heavily edited. >> planned parenthood has been in the news recently because of deceptively edited videos released by a group that's dedicated to making abortion illegal in this country and this is just the most recent in a long line of discredited attacks. the latest smear campaign is based on efforts by our opponents to entrap our doctors and clinicians into breaking the law and once again our opponents failed. the outrageous accusations leveled against planned parenthood based on heavily doctored videos are offensive and categorically untrue. >> we want to take you back to the hearing right now to listen in to more of what the head of planned parenthood has to say. >> -- we have programs in latin america and in africa as well, we support family planning programs. so i can certainly -- i think we have provided very detailed information, thousands of pages of both our financial statements, our audited

financials, our annual report and if there's anything that we need to break down further i'm happy to do that. what i would say that -- >> i would very much appreciate it if you would break it down. because the taxpayers are funding over 40% of planned parenthood. and my question is they just have a right to know how this money is being spent. >> absolutely. >> and if taxpayer dollars are being used to free up services that you provide that are aberrant services in the view of many taxpayers. there are alternatives in this country -- many, many -- 13,000 clinics that cater specifically to women's health. >> congressman loomis, i'd like to address that because one of the comments made earlier that i

wasn't able to respond, we don't get a federal subsidy. it is really important to understand for everyone here -- >> can you function -- let me ask you this. could you function on non-federal dollars? why do you need federal dollars? you're making a ton of dough. >> we don't make any profit of o of federal money. if i could just have a moment to explain. >> but you're using federal money and displacing money that could go to the 13,000 health care clinics. my time's up. i yield back. >> could i answer the question? i'm not sure exactly what the whole question was but i do think it's really important that you understand that 60% of our patients are receiving either -- they're either medicaid patients or title 10 patients. 78% of our patients live at 150% of poverty or below. for many of them planned parenthood is the only family

planning provider that will see them in their area. half of our health centers are in medically underserved communities. so it is not -- we don't just get a big check from the federal government. we, like other medicaid providers are reimbursed directly for services provided. >> thank you for allowing miss richards to answer the question. >> as a point of clarification, miss richards, i want to make sure there is no ambiguity here. the gentle woman from wyoming asked for a listing of affiliates where the majority of revenue comes from abortion services. you said you talked to your team. will you actually provide us that list. >> i will talk to my team. if i just for the record, we have -- i am here voluntarily. we have provided tens of thousands of pages of documents to you. we have provided audited financial statements. i will talk to my team and we will do everything we can. >> for the record you have been very cooperative. i just want to keep that rolling. you were very good at agreeing to give other bits of

information. why not this part of information? >> i don't want to commit to anything that i might not have. i said i will work with you and your team. we are -- we have -- >> if you have it will you give it to us? >> i don't have it so i'm just saying to you i will work with my team and we're working with your staff to provide any and all information that we can. >> i would hope that that would include the request from miss loomis of wyoming as well. now recognize the gentlewoman from new york, miss maloney for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i first would like to register my opposition and my objection to the chair beating up on a woman on our witness today for making a good salary. the entire time i've been in congress, i've never seen a witness beaten up and questioned about their salary.

miss richards heads a distinguished organization providing health care services to millions of americans and i find it totally inappropriate and discriminatory. miss richards, are you aware that there are over 285 rallies in support of planned parenthood, including one in my district today, and that many are calling today national pink-out day in support of the services and life changing and life support services of planned parenthood. are you aware of that? >> i am aware of that and i look forward to changing into pink as soon as these proceedings are finished today. >> and are you aware that over 2.7 million men and women in america choose planned parenthood as their primary health provider? and that there are two planned parenthood clinics in the district that i am privileged to

represent. and if you go at the end of the day, young women and men are lined up through the waiting room, out the door, and on some days clear down the block waiting for the health care services of planned parenthood. >> i'm glad to hear that. and again, we're pleased to provide services to anyone who walks in our door. one of the things that i think is very important and refers a little bit to the question earlier is that 60% of our health centers are able to patients on the same day. i know for many women, if they are concerned about a lump in their breast or they need birth control, some of them haven't had an annual exam in many, many years, we are proud to serve them with high-quality care when they need it. >> and are you aware that this hearing today is promoted by a series of deceptively edited and purposefully misleading videos

that have been found to be deceptively edited by leading fact checking organizations, including five states had their own investigations. now it's six. missouri did their own review and they all found that planned parenthood complies with all state laws and regulations regarding tissue donations. now are you aware of any other efforts by republicans and others to defund other organizations that provide health care, reproductive health care to women in this country? >> i'm not aware of any. but there may be. >> what about attacks on title 10? >> well, i think it has been concerning that not only are we seeing this country efforts to end access to safe and legal abortion, which is an important right of women in america, but the reductions in support for family planning are equally disturbing. i'm very encouraged actually

