grandma. how great is that? >> whoa. >> 18. she just started driving and now her 18th birthday. >> get through college. get through college. >> i mean, seriously. >> get her through college. >> what did i learn today? >> did you learn anything? >> there's a new breed of angry weathermen. al roker, bill karins, they're -- >> yeah, i'm a little mad, too. happy birthday, amelia. i love you. >> happy birthday. >> go to chuck. that's one way to toss it to me. just go here. don't stand so close to me. as house gop leaders head out of town to talk strategy and key issues like immigration, some of them want to make it very clear that they don't agree with the president as much as he claims that they do. so what does matter more? what they're doing or what house republicans are saying? as for the president, he takes his with-or-without-you

message to wisconsin and tennessee today. is he on a bed of nails, as we wait? we'll hear from epa chief jenna mccarthy on what environmental action the president could take by himself. also, the latest on the southern storm that's starting to thaw it out and the emerging blame game surrounding atlanta's mayor, georgia's governor, and the 60 plus officials that are actually in charge of atlanta's urban sprawl of a metropolitan area. good morning from washington, it's thursday, january 30th. this is the "the daily rundown." also here later this hour, orrin hatch. his new republican pitch on health care. let's get right to my first reads of the morning. republicans are signaling that they want to get some points on the scoreboard in 2014. legislative points, that is. and although the president's economic agenda is getting a cool reception from some republicans, there appear to be a few things the president pushed in his state of the union address that some republican leaders do want to make a deal

on. first among them is immigration. but even as republicans hint that they hope to make an immigration deal, that they may be willing to negotiate, say, on part of tax reform, and they want to avoid defaulting on the debt, you wouldn't know it by listening to their rhetoric. it's clear that when any republican leader is on the verge of working across the aisle, either with other democrats or the president, they believe they have to sound defiant while they're doing it. republican rhetoric appears to be going in one direction while the action is going in another, and we had a bunch of examples just in the last 24 hours. and it's often the clear sign that deals are -- or at least legislative progress -- are on the horizon. today, house republican leaders, huddling in maryland's eastern shore, heard from lou holtz last night for their winter retreat, circulate a one-sheet statement of principals on immigration, which includes a path to legalization for the 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the country illegally. now, congressman paul ryan, of course, rolled out the framework on this show yesterday.

>> the plan that you guys are going to push will have a pathway to legalization but not citizenship. is that how you understand it? >> that's right. but it will also involve basically a probationary kind of status to make person is nod rewarded for breaking our laws. you mentioned earlier in your comments about the president going around to congress, about the president not enforcing the laws, that's a big concern of ours these days, and as you can tell from his statements, we have reason to be concerned. so we want to make sure we write a law that he can't avoid. >> if ryan simply started moving toward democrats and the white house on immigration, could light up talk radio, burn him and the gop leadership, so it has to make it like they're boxed in, perhaps, and the only way out is writing the own, slightly tougher compromised law to force the president to follow the law. already some house conservatives are grumbling publicly about the emerging framework. jim jordan saying a bill that

legalizes undocumented immigrants will be difficult to pass. we're not talking about citizenship. mick mull veinny told this to the hill. i think the willingness to go so far as specific legislation has cooled considerably over the course of the last couple of weeks. florida's marco rubio who flew too close to the sun arguably on immigration, at least as far as the republican base was concerned and got burned, is wary of looking like he's working with the president these days. after the president praised rubio tuesday night in the state of the union with a public shoutout, crediting him with an idea to reform the earned income tax credit for low-income workers, rubio's office immediately tried to put as much distance between the two as possible. they sent around a link yesterday afternoon to these comments that rubio made to conservative host michael medved. here's what he said. >> as important as the issue that he's identifying, we have a different idea about how to do it, and his idea is to expand the existing earned income tax

credit. the problem is, as it's currently structured, one, is not the best way to deliver that assistance, and secondly, it's filled with fraud. i think we've identified the samer shoe, but his prescription for it seems to be more of the same, an that's problematic. >> as we know earlier, rubio was burned by the rejection of his immigration bill by conservatives, and he was the guy that was put out there to sell it, the conservatives. he went out of his way wednesday to blame the president, by the way, for the immigration deadlock telling a "wall street journal" breakfast, i don't know if it's going to happen this year, i don't know if it's going to happen with this administration. >> what i found was the central impediment to making progress on this issue is people would say to me, we understand that you put all the security stuff in the bill, but we don't think that matters. we don't think the government will enforce the law anyway. and then they pointed to the irs scandal and the benghazi stuff and the nsa revelations, and then the obamacare decisions by this administration as evidence

