nbcuniversal's coverage 0f the 2014 olympic winter games. it's connecting over one million low-income americans to broadband internet at home. it's a place named one america's most veteran friendly employers. next is information and entertainment in ways you never thought possible. welcome to what's next. comcastnbcuniversal.

rounding out his media tour, peter king took rand paul to task on "morning joe" accusing joe of scare mongering and isolationism. >> what rand paul is comparing general clapper to snowden saying clapper belongs in jail with snowden and all phone calls are being listened to, rather than using intelligent arguments as people could well do, he's resulting to fear and the lowest common denominator. >> the paranoia to when he is referring rand paul's suggestion that james clapper should face

punishment for telling congress that the nsa collects no bulk data on millions of americans. >> i frankly think it would be somewhat enlightening for clapper and snowden to share a prison cell and maybe we would all learn from that. >> it is peter king, not rand paul, who is on the fringes of modern gop. yesterday senator minority leader mitch mcconnell released a brand-new ad for his 2014 re-election bid, featuring the scare mongering senator from kentucky. >> what he has done and allows him to be the most powerful republican up there is that he can pull people together united on obama care, united for a balanced budget amendment. >> joining me now is anchor of bbc world news america katy kay and eugene robinson. mitch mcconnell hearts rand paul, at least during this election season. but we are seeing interesting

bedfellows in this moment, especially relating to issues of defense and national security. it is -- goes without saying thgs not your father's gop, a group that will not extend unemployment assistance for -- without pay fors for first time in a very long time. but it is also a party that is split on the issue of defense spending as per the sequester and where you see in very clear evidence a real chief on the issue of nsa. what is the legacy of this going forward do you think? >> i think the operative phrase there is at least during this election season because there are clear differences between the position of rand paul and many others within the republican party. if you go back to the attacks of 9/11, rand paul was as far as i can recall, the only republican voice who came out and said maybe america should examine its foreign policy if it wanted to get to the roots of why al kid was so hateful of what america was doing around the world. he got slammed for saying that. when he comes out now and talks

about the nsa and idea that director clapper should be in a prison cell, there are plenty within the ranks of the establishment republican party who are horrified as peter king is by what he's suggesting. rand paul is doing a couple of things. trying to appeal to that base of the libertarian young base of the republican party that supported his father so much and that is very opposed to the nsa policies and i think he generally believes in a more isolationist america. >> eugene, to be fair, there's also tension on the left about how much we are going to criticize the policies of a democratic president, whether he has done the right thing or whether he has done the necessary thing. you have a column out and write, president obama should force the agency to think less about the quantity of information it gathers and more about the quality. assembling massive amounts of data may create the illusion of

total awareness but doesn't tell you who the terrorists are or what they might be up to. you've been a real voice on this in terms of surveillance and where we should be going. do you sense though, there is enough of an engine on the left to really push this white house to change? >> i'm not sure frankly, alex. this is an issue that cuts in all sorts of strange ways through politics in washington. and there are those many democrats, senator dianne feinstein, for example, who defend the nsa and defend the bulk collection of telephone data and all of the other stuff the nsa has been doing, the secret courts that allow this to take place. and so the split in the democrat party and republican party as well. it's kind of uncomfortable for me on a certain level to say that i stand with rand on this issue. >> on this very specific issue and let's be clear about that. yeah, but you know, i think his

feelings on this are genuine and on several civil liberties kinds of issues that libertarian philosophy does detail with what people on left believe. >> go ahead. >> one group of people that are united in their opposition to what the nsa is doing and gene is so hip he's right there with them, are young americans, right? whether they are republicans or democrats, people in their early 20s are much more opposed towards the nsa surveillance programs have done than older americans. i think rand paul is partly appealing to that but he's also reflecting their concerns about this. >> but you know, to that point, eugene, embracing the paul position on national security measures is a good thing for the republican party in so far as they have no currency with young people. they refuse to actually try to substantively court minorities or working and middle class

americans. so here's basically a give me for them. we're for these paul yan ideas about surveillance, when it comes to brass tax, i would have a hard time managing any republican president, let alone leader would institute true reforms on the issue of the nsa. >> it's difficult to believe. i kind of think rand paul might try to do it. but there's the whole other 80% or 90% of his philosophy that so far to the right that it is unappealing certainly to young people and to most americans. it's kind of a dilemma for the republican party, how do they appeal to young people. and this may be the best in they have right now. but it doesn't necessarily go that far once you get to other policies. >> kenny, really quickly, before we go, we talk about rand paul and obviously we're going to be talking about him in the leadup to 2016. i imagine that he will do something akin to what a newt gingrich did, which is shift the

goal post in terms of the national dialogue and republican dialogue in the primary season if he does in fact run. in so far as he retains these fairly hard core positions on defense and national security, it will be really interesting and potentially uncomfortable for other republican challengers in terms of where they plant their flag. >> generally speaking he's one of the most interesting republicans running because he says what he thinks and doesn't compromise on what he believes in and does highlight the split in the gop on national security. i can't see him mincing his words on that. it will be interesting to see what he does to the other candidates. >> what the effect of the paul is on the rest of the world. the bbc's katty kay and thank you to "washington post" eugene robinson. that is all for now. andrea mitchell reports is coming up next. n minutes could u fifteen percent or more on car insurance. everybody knows that parker.

well, did you know auctioneers make bad grocery store clerks? that'll be $23.50. now .75, 23.75, hold 'em. hey now do i hear 23.75? 24! hey 24 dollar, 24 and a quarter, quarter, now half, 24 and a half and .75! 25! now a quarter, hey 26 and a quarter, do you wanna pay now, you wanna do it, 25 and a quarter - sold to the man in the khaki jacket! geico. fifteen minutes could save you... well, you know.

yeah... try new alka seltzer fruit chews. they work fast on heartburn and taste awesome. these are good. told ya! i'm feeling better already. [ male announcer ] new alka seltzer fruits chews. enjoy the relief!

when congress passes a bipartisan effort starting here, right at the beginning of the new year, who knows, we might actually get some things done this year. >> right now on "andrea mitchell reports", the president made it clear it's his new year's priority and senate moved one big step towar extending unemployment insurance. john boehner is quick to lower expectations for the bill in the house. is there any hope for a bipartisan compromise in a contentious midterm election year. >> best choice, pass it, no strings and get it done quickly. second best choice, finding a reasonable pay for that can work on both sides of the aisle. i would caution people, that's a lot easier sad than done. >> the polar express. >> stay home. don't come out. it's