that finally we're beginning to see some breakthrough. as i said earlier, we have now the lowest teen pregnancy in 40 years in america. we are seeing much better birth control and through the affordable care act, now 50 million women get access to no-cost birth control. i think there is a lot we can do to reduce unintended pregnancy in america. >> what do you say to those who want to defund planned parenthood and outlaw abortion all together in our country? >> well, i think what's important to me is at planned parenthood we trust women to be able to make their own health care decisions. and to make their decisions about where they want to go to for health care. i know a lot of members of this committee feel strongly that people should be able to go to their own doctor. this isn't really an attack on planned parenthood. this is an attack on 2.7 million patients who each year choose planned parenthood as their health care provider. i think they should have that right. >> i agree with you completely. we in congress --

>> we are continuing to listen in to this house hearing taking place but i would like to bring in a guest, democratic congresswoman jackie spear from california who has also been monitoring this dialogue happening right now. much of it -- at least what we've heard so far, congresswoman, has been focused on the compensation or salary of cecile richards, the head of planned parenthood. these were heavily edited videos that actually spurred this hearing and many others. >> that's right. you probably won't hear much about that because this is not about digging deep and finding out whether or not there is any violation of the law, this is a witch hunt. it is the same witch hunt that went on when the republicans took over the house, when they introduced hr-1 four or five years ago. it's going on today. it will continue to be the basis on which the republican party regrettably is going to shut down the government over the

funding of planned parenthood. it is important to remember that over 2.7 million americans get their health care through planned parenthood. 865,000 get breast cancer exams and std testing and contraception. 86,000 americans are diagnosed with breast cancer or another form of cancer as a result of going to planned parenthood and their lives are saved. so why -- why are we doing this is the question we all should be asking. >> the other question being asked as reported by the hill, democrats on the house oversight committee asked the republican chairman jason chaffetz to invite the creator of these undercover videos to testify but that the chairman ignored their reported calls. were you a part of the group asking or who want to see this individual behind this video face these same types of questions? >> i think it is very important that this individual face those kinds of questioning. i would say that any entity that

creates fake i.d.s, a fake company, violates federal laws around the internal revenue code, violates california laws around videotaping without the consent of the other person, is not someone that is credible and it's clear that they have doctored up these videos. so why are they continuing to get the attention by the republicans when they have no credibility? >> you have some republicans who also agree with you, they do not want to see this create a government shutdown but still want to take on planned parenthood. you and i both know that this is also part of the conversation or debate happening within the republican party in the presidential race. carly fiorina was on "meet the press" on sunday and she is still refusing to acknowledge that fetus -- she says that she is a you the fetus on the table, that it does not exist, video that she's linked to planned parenthood but a number of

agencies with no ties to either party have said it does not exist in the form that she detailed in that debate. >> it was grossly irresponsible of carly fiorina to make that statement and then not retract it after she was given solid evidence to prove that she was wrong. let's be clear about stem cell research. it's been legal in this country since the 1990s. one of the things that have happened as a result of stem cell research -- we have vaccines for help tie spatitis . fetal tissue has been placed into the brains of parking son's patients and their lives have been extended with good quality for 14 years. 91 research institutions from this country use stem cell research, most of them universities. if we really want to cure cancer and alzheimer's and autism, we have to continue this research. >> okay. they are now talking about these

videos with cecile richards. >> we may just have to agree to disagree on this matter. >> i don't think we're agreeing to disagree, i think you're not answering my question. >> i've answered it i think repeatedly here. i want to -- >> just for the record. this to me is critical because at the moment you did this there was only one video. then you do your video in response to that video. and you made a specific statement. i'm sure your staff worked on this, you prepared this. this probably went through a number of drafts and you were very specific in what you said. "i apologize for the tone and statements." so there is obviously statements in that first video that were accurate that you didn't think were -- needed to be out there and you wanted to apologize for it and you wanted that message heard by the american people. i'm asking you a simple question. in that first video tell me what you needed to apologize for. >> that highly edited video that

