it to you live. the gop's health care plan, will it cost 24 million people their health care? from the political storm in washington to the snowstorm that's slamming the east coast. er inially 7,000 flights are cancelled and power is knocked out for some 100,000 people. and it's not over yet. let's begin this hour in washington. republicans are tied in knots over the white house-backed health care clan. on one hand the cbo notes it saves billions of dollars. no pretty penny. on the other hand it puts white house republicans and even the white house in direct opposition of the declaration that no one would lose their health care. on the "today" show this morning they struggled to defend the bill. >> is it time for the legislation to level with the american people and say you know what, some people are going to lose their coverage? >> no. the fact of the matter is if you look at the whole plan what the president said is absolutely

right. >> you are saying this new york that you agree with president trump that under this plan everyone will be covered, no one is losing their insurance? >> everyone will have access to the coverage that they want. >> meanwhile, office of management and budget director mick mulvaney clearly up with a joke that he liked this morning to discredit the cbo. >> first i want to say good morning from washington whereas you can see according to the congressional budget office it's sunny and 7 >> good morning from washington were where according to the cbo it's sunny and 75 degrees this morning. >> we have kasie hunt, who is not quite with us yet. we also have peter alexander had the white house briefing room. resident trainham, and harold ford jr. peter, you are in the white house briefing room. the white house is sending out mick mulvaney and tom price to defend this bill. are they going to be sticking with it themselves, though?

>> i think what's been striking is the language we've heard from both mick mull vaby and tom price in the last 24 hours. they referred to it as defying beliefs, that it was unbelievable. tom price i believe said basically he strenuously disagreed with the findings of the independent analysis that congressional budget office's report. i suspect that's what we will be hearing from the press secretary, sean spicer a short time from now. but there has been tonally a difference between what we've been hearing from this white house and what we've been hearing from paul ryan and others on capitol hill, specifically paul ryan basically saying of the report that it exceeded his expectations. and it appears there are some differences perhaps in the goals between the hill, paul ryan, and the administration. remember, it was the president who had initially promised that there would be insurance for everybody. there appear to be fundamental differences given the fact that ryan and others heavily focused on the idea of access. that's' part of the conversation we will try to pin them down on

today in terms of their plans going forward. but the administration's goal is to immediately get this through the house. they believe that will allow for some fixes to take place in the senate going forward. >> peter, do you get the sense there is any effort inside or outside of the west wing among those that donald trump is close to in order to get him to ditch this plan and try something new, to separate himself from paul ryan? >> i think there are certainly some divisions within this white house. we've witnessed that on a variety of different topics right now. it's not entirely clear where these factions are specifically aligned on this. a lot of people have been pointing to some of the recent reporting from breitbart. of course that was formally founded by steve bannon who now is working at the side of president trump here. they referred to this as ryan care, referred to it as obamacare light. among the questions right now is whether or not president trump has whispers in his ears basically saying to cut bait on

this. what i've been hearing from folks i have been speaking to at the white house is that they stand by this bill. they want to push forward with it and it's part of the reason that donald trump is going to head out on the road with a series of travel plans scheduled for tomorrow and early into next week where he heads back into kentucky. >> speaking of the breitbart report that peter alexander just mentioned, they have just released newly discovered -- w newly released audio of paul ryan saying he would not defend donald trump. this came out after the access hollywood tape it was reported at the time but the audio is new. let's listen. >> there are two things i want to make clear. i am not going to defend donald trump. not now, not in the future. look, you know itch real conference our nominee. >> robert, talk to me about the timing of this, the fact that this audio was released right now by breitbart. given everything that's going on in washington. does this suggest there is an effort among the outsiders, the

breitbart folks, the news max folks to influence the president in order to make him break with the folks never gone after so officer vently in the past, paul ryan being one of them. >> two things. one there is no news here. we knew that paul ryan and a lot of republicans had some deep reservations about then nominee donald trump in the context of the access hollywood tape among other thing. that's not new. what appears to be happening is that this new audio is being used as a weapon, if you will, or as a threat to try to intimidate either speaker ryan or the president. i think it's going to boomerang back. the reality is these are the facts. any time you try to take away an entitlement it's going to be hard to convince people that that's a good idea. the affordable care act is in fact a entitle men. and the congressional republicans with the president are on the record saying they wouldn't to repeal and replace it. now that republicans own this town and dominate the building behind me the question becomes