of how the government -- this administration unilaterally decides which portions of the law tone force and which ones not to enforce. >> then there's house speaker john boehner who may be in the best position of the three politically after he was proven right about the political folly of the government shutdown. boehner signaled this week that he's unwilling to repeat another confrontation next month on the debt ceiling, telling reporters, quote, no one wants to fault, but he blamed the president's intransience for why he has to fall on this issue. >> it's become obvious to me after having tried to work with the president for the last three years he will not deal with the long-term spending problems unless republicans agree to raise taxes, and we are not going to raise taxes. and so, while the options available continue to be narrower in terms of how we address the issue of the debt ceiling, but i'm confident that we'll be able to find a way. >> boehner can't sound like he's being conciliatory or that he's completely folding. that would light the base on

fire. here's the bottom line. republican rhetoric isn't matching the action right now. they're ratcheting up the rhetoric regarding the president at the very time they're close to finding common ground on the debt ceiling, on immigration, on earned income tax credit. it's been a standard operating procedure for sometime for getting things done in this political era, but it was just amazing to see it so starkly just in the last 24 hours with three, arguably, of the biggest stars in the party, and the biggest power players these days in the party -- ryan, rubio and boehner. the biggest problem next year is not having realistic alternatives. it's been a problem for republican candidates around the country who have to run on the gop brand. they're trying to fix that in maryland. speaker boehner is kicking off an effort to try to give them an agenda. boehner told reporters at a breakfast this week, as we look at this year, i think we go back to '07, '08, '09, '10 and that's the party of better solutions.

when i took over in '07, i told our members you can't criticize democrats unless you tell them what you're for. well, this morning in a letter to the president, house republican leaders are doing the best to discard the party of no label, writing this, quote, mr. president, as you reminded us all on tuesday night, sometimes things don't come easy, but we should never give up and never quit. we haven't given up on working with you to find areas of common agreement where we can do good things for the american people. boehner is challenging the white house and democrats to, quote, work without further delay on bills house republicans have passed on job training, natural gas pipelines, workplace rules, and pediatric research. the question is, will boehner's own members throw a wrench in his rebranding efforts when it comes to the two big issues ahead? immigration and the debt limit? luke russert joins us from the republican retreat on maryland's eastern shore. so, luke, this issue, you heard me run through it. leaders sometimes publicly have to say one thing while they're working to sort of forge a

compromise behind the scenes. is there going to be a conservative explosion to this strategy that the leaders are trying to implement? >> yeah, well, good morning, chuck. it's interesting this morning the house gop leadership released a letter, as you mentioned, and it was much more conciliatory in tone, trying to show, as you said, they're not the party of no. they want to cooperate. but the real issue here, though, at this retreat is two. it's where are they going to go on immigration reform and what they're going to do about the debt limit. last year, paul ryan was able to convince more conservative members it wasn't worth getting into a fight with the president over the debt limit. it's expected from conversations that i've had that he's going to try to do that again this year and try to figure out some sort of compromise on the debt limit that would not get into one of the showdowns where the nation's on the brink of economic catastrophe. immigration reform is the other trickier issue. nancy pelosi yesterday said that john boehner told her that he

was going to put forward sincere principles that both sides could agree on when it comes to border security, when it comes to residence status versus full-on citizenship. that'll be the question. what will republicans agree to at this retreat here in terms of a pathway for possibly the undocumented 11 million of them to get some sort of legal status? it's expected they're going to offer something. john boehner will have to do that today. it will be an aggressive sell job. how it will look, there's a ton of rumors. we do not necessarily know, get to the back of the line is one thing we've heard. everything's contingent upon border security. and that is still the question, chuck, is that before anything pertains to the undocumented, from the conversation i had this morning, border security still has to be figured out. what is that? is it the herman cain moat strategy with alligators, or is it something more feasible? >> all right. luke russert doing your best to

get what can you get out of this retreat. let me know if you run into lou holtz. i know he was there last night. thank you, boss. brand-new numbers show the economy grew at a rate of 3.2%, boosted by the best consumer spending in three years. so later this hour, we'll take a "deep dive" into a new theory on why the economy performed so much better when a democrat is in the white house than when a republican is. it's 40 years of data. fascinating. the president pledged to take action on climate change. but how much can he do without congress? epa chief jenna mccarthy will be here to talk about that. first, a look at today's politics planner. the president is on the road, as we told you. he'll be at a g.e. plant in wisconsin, and then he heads to tennessee. now you're looking at live pictures here. this is i-65, interstate 65 near atmore, alabama. as you can see, not a whole lot of people are on the road as parts of alabama are finally reopening, but authorities say it will be at least another day