now of course as we have gotten further -- and i've read pages -- >> a highly edited video that you apologized for. >> excuse me. i have now read hundreds of pages of all of the things that were said and what is clear now that there were many -- i think ten times during that conversation in which dr. deborah expressly said -- >> it is a simple question. >> well i've answered it -- >> it is as simple and basic as it gets. you don't apologize for things that are inaccurate. you apologize for things that are accurate. and you said there were statements in that first video that i want to apologize for. i'm asking you to tell this committee chairman, this committee and the american people what were those statements? >> i think i've already made my explanati explanation. just for the record, dr. deborah is an excellent doctor. >> i'm not saying she's not. >> you've had your moment i wanted to make sure that you understood what -- that she

provides incredibly compassionate care and i'm proud of her. >> now recognize the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, miss norton. >> miss richards, first i want to thank you for the medicaid funds you do receive. the fact that they are medicaid funds makes its own statement about who you are serving. you are serving low-income women in my community and throughout the country. i want to thank you for that. i want to congratulate you on raising your own funds. >> we will continue to follow the hearing. i do want to bring in my colleague, kelly o'donnell who covers capitol hill for us. kelly, obviously the lines were drawn well before this hearing started. a lot of focus from congresswoman jackie spear as well as congressman elijah cummings on what they believe and congresswoman mahoney, of

course all democrats they believe is a heavy focus on compensation and other issues involving planned parenthood and not what many expected to be the core of this hearing which was supposed to be what planned parenthood calls these heavily edited videos. >> i think you have to look at how these hearings play out. there has certainly already been a lot of focus on the compensation for cecile richards. what lawmakers do over the course of a period of hours, different members will focus on different issues. at the point you were asking those questions of congresswoman spear, she was correct there had been a lots of foccus on that bt now they are moving on to other topics. women democrats want to shine a light on it and say the compensation for cecile richards which was about a half a million dollars a year should not be an issue in this hearing. that's the kind of thing that will certainly draw the anger of women around the country. now they are also talking about other matters like the nature of

the services that are provided. what you pointed out, tamron, is that this really is falling on very predictable lines. there are passions, deeply held, for both democrats and republicans about the role and the reach of planned parenthood, the kind of impact it has in communities, especially for low-income women, and then some of the republicans are trying to key in on the political activities of planned parenthood which is a separate organization but uses the same well-known name. part of what they are trying to do, republicans are saying if the group gets some federal dollars, and those dollars are used to sort of offset their costs, while at the same time they're engaged in political activities, do they really need the federal dollars. that's a big argument to have and it will play out in this kind of setting. but big overlay here is the emotion and deeply held views about abortion, abortion services and women's health care. there's just so much in this. i expect it will be a show of

fireworks throughout the hearing. >> to your point it also though extends to what we're seeing play out with the leadership within the republican party and whether or not this government shutdown and the possibility of it will hover over the heads as the republicans decide who will now be their new leader and some final moves from speaker boehner. >> there are some congressional republicans in both the house and the senate who were willing to take this fight to try to remove funding for planned parenthood over the issue of abortion and fetal tissue used for research. and they were willing to take that fight over the cliff for government funding. pardon me for my voice being a little hoarse. but leadership, speaker boehner, mitch mcconnell, say no, they will not take that fight and that's the issue that's really separating and distancing the ploeft conservative members from their core leadership and it will be belong the last big acts of john boehner to keep government funding beyond his

term as speaker if he can get this through. we expect to see the senate finally pass funding through mid-december that does not take any dollars away from planned parenthood, then john boehner has told us he will take up that same bill on the house side and he will require or rely on, rather, democrats to vote for it because not enough of his republicans would vote for it to pass it. john boehner is saying the government must remain open. the issue of planned parenthood, abortion and these concerns have to be fought in a different way. hearings like what we're seeing today are one of the avenues that conservatives want to use to showcase their views on this and democrats get to fight back and then there will be another day to fight the battle over funding. >> a poll out with "wall street journal" poll, september 20 through the 24, 27% of americans have a positive view planned parenthood. 31% of americans have a negative view of planned parenthood. 61% say eliminate funding to planned parenthood -- no.

only 35% say yes to that question. we'll turn it back over to the hearing but quickly, kelly, what more can you tell us about the fact that you have some democrats who requested the person behind this video also face questions at the hearing today. as i understand it there was no response from the chairman. >> reporter: the chairman is saying that there are other cases of litigation that were involved in that. i don't know all the answers behind it but cecile richards pointed out that she's here voluntarily. while there is a lot of emotion in this hearing, there isn't the kind of anger that you would expect toward a key witness that we see in some other kinds of hearings. so there is a level of respect that cecile richards is here in person. their group, planned parenthood, is providing documents. she's getting praise for being cooperative with congress, even amid these certainly strong lines of disagreement. >> i can tell you i think the chairman has said she was very cooperative but the line of questioning from congressman jim jordan of ohio i think many