whether or not they can do so in a way that appease the cop serve tiffs but also that appease the american peep. sals like right now those two are not in concuence. >> do they have an appetite for it, harold. that's the question. take this line from the cbo that came out yesterday. they said in scoring the house bill that a 64-year-old making $26500 a year -- if obamacare were to stay in place would pay $1700 in 2026. that same person, under the gop health care plan in 2026 would way $14600. that is more than half of that person's income. given that, how does paul ryan sell this bill? >> it's going to be very hard. robert and everyone has touched on it. put it in conexthe. donald trump ran for president and you interviewed him early on. he made the case that one of the reasons that republicans lost in 2012 was because paul ryan wanted to change entitlements

and that older americans would not vote for americans. he promised no touches to social security medicare and medicaid. two you have senators saying they have problems with this legislation. as much as paul reince want to make themselves and they are relevant to the conversation the real action will take place in the senate. you have such divergent thinking on this, one group wants to expand medicaid, another wants to cut it. not only that, cuts to medicare opens up a whole another set of conversations. t when are republicans going to recognize that to sorl solve this you have to find democrats that think obamacare is broken, how do you inject more competition. you don't inject more competition the route they are traveling its it's not clear from democrats, but to republican. i don't know how you reconcile that gap. the numbers don't add up. >> what if the president does break with paul ryan,lies the freedom caucus behind, salvages some aspects of this gop bill

and then says we need to have a bipartisan bill, republicans have got to work with democrats and vice versa. when you both come back at me with a plan that can pass i will take a look at it. that's essentially what news max is suggesting, chris reddy is suggest as of today. if the president were to do that, take that line, would democrats have an an fight to work with him on it. >> i think you sake schumer and pelosi at their word there would be a willingness. if the desire here is to raise costs on the poorest of americans and providing a tutankhamen on the wealthiest of americans democrats are not going to go along with that. about you if you can bring more competition to the affordable care act, meaning more insurance carriers, more options in states. that that you are not going to cut medicaid, i think you will find democrats wanting to come and support it. right now the issue is not democrats. it is a republicans fighting republicans. kasich and schneider both saying they can't do this.

pat toomey now joining the conferring saying i can't be for this unless you make changes. >> let's bring in congressman joe bart ton of he texas. congressman, thank you for joining us. i want you to jump in on this conversation. as a member of the freedom caucus, is this a bill that you can vote on as it currently stands or do you need the see obamacare repealed wholesale? >> well i vod for it in committee in the economy commerce committee i'm the vice chairman but i offered an amendment that i withdrew which i hope to offer again at the rules committee that ends the medicaid expansion, in other words adding new medicaid enrollees in the healthy adult population. instead of ending that in three years as the current bill does, my amendment would end it in one year and then i would go back to the original approximately two thirds federal match one third state match beginning in 2023. the current bill never -- it

automatically ends the super hundrto 90% federal match. we've been trying to get the democrats to work with us on this really for years. certainly this year. and they are not ready to step forward. they are still defending the affordable care act as if it requests one of the ten commandments. >> congressman, you know there is a good portion of the population, the majority of the population, who does like the affordable care act right now. they have that on their side. i want to ask you specifically -- >> they are a minority of the population. >> something the cbo had said. i want your take on this. a 64-year-old -- >> let me comment on cbo. >> before i even -- can i ask you a question. >> cbo is a modern day equivalent of no, sir troe dam as. they have an opinion. that's all it is. it may be an informed opinion.

the cbo -- one. things you can always say is whatever the cbo says they are going to be wrong. >> no matter what the cbo says, they are going to be wrong. so the fact that a 64-year-old -- >> that's what it has been in the mast. >> if it comes out that a 64-year-old that makes $26500 under this plan in 2026 would need toay $14600 for their health care, is that something that you stand behind, sir? >> well, if it's a 64-year-old, they might be eligible for medicare. they certainly would be at 65. if they retired at 62, which you can do today -- >> what if they gottan illness and they were 64? >> well, our plan covers preexisting conditions just as the forth act. >> would they be able to pay the $14600 it would cost to get them their health care when they only make $26500 a year? >> well, if we pass our plan or some version of it and it becomes law, they are going to have lots of choices to make

instead of a mandated plan that they have to take no matter what. in some cases, they may -- under current law they may not have a choice. our plan is going to give them choices. and they can choose what's best for them. >> let's put this on hold for a second congressman. you had a town hall the other day. i want to play a little bit of sound from it. take a listen. >> given your voting record, opposing legislation protecting women from violence, will you make a commitment to us today, make a promise that you will reach out to congresswoman jackie spear and work with her to see this bill successfully through congress? [ applause ] >> let me comment on a number of things there. on the first bill that i voted