before things get back to normal across the state. we're going to get into the problems in georgia later in this show. i need proof of insurance. that's my geico digital insurance id card - gots all my pertinents on it and such. works for me. turn to the camera. ah, actually i think my eyes might ha... next! digital insurance id cards. just a tap away on the geico app. could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. everybody knows that. well, did you know that when a tree falls in the forest and no one's around, it does make a sound? ohhh...ugh. geico. little help here. ♪ clovers and blue moons shoes ♪ hourglasses, rainbows ♪ and tasty red balloons let's go! ♪ lucky charms ♪ frosted lucky charms ♪ they're magically delicious she loves a lot of it's what you love about her. but your erectile dysfunction - that 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 medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as 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 cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. i have a big meeting when we land, but i am so stuffed up, i can't rest. [ male announcer ] nyquil cold and flu liquid gels don't unstuff your nose. they don't?

alka seltzer plus night fights your worst cold symptoms, plus has a decongestant. [ inhales deeply ] oh. what a relief it is.

well, of all the issues the president's chosen to try to get around congress, the environment is the one the president's concentrated on the most. after he was elected, the president committed to drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions, a tall order and a controversial move to some. last year, the president called out climate change deniers and called fossil fuel yesterday's energy. but this year, the president went a bit further. first, he said he directed his administration to set new limits on carbon pollution, and then he gave his strongest statement yet on climate change. >> but the debate is settled.

climate change is a fact, and when our children's children look us in the eye and ask if we did all we could to leave them a safer, more stable world with new sources of energy, i want us to be able to say, "yes, we did." [ applause ] >> the president's call for new pollution limits is already in the works without the need for any congressional action, specifically the epa has already shut down dozens of coal-fired power plants using existing emission standards and now the epa is poised to beef up the rules even more. under the current rules, coal-fired plants can legally put out 2,250 pounds of carbon dioxide for every megawatt hour of power they generate. but check out this new standard. the epa's considering cutting the emissions in half. now the coal industry is claiming the new standards could be a threat to the power grid itself, and that's the president's problem, how to keep everybody happy while making good on the climate promises. here's the attempt he made on tuesday night.

>> the all-of-the-above energy strategy i announced few years ago is working and today, america is closer to energy independence than we have been in decades. [ applause ] >> now, that line prompted this headline in the "wall street journal," claiming the president had, quote, softened on climate. and the sierra club attacked the president's position saying, we can't effectively act on climate and expand drilling and fracking for oil and gas at the same time. but the administration's top environmentalist tweeted this. awesome speech tonight, love the everything president obama said, especially on climate, great night for america. well, joining us now live is the author of that tweet who happens to be administrator of the epa, gina mccarthy. welcome. >> thanks, chuck. >> let's talk about the coal and natural gas. last year, the president didn't sound like a guy that was pretty big on natural gas and the fracking. this year, he said -- he seemed to be much more open to this

expansion of the natural gas. essentially, the epa saying and what the president is saying in the policy now, you're going to get tough on coal, but in exchange, you're going to be more open to this expansion of natural gas drilling? >> i think the president has been very consistent in his message. his message is that we want to be as secure in our energy supply as we can. it's important for national security. but at the same time, we can -- we can move forward with reductions in carbon pollution that'll make our public health improved and make our communities safer. i don't think there's been any change in position. there's been opportunities to make success in reducing carbon pollution. we're going to build on that. >> do you believe, though, that this -- i mean, obviously, there are some environmental groups who believe that this natural gas boom that's -- it's certainly an economic -- having a positive economic impact in a lot of states, particularly the midwest, is going to cause environmental problems down the

road. where are you on this? >> i think the president has been clear that the natural gas boom has provided us an opportunity -- tremendous -- >> you think it's a net positive? >> from a greenhouse gas perspective, it certainly is. and what we can do and what the president has pledged to do in his plan is to continue to look at this and make sure it's safer and cleaner moving forward. we are looking at carbon pollution reductions from the full range of fuels available to us. so it's not just about fossil fuels and natural gas or coal. it's about increasing the supply of renewable energy. that is an area where this administration has had tremendous success. >> as you implement this new rule -- first of all, the new rule on coal, is that a done deal, cutting it in half? >> no, the -- >> give me the sort of the time line -- >> the requirements you mentioned are requirements we proposed. >> who proposed them? >> epa. >> so you proposed them -- >> under the existing -- >> explain this process. is there a comment period? how does it work? >> it's a rulemaking move.