people would describe certainly as aggressive in that he was definitely elevated in his tone with her. >> predictably tough from him. and you'll see it -- again, we always know that these moments are an opportunity for lawmakers to showcase some of their views and those clips end up on their own websites and all of that. so there is some theater as well as some real investigatory nature to this. >> kelly, thank you very much. we'll continue to follow the hearing and bring you any big developments from it. i wants to get you caught up on another story developing right now. a clemency hearing is about to get under way for a woman on death row in georgia. just hours from her scheduled execution. she is due it die by lethal injection tonight for the 1997 murder of her husband. if executed tonight, she would be the first female death row inmate put to death in the state in 70 years. the state board of pardons and parolees agreed to meet today to consider what's being called

supplemental information from her defense team. nbc's gabe gutierrez joins me now from the prison in jackson, georgia with the very latest there. gabe. >> reporter: tamron, good morning. her supporters are racing against the clock here. her execution is set to get under way here at 7:00 here at this prison but as you mentioned, that parole hearing is set to get under way and kths woman would be the first woman executed in georgia in 70 years. right now she is the only female inmate on georgia's death row. she was convicted back in 1998 for planning the murder the previous year of her husband, and her kids, her grown children, now say that she turned her life around in prison and last week they released a video begging for her life to be spared. >> she said, you know, i'm not asking for your forgiveness. i'm not asking you to love me,

because if it was me, i don't think i could forgive myself. >> she has grown and the changes that she's made are incredible. >> now relatives for her husband released their own statement. they say that, "kelly planned and executed doug's murder. she targeted him and his death was intentional. she's been given more rights and opportunity over the last 18 years than she ever afforded to doug. his life was not hers to take." again, her execution is still scheduled for 7:00 tonight but a parole hearing is set to get under way in just a few minutes to see if her sentence might be commuted. they could delay her execution for up to 90 days or bring down her sentence to life with or without the possibility of parole. now she would be the 21st inmate executed around the country so far this year. that's down from a peak of 98 people executed back in 1999.

tamron? >> gabe, thank you very much. up next, our new poll shows donald trump is the least popular presidential candidate and joe biden is the most popular if he joins the race. this as trump spends much of this morning defending his tax plan that includes tax cuts for the poor -- but also for the rich. and developing now, the northeast bracing for tropical storm joaquin. that could make landfall this weekend. we have a new updated forecast for you. join conversation online, find the team at "news nation" on twitter and feignind me on face, twitter and instagram. we'll be right back. i am totally blind.

and sometimes i struggle to sleep at night, and stay awake during the day. this is called non-24. learn more by calling 844-824-2424. or visit your24info.com.

the way i see it, you have two choices; the easy way or the hard way. you could choose a card that limits where you earn bonus cash back. or, you could make things easier on yourself. that's right, the quicksilver card from capital one. with quicksilver you earn unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase, everywhere. so, let's try this again. what's in your wallet? taking you back to the house hearing playing out right now, the focus on planned parenthood. let's listen in. >> -- national organization and daring to actually make decisions as the head of that organization. lord almighty, what's america

coming to. the disrespect, the massaisogyn rampant here today tells us what is really going on here! this isn't about some bogus video. the author of whom does not have the courage to appear here, nor would the majority call him because they know he'll make a bad witness, under oath. this is about a conservative philosophy that says we are constitutionalists. they hold it up. we believe in rugged individualism and personal liberty with one big carve-out though -- there is an asterisk in that assertion. and that is, "except when it comes to women controlling their own bodies and making their own health decisions." you would never know that the constitution, according to the

supreme court, guarantees a right of choice! hopefully, apparently, we're going to erode that choice, and that right, by using insinuation and slander and half-truths to besmirch an organization whose primary mission is to provide health services both to men and women but primarily women. you know, this notion -- one of my colleagues said, well, getting rid of planned parenthood will just hand over these functions to community health clinics and other non-profits that can take up the slack. now if you were really committed to that principle, surely you would agree to the expansion of medicaid as provided under the affordable care act to, in my

home state of virginia, 400,000 people who aren't currently covered. >> that's correct. >> make your job a lot easier, wouldn't it? >> a lot of women, a lot of families in this country need access to health care that aren't getting it. >> so if we really mean it, that's what we'd do. but of course the very same people who are saying that vehemently oppose the expansion of medicaid, which would be funded in the first three years by 100% of federal dollars and thereafter 90%, a good deal for any state. which might be why the governor of ohio, the republican governor of ohio, actually agreed with that and expanded it. >> that's right. >> is there anything else you want to add, uninterrupted, with some sense of respect, miss richards? let me at least provide that to you. >> well, thank you, congressman. i did want to respond to some of the -- what's been said. we are a health care provider to