against, that's a true statement. and i voted against it because i think that's a state issue, not a federal issue. >> boo, no. civil rights don't go to states. >> it's violence against women. that's a national issue. that is an issue that impacts everyone everywhere, not only in this country but anywhere. >> civil rights. >> state of texas, you represent texas first. >> you should shut up. >> what is that? you don't tell anybody to shut up. >> congressman, sean spicer is at the podium but i'd like to get your response to those words you just said there in that video? >> well, my opinion is that there are some issues that are totally federal issues and there are some issues that the proper jurisdiction is at the state level. most laws with domestic violence are state issues and handled by the state of texas. we had the navarra county

district attorney in the audience. i don't believe you caught that on what you just showed. and i asked him did he prosecute domestic violence cases in the down every year. and the answer was obviously he did. so the fact that somebody wants to make it a federal issue, you know, that's one of the problems in my opinion that too many times we are now looking to the federal government and making it a federal issue. >> congressman joe barton i'm sorry to interrupt you. sean spieser is at the podium, we have to go to him now. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> let's listen to sean. >> late they are afternoon the president and secretary of health and human services dr. tom price will have a call with the ceo of anthem health care. they will then have a phone call with speaker ryan and majority leader mccarthy to further discuss the republican plan to repeal and replace obamacare with the american health care act in a series of much needed

regulatory reforms to accompany that. the president was glad to see the national federation of businesses announce their support the the american health care act. and fib has identified health care as long with small business taxes as their two biggest priorities. the president's health care agenda will address many of their concerns for small businesses. yesterday of course the cbo released their report on the american health care ability. i know there have been significant concerns about the cbo report. i want to give a little bit of context to the numbers that have been going around. in 2013, the cbo estimated that 24 million people would have coverage under obamacare in 2016. they were way off, off by 13 million people. over 50%. in fact, only 10.4 million people were actually cuffed. reports now suggest that number has dwindled down to 9 million. cbo coverage estimates are confidently wrong and more importantly did not take into conversation the comprehensive nature of the three pronged plan to repeal and replace obamacare with the american health care

act. we are working to bring reallily and better choices to the american family. if two other prongs of our plantain several additional reforms that will drive down costs and increase coverage. when you get down to it the congressional budget office office is to estimate affects on the budget. the focus is on what the office is really about, the cbo concedes the american health care act would reduce the definitity sit by $330 billion, and bring health insurance premiums down 10% even before many of the significant reforms in prongs two the three take effect. some of niece include expanding health care savings accounts, streamlining the process at fda so that medicines can get to patients faster. allowing health insurance to be sold across state lines, which increases competition and decreases costs. permitting small businesses to

band to the and negotiate health care rates for all of their employees and reforming the medical malpractice system so doctors aren't spending their time and patient's money on unnecessary procedures. beyond the numbers let's talk about real life examples of the cost of obamacare who the president heard from during his listening session yesterday. a small business owner in arizona had her health care costs skyrocket from $289.79 a month to $809.15. a mother of six from colorado whose youngest son is autistic saw her family's yearly insurance go from $1700 to $52,000 for lower quality plan. and joel brown, a farmer from tennessee, saw his catastrophic coverage costs spike in the wake of obamacare from $119 a month to more than $500 per month. these are the stories that really matter to millions of americans who are suffering under obamacare. and these are the stories that

are at the top of the president's mind's he works towards reforming our health care system. the president is committed to working together with speaker ryan, majority leader mccary and majority leader mcconll to create a system that's affordable and accessible to all americans. let me walk through the rest of the schedule for the weekm tomorrow the president is headed to michigan to meet with auto executives and workers and will discuss how his plans for rolling back federal red tape will lead to more american jobs and higher wages specifically in automobile sector. it is a great opportunity for the president to showcase moves he has already made towards his ambitious buy america hire america agenda like encouraging investment in work force training and development so americans are ready for the jobs of the future and removing the road blocks that prevent american businesses from staying and expanding here in the united states. the president hopes to build on if great optimism he has built within the business community in anticipation of the renewed opportunities the president's economic agenda has already

created. he and his team are hard at work to produce the results that the american people deserve and voted for last year. he will also travel to nashville, tennessee where he will lay a wreath at president jackson's tomb on his 250th birthday. thursday, the t shuck of ireland will come to the white house for the traditional st. patrick's day visit. as i mentioned, german chancellor merkel's visit will resume on friday. we will have an update on that schedule. with that i'd be glad to take a few questions. >> sean, president trump has said that under his plan there will be insurance for everybody. how do you square that with the cbo numbers? is that a promise he can really keep? >> i think there are two issues important to note on that, catherine. number one, for and more americans have no choices. so they don't have insurance. i mentioned this before. having a card and having coverage that when you walk into a doctor's office has a