we put out a rule. there's a comment period. we look at those and we issue a final rule. we actually proposed this in september. we're still in the comment period now. and then we'll be finalizing that moving forward. but those rules are about new power plants. it was about taking a look at what technology is -- >> this is new coal-fired power plants, not current ones. >> that's correct. there's no rule for existing power plants at this point. that's a process that we're still engaging with tremendous outreach to find out what states are thinking, what utilities are thinking, what individuals feel like we should be doing, and we are going to be proposing those in june. but what we've talked about is what investments do we want made using available technology to ensure if you're building utilities, which last 50, 60, 70 years, that they're prepared for a carbon constrained future using technologies that we know are available. >> so this issue about the power grid that some of these companies have brought up -- >> yes. >> -- how do you respond to

this? >> the president has made this very clear, and we have always ensured that this is the case, we can address pollution without threatening energy reliability, without significantly increasing energy costs. that's our job. that's what we're going to do. carbon pollution is no different than any other pollutant we have regulated under the clean air act. we have succeeded in reducing pollution, continuing to grow the economy. that's the challenge before us. >> you brought up the clean air act. there is a supreme court case that is going to decide how much power the epa has regarding some of these issues. so what will this court case mean if, essentially, the supreme court strikes down some of the epa's abilities here to write the rules without congressional legislation? >> well, the supreme court decision -- the supreme court is actually spoken to this issue on a number of occasions. what's before them right now is not speaking to whether the clean air act can regulate carbon pollution, whether the endangerment finding we said -- that said that climate change is

a danger to public health. they're not questioning any of that. that's not before them. it's a very narrow issue how to we permit greenhouse gases. so this is a done deal. not only is climate a fact, but it's a fact that -- >> you're not worried -- you don't believe this court case is really going to limit -- >> no. >> -- what you do too much? >> actually, the court had an opportunity to retake those issues up again for the third time. they didn't. >> it seems we're in this -- it's been interesting watching on what you've -- what the epa has been doing, both you and your predecessor, been very aggressive in having to do this, because there's no congressional backup here. but what this also means is essentially we only have rules for four or eight years at a time, depending on a new administration. do you need -- what have you done rulemaking wise that you need codified in law if it's really going to have a long-term impact on cutting pollution? >> i think the president's message is that he's really worked with congress to try to get laws in place to address the

threat of climate change, more comprehensi comprehensively, but that doesn't mean we can't take reasonable steps forward. you only need to look back a few years to see the opportunities available to us moving forward. we had that challenge when we were looking at the automakers. we worked with the auto industry at a time when they were ready to collapse. they're now rejuvenated. and what are they doing? they're selling cars that go twice as far on a gallon of gas. they have innovative technologies that eventually are going to make their way into the market, and change the way we actually travel. and we are looking at opportunities for job growth. we can actually do this in a way that makes sense for everybody, including consistent with our economic growth opportunities. >> how much does it hinder your ability to get some stuff done, that you've -- the epa is this political football for conservatives? >> yeah. >> fear. there's this fear of the epa. do you need to be more transparent? do you need to open things up more?

do you think there is a p.r. campaign, the epa could go about to sort of lessen the fear that some have of the fear of the power of the epa? >> well, i think transparency is important. i think we've said that all along. and one of the things we're doing with the power plant rule for existing facilities -- which we know people are concerned about -- is we've done 11 listening sessions across the country. 3,000 people have offered us written comment. we have a web page that takes -- that's taking comment every day. we want people to know we're listening. we know we have to understand this industry, we know we have to grow the economy. but we also know that we can do it in a way that lowers carbon emissions and deals with this significant public health threat and the threat to our communities. >> gina mccarthy, the administrator for the environmental protection agency. thank you for coming in. good to have a "dive" on this issue. >> take care. up next, a storm of controversy. nothing like an ice and snowstorm to put local politicians under the spotlight. cleanup is under way in atlanta after the ice and snow brought

the city and the entire metropolitan area to a standstill. and now there's a blame game that's been kicked into high gear. atlanta's mayor is trying damage control for himself. we'll give you some of that. still to come, replacing repeal. if you listen to the various state of the union responses that republicans had out there, they all admitted that scrapping the affordable care act altogether is now off the table. we'll explain. first, today's trivia question -- [ male announcer ] it's simple physics... 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. i took medicine but i still have symptoms. [ sneeze ] [ male announcer ] truth is not all flu products treat all your symptoms. what? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus severe cold and flu speeds relief to these eight symptoms. [ breath of relief ] thanks. [ male announcer ] you're welcome. ready? go.