2.7 million people every year. they come to us by choice. so when i think about what's really at stake here, particularly for folks who think about ending access to planned parenthood, i think about those folks. last year we provided 3 1/2 million birth control services in this country. 4.4 million std testing and treatments. 378,000 pap tests. and almost half a million breast exams and more than 1 million pregnancy tests. i think it is interesting, one of the things we do and planned parenthood is we work to the highest level, most current level of health care for women, and so it is interesting we're being criticized for the decline in. sme pap smears but that's because we adopted the best medicine, which is that not every woman needs a pap smear every year. to me that's what we're about be with is making sure that every woman in this country,

regardless of where she lives, her income, immigration status, whether she is insured, can get access to health care. that's what we do at planned parenthood and we're proud to do it. >> that's called respect. thank you, miss richards, for being here. >> thank the gentleman. now recognize the gent lgentlemm tennessee. >> this is my 22nd year in congress, i can assure you i've seen many males treated worst than you've been treated today. i can assure you i'm not going to be tough on you but sure will you you don't expect us to be easier on you because you are a woman. >> absolutely not. that's not how my mama raised me. >> you say in your testimony that a lot of women wouldn't have access to certain types of health care were it not for planned parenthood. do you know that the department of health & human services says there are 9,727 health care service delivery sites, there

are 4,082 rural health clinics, 1,200 federally funded qualified health centers that also operate 9,000 other sites -- over 9,000. do you know about that? and you also know that there are over 2,000 pregnancy health centers, over 80% of which receive no federal funds at all? and that doesn't even count the many hundreds of thousands of private doctors, nurses and health care delivery services, walk-if had clinics and so forth. have you taken all of that into consideration? >> certainly. what i can speak to is what i know about, is the patients that choose, again, voluntarily to come to us. i think one of the interesting things is that for nationally, one-third of the women who access family planning services through a safety net provider,

one-third of the women get that from planned parenthood -- >> my point is that -- >> even though we're only -- >> many thousands of other alternative health care providers. let me ask you this. according to our reports, there are 2.3 million private charitable organizations. almost all of whom receive no federal funds but do you know how many receive 41% of their funding from the taxpayers? >> i don't know how many -- we saw see 2.7 million patients a year -- >> do you know any other private charitable organizations receiving $528 million from the taxpayers? >> i think the comparison, fairer comparison would be who's seeing 2.7 million patients. we don't get a big check from the federal government. we actually are reimbursed for services delivered, for birth control, for std testing and treatment, for well woman visits. >> i can tell you that almost every one of those 2.3 million

charitable organizations would i'm sure if given the opportunity would tell us that the government taxpayers benefit from what they're doing also. and just give you an example, the national boys and girls club in their -- clubs in their last annual report said they received $26 million from the federal government. compared to your $528 million. seems a little bit lob sided to me. >> i think the costs of providing health care to 2.7 million people i very much respect the boys and girls club. we work like hospitals and other health care providers in being reimbursed for directly for services that we provide. again, i think it is -- the comparison is a little apples and oranges. >> let me ask you this, do you think it is right in a free country to force people to contribute to your organization because that's what you're doing? taking taxpayer money from people that are totally opposed to what you're doing. >> we provide health care under the medicaid program just like every other hospital and health

care provider that sees medicaid patients. i think one of the things that's important to understand is, in many areas, there aren't -- there aren't new doctors or health care providers that will see medicaid patients. particularly when you talk about ob-gyn services, it is not always easy for women particularly in the southern united states to find someone who will actually provide them a well woman visit, birth control services. >> my time's running out, but i know you apologized for the discussion and the tone, and maybe the laughter -- i don't know whether you apologized for the laughter or or not on the video. do you defend the sale of baby body parts? >> no. i think that's really a total mischaracterization. fetal tissue research, as i mentioned -- the whole commission that leaguized and created the structure under fetal tissue research was started under the reagan

administration. it is actually what it does is facilitates fetal tissue donation and that is actually -- as i said, fewer than 1% of our health centers facilitate fetal tissue donation for the patient. >> my time has run out. >> i just want to say this. it seems to me that the apology you offered was like what some criminals do, they're not really sorry for what they've done, they're sorry they got caught. it seems to me thatyour apology is that you got caught on these videos. >> i respectfully disagree. >> thank you, mr. chairman. miss richards, thank you for being here and testifying today. >> we continue to watch this hearing on capitol hill with the focus of planned parnho hoparen. the president of planned parenthood for the first time taking these questions. joining me live now, nbc news political reporter carrie dann.

so much of this is focused on compensation, how many money planned parenthood receives and not the headline that i think's driven many conservatives to the latest battle cry to defund planned parenthood which was -- these videos says planned parenthood are heavily doctored videos. we heard a conversation there regarding fetal tissue research 37 cecile richards saying this was something that was brought to light under the reagan administration. it's less than 1% of what their facilities focus on. but again this big battle cry that we're hearing from carly fiorina and some other republicans who want to shut down the government over planned parenthood really not the focus so far. what do you believe and how do you assess what's happening here? >> one thing that's really interesting is we have new nbc

news/"wall street journal" poll numbers that came out yesterday. 6 in 10 americans oppose the idea of defunding planned parenthood, and even within that number, only 9% of those who are pro the nixing any funding at all. deep inside these numbers, both democrats and independents fine planned parenthood overall to be very popular. it is not only has a net positive rating, it is the most popular institution or politician that nbc news or the "wall street journal" polled. what's really most striking i think in these numbers is going back to july, we asked our pollsters the same question -- what do you think about planned parenthood. those numbers are almost identical in july as they are today. so although a lot of americans, majority said, 65% say that they heard about the coverage of these recorded videos about planned parenthood and their practices, the majority of

americans still are -- all americans are really in exactly the same place that they were in july. this issue has not moved the electorate at large though it certainly has animated conservatives. but if you look at a general electorate, people have not really changed their opinion, their ideas about planned parenthood and the services they provide or about abortion services have been really baked in and they've remained that with a i all summer. >> the request he that also remains is how dicey the situation, are some republicans looking at -- when you talk about the popularity of planned parenthood but also the line of question, it seems that one could interpret this, if you are planned parenthood support er, s again the debate over a woman's right to choose abortion rather than planned parenthood. >> this is the issue that really animates folks. abortion services generally, even if you look at polling trends over the last ten years, this is not a place where there is a lot of movement. people who feel very

passionately there should be absolutely no or all restrictions abortion bans should be put in place have felt that way and have been very animated about it. people who support planned parenthood on the other side of that issue are not moving because of these videos or this because of this testimony or because of carly fiorina or because of anything that's brought this issue to the fore. we need to get to presidential politics quickly here. this morning donald trump is defending his plan to overhaul the income tax system particularly against one of the chief criticisms in that it is disproportionately beneficial to the rich. >> we actually have had tremendous reviews on the plan by most people. most people are liking it and are supporting it. and it will actually affect the rich to a much lesser extent. the people that are in middle income are middle class, are middle-income people, are going to be the biggest beneficiaries. their taxes are coming down very substantially. >> trump's plan reduces the

current seven income tax brackets to four. individuals earning less th$25,0 and couples earning less than $50,000 would pay no tax. the wealthiest americans would see their tax rates slashed to 25% from nearly 40%. trump's plan also eliminates the estate tax paid by the wealthiest americans. meantime, the corporate tax rate would be cut to 15%. but how to pay for all of that is not clear. trump promises to get rid of unspecified deductions and close tax loopholes now available to special interests and the very wealthy. he says critics who charge that the numbers don't add up are wrong. >> they're wrong because we're bringing in at least $2.5 trillion is stuck outside of this country. that money now will be able to flow back in under my plan. that money will be able to flow back in to the country, we're going to be reducing corporate taxes, jobs will be created, the economy is going to expand tremendously like it hasn't

since reagan, but probably even before that. this will be a rocketship for the economy. >> let me bring in our political panel, martin sullivan, chief economist for the non-partisan group tax analysts and formerly worked for the congressional committee on taxation. martin, you've said that the trump plan is not realistic on the revenue side. still no specifics on the deductions and the loopholes he would close here. are we really getting a specific plan from donald trump as some have called it when there are no specifics? >> well, tamron, you know, presidential tax plans are like preseason football. they give you a clue as to what's going on but they don't really count. all of these presidential plans are under realistic but i think mr. trump's plan is especially unrealistic. we can compare it to what mr.