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. well, new developments in the controversy and emerging blame game over the southern storm response that gridlocked traffic, stranded children in schools tuesday night. first, the traffic getting into and out of atlanta is much

improved. it's still bitterly cold and thousands of cars are still abandoned on the roads. but the greater atlanta area got a couple inches of snow tuesday and it brought traffic to a standstill. drivers spent the night in their cars. now, school buses set out to take kids home, but either turned back or got stuck and it left thousands of children to make due on gym floors. so who is responsible for the disastrous response? frankly, why were schools open that day? georgia governor nathan deal, he claims it's not him. >> what could we do to have avoided that? we can't control mother nature, just as we could not make better predictions -- >> a lot of alabama schools chose to close, though. so this morning, atlanta mayor kasim reed appeared on a bunch of morning television to explain why he shouldn't be taking the full blame either. he says these pictures don't even show the atlanta city proper. so then, mika asked this earlier this morning --

>> so who screwed up, mayor? >> i think that we all have responsibility in terms of -- >> so are you responsible or not? >> the question is -- i shared what i was responsible for. >> by comparison, birmingham, alabama, did much better with the storm. the gridlock was bad tuesday, no doubt, but as you could see from these live pictures, the roads are much clearer this morning. there's actually a great piece this morning in politico magazine explaining the issue with atlanta, the atlanta metro area. it's actually 60 different mini-metropolitan municipalities, and guess what? they were not working in concert. they clearly have to figure this out, because this is a mega-opolysis, it's all of them. leadership or luck? it's a "deep dive" into a new theory about decades of data which has suggested the economy does better when a democrat is in the white house. so what's the reasoning? "deep dive" is next.

you're watching "the daily rundown" only on msnbc. hey guys! sorry we're late. 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. ♪

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 right. i called our epa thing a "deep dive," and it was in depth, but this is our real "deep dive" for the show, and it's a compelling link between the economy and the party in the white house. we got word that the gdp grew 3.2%, down from the third quarter but still strong. it came a day after president obama praised hard working americans and insisted the government has a role in helping them out. >> you don't have to make it the way some folks make it, but everybody should have enough to feel some security. and americans overwhelmingly agree that nobody who works full time should ever have to raise a family in poverty. >> now, republicans say the president's economic policies have hurt more than they've helped. and they insist that they have a better way. >> the goal isn't to just have

the government say, here's how much you're going to get paid. the goal is to remove the barriers for economic growth so people can get better jobs. >> but is policy the deciding factor between an economic boom or bust, or frankly, is it something else? according to a new analysis paper by economist alan blinder and mark watson, it's not policy or politics. more often than not, they say it's simply dumb luck, and most of the time it ends up favoring the democrats. the paper examines how the u.s. economy fared under 12 presidents, all the way back to harry truman. what they found was that generally democratic presidents were in charge when the economy was doing the best. you can see truman, kennedy, johnson, clinton stand out on the chart. interesting to note, carter's numbers are probably better than you real identify, because gdp growth was good at the time. his problem, of course, was inflation. now, reagan's numbers are probably worse than you remember. don't forget the start of his presidency was clouded by a severe recession. overall, the economy grew of

more than 4% under democrats and 2.5% under republicans. it's a pretty dramatic difference. but why? well, blinder and watson looked at a number of possible factors and came up with three big ones. number one, oil shocks. the price in the early '70s hit nixon and ford, and threefold increase in prices did huge economic damage under george w. bush. and productivity. surges in productivity helped kennedy and jond son, while a drop hurt reagan. but the paper concludes these look more like good luck than good policy. the third big factor is simply consumer confidence. but the paper argues that may be a suelf-fulfilling prophesy. consumers expect the economy to do better under democrats and make that happen by purchasing more durable goods. so, in fact, blinder and watson describe all three as luck factors that seem to happen randomly. so what about the policy? defense spending?

the paper finds they may play a small role but more or less insignificant when it comes to determining why republican presidents seem to get the fuzzy end of the economic lollipop. but the researchers admit the three luck factors can only explain about 60% of the gap. they say the rest remains, for now, a mystery of the still mostly unexplored continent. well, joining me is alan blinder, the princeton university economist and former economic advisor to president clinton. he co-wrote the paper. thank you for coming on, sir. >> thank you. >> so this is -- if it's 60%, the three factors, and essentially you're saying luck, so what's in the 40%? what is part of this 40%, or is that still to be researched? >> that's definitely still to be researched. we may do some more research on it. the nature of scholarly work, is you put findings out there and you hope other people will work on them. it's also a bit of a mystery to try to figure out how much of that, quote, luck might actually

be policy. for example, you mentioned the big oil shock under president bush, the younger bush 2, but we invaded iraq. it wasn't a total accident that that happened at the time. >> well, the other part of this that i'm wondering is how do you factor in sort of when a policy takes effect and how long -- so not necessarily a policy, but almost like a philosophy of a president, and when it eventually kicks in and actually impacts the economy. what is that lag factor? so clinton's philosophy, economic philosophies, it was -- is it four years in, is it five years in? ditto with reagan? what is the lag factor when it comes to the implementation of a budget philosophy, say, and how it impacts the economy? >> it clearly depends on the nature of the policy. for example, president obama came in and in february 2009, there was already a stimulus package which starts to affect

the economy the next month. some things are very long term and don't -- if you talk about infrastructure spending, it's going to be years. what we did in the paper is basically credit or blame the first quarter of each administration to the previous president. we also looked -- suppose we did two quarters, three quarters, four quarters, we got similar but not identical results. >> you know, the other thing that you note here is that democrats have inherited low-growth rate when is they've come into office into the white house. >> right. >> republicans have inherited high-growth rates. >> right. >> does that skew things? for instance, obviously, you know, the whole, you know, when you hire a new football coach, you know, he wants to come in, where the expectations are low. so democrats are coming in with low expectations. or they're being rewarded by voters because they're mad at republicans, so they need this, and vice versa when things are going well, they feel more comfortable? what is your sense here? what does that mean? >> we know the answer to that,

because in gdp growth, as in most economic variables, there's a lot of inertia. so if you ask the question, if this quarter is high, does that make it more likely or less likely the next quarter will be high? the answer is more likely. so if you have a good inheritance, which the republicans do when they come in the office, that should favor you, if you have a bad inheritance that should go against you. and so, that factor clearly weighs in favor of republicans, not in favor of democrats. >> so as somebody who studies these things, and your belief in statistician, when do you think this trend is a fact, is a provable fact? because sometimes you look back, and i say that even we've had 57 presidential elections, and you know what, that's actually not enough examples to say this is always the way it happens, this way or that way. >> no, always is too strong. but think of it is as coin flipping. as some point if you're flipping a coin enough times, you may

discover it's an unfair coin. it's not actually coming up 50/50. so the question is, how many flips do you actually need before you get -- can reach a conclusion like that, a probablistic conclusion? and we could. there are standards, statistical tests for that, and the likelihood that this larger gap, you showed it on the first graph, in the setup piece, was happening purely by chance, like coin flipping on a fair coin that just didn't come up 50/50, was under 1%. >> all right. >> so that's good enough -- that was good enough for us. >> good enough to put it in t the -- for princeton. all right, sir, alan blinder, thank you. very interesting report. and i bet you there will be more research built upon it. thank you very much. developing now, we'll show you a few pictures here. house republican leaders are holding their press conference before they get into the nuts and bolts of their annual retreat, which this year is taking place on the eastern shore of maryland. a now more familiar face to some of you, that, of course, is cathy mcmorris rodgers, who did the republican response a couple

of nights ago. coming up next, hatching the plan. the most senior republican in the senate. utah's orrin hatch joins me next, part of a trio of republicans who unveiled an alternative to president obama's affordable care act. can he convince his party to unite behind the plan? first, the white house soup of the day -- [ female announcer ] who are we? we are the thinkers. the job jugglers. the up all-nighters. and the ones who turn ideas into action. we've made our passions our life's work. we strive for the moments where we can say, "i did it!" ♪ we are entrepreneurs who started it all... with a signature. legalzoom has helped start over 1 million businesses, turning dreamers into business owners. and we're here to help start yours.

♪ drimusic stopsusic into business owners. ♪ music resumes ♪ music stops ♪ music resumes ♪ ♪ [announcer] if your dog can dream it, [whistle] purina pro plan can help him achieve it. nutrition that performs. [ male announcer ] campbell's homestyle soup with farm grown veggies. just like yours. huh. [ male announcer ] and roasted white meat chicken. just like yours. [ male announcer ] you'll think it's homemade. i love this show. [ male announcer ] try campbell's homestyle soup. [ male announcer ] you'll think it's homemade. i love this show. "stubborn love" by the lumineers did you i did. email? so what did you think of the house? did you see the school ratings? oh, you're right. hey babe, i got to go. bye daddy! have a good day at school, ok?