romney did in 2012. we can compare it to what george bush -- i'm sorry, jeb bush proposed a few weeks ago. this plan is much more generous and very unlikely to be revenue neutral. >> when trump says that people are wrong, that they would be bringing in at least $2.5 trillion in money that's stuck outside of this country, does that make any sense to you? >> i'm afraid it doesn't, because when you do the math, when you bring in that $2.5 trillion, for example, the most that would raise would be $250 billion, which is a lot of money, of course. however, mr. trump has other aspects of his plans which are extremely generous. for example, he would reduce the corporate rate from 35% to 15%. when you do that, just in one year, that would more than offset the extra revenue that he would get from that repatriation provision. so, yes, we could get money from the component that he's

emphasizing, but his rate cuts are just so far off the charts in terms of revenueistic to thi be a net revenue razor. >> billionaire investor carl icahn says he endorses trump. trump says icahn would be his treasury secretary if he were elected. you also have grover norquist giving his blessing. of course he is the architect of the anti-tax movement, major player on your side of the aisle for republicans. >> yes. >> what's your take? do you give trump a thumbs up, thumbs down, on his plan? >> i think the plan is in the right direction. i think it is unfair to say it is going to cost all this money when he has said it is going to be revenue neutral. as a conservative i actually wish it wouldn't be revenue neutral. i'd like to see us not worry so much about the revenue side of tax cuts. what we don't know, you got to look at two sides of the equation. it is not just what the rates are, it is what's going to happen to the deductions.

what you really want to know is what your effective tax rate is, whether it goes up or whether it goes down. yes with be these rates look like they're going to go very low. but if you lose all your deductions, it could not come out in the wash the way you want it to. i agree there are a lot of details to be learned on the plan. >> but this was a big part of this announcement yesterday, was that finally we would hear some details from trump about a policy. when you talk to him about syria, for example, he kind of says let them fight it out, then we pick up the remnants if you want to consider that a specific policy on this. >> but this is pretty fair. look, let's give him his due. i mean this is a reasonable tax plan. this is about as much detail as you get when someone's running for president. we know that it's very clear that if donald trump gets the nomination and is elected president, he is going to take bold steps to make sure that we no longer have the highest corporate tax rate or one of the highest corporate tax rates in the country. by the way, our rate on small

business people is even higher than the rate corporations pay. so we definitely need to bring these rates down if we're going to be competitive internationally. >> matt, the tax foundation which advocates lower tax rates says that the cost of trump's cuts could easily total more than $7 trillion over the next decade. >> depends on what happens to the deductions. >> i'm glad matt brought up question of the deductions. we aren't flying blind here. ever since bowles and simpson made the big push for tax reform in 2010, we've been studying all different types of tax plans. we have a pretty good idea of what are the possibilities on deductions. mr. trump has taken the chair ability deduction and the mortgage interest deduction off of the table. so there really are not -- once you take those off the table, there really aren't a lot of deductions and tax breaks left to make up the difference. in fact, even for the romney plan which was much less generous, it was very, very

difficult to get the rate down to 28%. so -- then on the corporate side, we have things like the research and development tax credit. we have tax incentives for investment. do we really want to get rid of those to pay for 15% rate? so we're -- you're right, mr. trump has not given us the details but we really can't give him the benefit of the doubt because we know what the likely candidates are and we know there -- >> there's nothing rate with cutting rates so low that we actually spur economic growth again. it is what obama's struggling with. we have a stagnant economy and it means we don't have job growth. if you haven't seen your wages increase, that's why. >> we have stagnant wages, we definitely need to cut our tax rates. but tax -- large tax cuts that are unfunded will have a detrimental effect on the economy. >> come on. come on. >> matt and martin, thank you both for your time. i greatly appreciate it. i have a couple of other developing stories i need to update. we know there is plenty more

time to discuss mr. trump an his tax policy. thank you, gentlemen. we do have some developing news as i just stated at the united nations general assembly in new york. it is another very busy day for president obama. right now the president is leading a summit on how world leaders can better combat the threat of violent extremism especially with the focus on isis. earlier this morning, the president held a bilateral meeting with cuban leader raul castro. this was their second one-on-one meeting since the two countries restored diplomatic relations late last year. it all comes on the heels of course of the president's much anticipated meeting with russia's president vladimir putin yesterday. the first meeting between the two leaders in two years lasted 90 minutes and was preceded by brief but not exactly warm handshake in front of cameras. the talks focused on the two main issues of disagreement between the two countries. syria and ukraine. secretary of state john kerry appeared on "morning joe" this morning. discussion.

i think both leaders are looking for a way forward because everybody understands that syria is at stake. >> now, russia's president putin also described the meeting to reporters as, quote, constructive and surprisingly open. there were no break throughs on policy. in the speeches before the u.n., putin called for a grand coalition against isis in syria, while president obama reiterated his call for syrian president to step down. we'll be right back. as a developer! its official, i work for ge!! what? wow... yeah! okay... guys, i'll be writing a new language for machines so planes, trains, even hospitals can work better. oh! sorry, i was trying to put it away...