...but what about when my parents visit? ok. i just love this one... and it's next to a park. i love it. i love it too. here's our new house... daddy! you're not just looking for a house. you're looking for a place for your life to happen. if your denture moves, it can irritate your gums. try fixodent plus gum care. it helps stop denture movement and prevents gum irritation. fixodent. and forget it.

♪ [ male announcer ] bob's heart attack didn't come with a warning. today his doctor has him on a bayer aspirin regimen to help reduce the risk of another one. if you've had a heart attack, be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. well, as you know, the affordable care act is not ott enlaw of the land, it's enrolled millions in new health care plans that are now in effect, and with the aca now in action, republican language about the law has gradually shifted. no longer are we just hearing about repeal. the focus is increasingly on what comes next. >> when it comes to health care, we know the best way to repeal obamacare is to deliver better solutions. we can't just return to the old system.

>> no. we shouldn't go back to the things -- the way things were. but this law is not working. >> but the party is still split, and some republicans have been challenged to come up with their own plan. well, here's one out there now. it's called the patient care act, is the gop's long-awaited alternative. this is in the senate, and it's not an alternative at all in some points, it's the same. it lets young adults stay on their parents' plans, like the aca, and both plans ban lifetime insurance caps on benefits. now, there are plenty of differences. under the republican plan, employer and individual mandates are gone. it ensures people can't be denied for pre-existing conditions, but that's only if they are continuously insured and never drop coverage. republicans would turn more regulation power over to the states and allow insurance companies more leeway in setting their own prices. and while the current law

expands medicaid, the republican plan would limit federal medicaid funding. final major difference would change the way employer contributions are taxed, a limit, sand the republican plan would tax 35% of the contributions to the health coverage as income. meaning you would pay taxes on it. and actually, that came up, if you recall, during the 2008 presidential campaign. that's compared to the affordable care act, which keeps employer-sponsored insurance tax-free. joining me now is one of the three co-sponsors of the new patient care act, utah republican senator orrin hatch. the most senior republican in the u.s. senate. good morning to you, sir. >> nice to see you. >> well, let's start with this issue of pleat repeal. considering the language -- there is a universal agreement, i take it now, that the -- no one wants to go back to the old system, is that fair to say, senator? >> well, i think that's fair to say. but, also, i think it's very unfair for some of the democrats

to put out that we were not for keeping children on the parents' health care till age 26, that we were not for some of the other things that we actually always have been for. we had them in some of the health care programs that we were writing back then. the things that basically they claim are so important for their obamacare we would have agreed to if we'd done a much better bill. right now, we know obamacare is not going to work. >> let's go to some of the key differences. >> sure. >> one of the assumed benefits in your new plan would allow for cheaper policies for young folks. >> right. >> at the same time, you would allow insurers to sell insurance at varying rates. so if you allow for a cheaper policy for younger, healthier people, right, this has been among the issues, the translation is you're going to see -- how do you prevent a spike for older americans who maybe just by default of genetics are start with a lot of

health care problems, and because of that, end up getting charged more? how do you prevent that spike in rates for them? >> well, we have a formula in there that it can't go beyond a certain position. but the fact of the matter is, somebody has to pay for these things. and the obamacare bill doesn't pay for things, they pushed them into -- into medicaid, which is nonfunctioning and not doing what it should do right now. and in the future, it's going to be unfunded, and we've got to find some way of, you know, completely rehabilitating medicaid. and we do that in our bill. and in the end -- >> now. >> -- in the end, we save a pot of dough, because we get rid of the bureaucrats back here in washington and all of the government processes that just eat up funds right and left, and we get it to where the system works on a consumer-based -- consumer-based program. >> but aren't you putting the burden in your plan of the money -- aren't you essentially shifting the costs to the health insurance user, essentially?

so, for instance, on your plan to tax -- and this was something that -- this was part of john mccain's plan back in the 2008 campaign, and we remember the obama campaign beat him up and him up and said, he would tax your health insurance plans. by making that in, how do you deal with the political attack that you're trying to raise income taxes on million of americans, because you would tax their health insurance plan. >> first of all, we get rid of the bureaucracy back here in washington. we basically allow the states to do most of the management. we do not have the multibillions of dollars just thrown right down the drain. we don't have the impositions on the policies that the obamacare does. for instance, the 25-year-old mcic who isn't married. does he really need maternity in his policy just because the bureaucrats back leer in washington think he ought to

have it? >> but somebody who needs maternity, they're going to get charged more. somebody is paying here. >> not really. not really. medicaid is bankrupt right hue. we've got to save -- this had save medicaid. what people don't realize is the obamacare will run us into bankruptcy. we won't be able to pay for it. we've got to come up with a consumer-based approach that gets rid of obamacare, but also makes sense from the financial standpoint. we're going to make it work against. >> well, i am unfortunately out of time, but i feel like this is conversation that should continue. i hope to have you back. senator, i appreciate your time. >> glad to do it. all right. trivia time it was mike leavitt who serbed first as epa administrator, and then took another post. congratulations to today's winner, eric. send your trivia suggestions to

daily rundown. we'll be right back. at 100 calories or less, there are plenty of reasons people are saying "progress-oh!" share your progress-oh! story on progresso.com. i took medicine but i still have symptoms. [ sneeze ] [ male announcer ] truth is not all flu products treat all your symptoms. what? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus severe cold and flu speeds relief to these eight symptoms. [ breath of relief ] thanks. [ male announcer ] you're welcome. ready? go. [ male announcer ] what kind of energy is so abundant, it can help provide the power for all this? natural gas. ♪ more than ever before, america's electricity is generated by it. exxonmobil uses advanced visualization and drilling technologies to produce natural gas... powering our lives... while reducing emissions by up to 60%. energy lives here. ♪

energy lives here. save get a sealy queen set on befor just $399.osturepedic. even get 3 years interest-free financing on tempur-pedic. keep more presidents in your wallet. sleep train's presidents' day sale is on now.

i love chalk and erasers. but change is coming. all my students have the brand new surface. it has the new windows and comes with office, has a real keyboard, so they can do real work. they can use bing smartsearch to find anything in the world... or last night's assignment. and the battery lasts and lasts, so after school they can skype, play games, and my favorite...do homework. change is looking pretty good after all. ♪

time now for the takeaway. a little jammed up on time today. they'll be running on their party's success, they claim, and turning the economy around. republican governors already running on the same message, showing how they're getting things done in their states, a contrast to they claim dysfunctional washington. 36 governor seats, of course are on the 2014 ballot. republicans need to defend 22 seats, democrats 14 in all. looks like we have a bit of a delayed reaction. highlighted are our top ten seats where we believe incumbent governors are the most vulnerable.

we took a look at the drop in the unemployment rate in these ten states in comparison to the national rate, which has dropped 2.7%, from 9.4 to 6.7 in the past three years. so how are we doing on a state level, in which governors get to basically run on success? the governors in the red states of florida, south carolina, michigan and georgia, and the blue state of colorado, all saw their unemployment rate drop at a faster rate than the national average. you can see that television ad write itself for those five incumbents. then you have these govern owes, pennsylvania, wisconsin, maine, connecticut, ohio, four of them are republicans. they'll have a harder time making that case, because their unemployment rate fell at a slower rate than the national average in these states. of course, the issue here, a lot of these incumbent governors will be running on a better economy. it will be interesting, so are a lot of democrats from

washington. does it complicate the washington republican message? that's it for this edition on "the daily rundown." see you tomorrow. 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. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i looked at my options. then i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out

about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it helps pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. to me, relationships matter. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. call now and request this free decision guide to help you better understand medicare... and which aarp medicare supplement plan might be best for you. there's a wide range to choose from. we love to travel -- and there's so much more to see. so we found a plan that can travel with us. anywhere in the country. [ male announcer ] join the millions of people

who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. remember, all medicare supplement insurance plans help cover what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. and learn more about the kinds of plans that will be here for you now -- and down the road. i have a lifetime of experience. so i know how important that is. i have a big meeting when we land, but i am so stuffed up, i can't rest. [ male announcer ] nyquil cold and flu liquid gels don't unstuff your nose. they don't? alka seltzer plus night fights your worst cold symptoms, plus has a decongestant. [ inhales deeply ] oh. what a relief it is.

the aftermath. after a rare winter storm shuts down parts of the south, atlanta's mayo defending his decisions passionately. why did this happen? and who's to blame? any minute, a vertebra for amanda knox. she now faces the same charges in an italian court. plus a new poll sharp in this the scope for hillary clinton. find out who she's beating by a factor of 6 to 1. freezing temperatures have turned many southern roads into blackize.