got it on the cake. so you're going to work on a train? not on a train...on "trains"! you're not gonna develop stuff anymore? no i am... do you know what ge is? trust number one doctor recommended dulcolax constipated? use dulcolax tablets for gentle overnight relief

suppositories for relief in minutes and stool softeners for comfortable relief of hard stools. dulcolax, designed for dependable relief misswill turn anan asphalt parking lot into a new neighborhood for san franciscans. a vote for "yes" on "d" is definitely a vote for more parks and open space. a vote on proposition "d" is a vote for jobs. campos: no one is being displaced. it's 40% affordable units near the waterfront for regular people. this is just a win-win for our city. i'm behind it 100%. voting yes on "d" is so helpful to so many families in our city. it's gotten squarer. over the years. brighter. bigger. thinner. even curvier. but what's next? for all binge watchers.

movie geeks. sports freaks. x1 from xfinity will change the way you experience tv. want to brief you before we end the show. take you back to this planned parenthood hearing on capitol hill right now. we are listening in to the president of planned parenthood taking questions for the first

time. a house hearing since the release of what planned parenthood says is very heavily edited video. let's listen in. >> says you're providing over 489,000 breast cancer screenings, and you've stated that none of your clinics actually have the mammogram machines. how many of the -- how many of your affiliates have the mammogram machines? >> our health centers are part of our affiliates. we have more than 650 health centers. affiliate is simply the corporate structure for those -- >> how many of them have mammogram machines? >> an affiliate is not a health center. i think i spoke earlier, we do not have mammogram machines at our health centers, and we've never stated that we did. because as was mentioned earl r earlier, for women who go for a breast exam, as i go for my annual, you get a breast exam. if you need a mammogram, you're

referred to a radiological clinic. >> you refer them there? >> there's different ways we refer for mammograms. >> how much does planned parenthood make from cancer screenings? do you know how much you make? >> how much we make? >> the revenues. >> for federal -- so just talking the federal funding, we don't make money off of cancer screenings. >> okay. that's great. how many -- well, you don't get anything from mammograms either. how much is made from abortions? what's the revenue that comes in? >> you're going to have to bear with me a minute so i can be responsive. >> i don't have much time. if you could respond as quickly as possible. >> okay. 59 affiliates. each of them are completely different. they all run their own operation, and i can't tell you -- i think this question was raised earlier -- i can't tell you -- >> you can't tell me how much you make from abortions? you can't give that number? okay. >> the national office, so you

know, we do not provide health services at the national office. we provided information for all 59 affiliates. they're audited financial statements. >> i wasn't asking about the affiliates. >> that's where health services are provided. >> okay. >> we are going to continue to follow the hearing right now. this is congresswoman mia love, a republican questioning cecil richards. we'll cover the latest developments from the u.n. general assembly. that does it for this hour. andrea mitchell is taking over now. it's time for your entrepreneur of the week. bill saw opportunity in the california's drought. using a trick that golf courses knew about for years, his company, brown lawn green, uses a grass coloring to make a lawn look healthy and green with minimal watering. watch "your business" sunday morning on msnbc. >> brought to you bring american

express open. the orders were rushing in. i could feel our deadlines racing towards us. we didn't need a loan. we needed short-term funding fast. building 18 homes in 4 ½ months? that was a leap. but i knew i could rely on american express to help me buy those building materials. amex helped me buy the inventory i needed. our amex helped us fill the orders. just like that. another step on the journey. will you be ready when growth presents itself? realize your buying power at open.com and sometimes i struggle to sleep at night,blind. and stay awake during the day. this is called non-24. learn more by calling 844-824-2424. or visit your24info.com.

♪ everything kids touch during cold and flu season sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. because no one kills germs better than clorox.

right now on "andrea mitchell reports," he said/she said. the head of planned parenthood is questioned by a mostly male congressional committee, as republicans go to war over abortion. >> you don't do mammograms. if you -- go ahead. >> i'm sorry. i -- >> you don't do mammograms. there's one or two places. you don't do mammograms. >> if you would give me one

moment to explain. >> sure. the president leading a u.n. summit against torerror, as congress gives the white house a failing grade on its progress against isis. out of this world. the discovery of water on mars has us star struck. >> the existence of liquid water, even if it's super salty, gives the possibility that if there's life on mars, we have a way to describe how it might survive. good day, everyone. i'm andrea mitchell in new york. the abortion battle is front and center at a house hearing over planned parenthood today. the head of the women's health organization, cecile richards, is under fire for ten undercover videos produced by