deductible of 15, $20,000 a year isn't coverage. that's a card. it doesn't get you the care you need. it doesn't allow you to get the procedure or the referral that you need from a doctor that's telling you what you need to have happen. that's vastly different than what we hope to exist, which is giving people who don't have it -- let's kind of -- i think it's important to add some context to this. if you think about the individual market that exists right now, the individual insurance market, you have got roughly 30 million people that exist right now. 9 million people now are on the exchange. that number has gone down. 6.5 million people have said they don't want any insurance and they are going to pay a penalty. and then just under 14 million people have said that they have -- have applied for a hardship. so you have got almost 20 million people in america who have said that they don't want obamacare and they will either pay a penalty or have applied for a hardship. those are people who don't have it to begin with.

the exchange is sought out the to cover that's people. we are finding out that you have got 9 million plus who are getting it right now. they have no coverage. for more and more 345er7bs they are losing their coverage, their choices are gone. tax credits and competition that will come in phases two and three in the prongs we talked about will further drop prices further increase competition. cbo's score didn't take into conversation that. again if you look at their numbers you have got roughly just over 9 million people on exchanges. the cbo number says that 14 million people in the first year alone will lose coverage. it doesn't take a ton of analysis to recognize that that doesn't make any sense logically. you can't only have 9-plus million people on the exchange and say in the first year alone where there is no touch to medicaid or anything else, you are just removing the individual mandate that forced people to buy something they didn't want in the first place that it's going to lead to 14 million

people. people are going to drop off of medicare, with their employer. that doesn't add up. i would argue if you look at the other part of the equation, the 20 million people who chose to pay a penalty. think about that, 6.5 are saying the plan is too costly, doesn't provide enough coverage, i think those people, when we start to instill additional coverage and they have more choices they can pick a plan that actually fits their needs or fits their budget you are going the see more people want coverage who are going to choose coverage. so i think that the cbo number, a, they have a record that doesn't match up with the ability to count people. they are pretty good at dollars. not as good as people. i think when you look at the additional phases our prongs of this whole comprehensive approach that actually changes the equation a lot. it's looking at one piece of a three-part plan. and that's not the entirety of the plan that we are looking at. so that doesn't -- what if the white house thinks the change will be next year, then.

>> again, i don't think -- we don't do those projections. but i think there is no question when you look at the cost, they are already saying just this alone, just doing the first prong of this will take costs down 10% in the individual market. when you think about it, they are up 25% in the individual market on average already. this year alone under just people who are on the exchanges up 25%. the cbo is saying just with what we're doing on the first prong alone, 10% decline in the individual market. that's a significant reduction. that's what we are talking about, bringing costs down and increasing choices. that's a big deal right now. the problem that you have currently is that the subsidies that people get get them a card that doesn't get they will care. and that's what we need to start focusing on is how many people are actually getting the care they need to deal with the medical concerns of them and their family. that's not what is happening. mike. >> sean, stating as you did the primary objection of this white house is that the cbo report doesn't take into account phase two and phase three, are there

specifics either in terms of the specific regulatory reforms that the white house is considering and the specific terms of the legislation that you would offer that are out there for people to study as part of this? because as you surely know, tom cotton among others are skeptical whether these can actually -- >> look, the things that i mentioned earlier, allowing people to buy across state lines, to pool their insurance, to expand hsas, to reform the fda, all of those things i think unquestionably add competition and choice. there is no question about it. if one plan can sell that was in maryland into virginia where they can seek additional customers, that competition alone invariably brings down costs. we have seen this in market after market where once you allow competition, by itself that will bring down costs. it will bring in choice. right now these insurance companies who have been mandated by the government to create certain packages that peep don't need -- you have got young people that are being told to buy packages that have, you know, end of life care that they

don't necessarily need. you have got people who are in their older phases of life being -- you know, having to buy stuff for maternity that may not be a service that they need at their stage of life. but the problem is that the government got involved in health care and started dictating what needed to happen instead of allowing the choice and allow people to buy a plan that actually was detailered to the needs they want. those preforms unquestionably bring down costs. no question. i think one of the issues that hassing to back to overriding this issue, the president stated this on numerous occasions. if we do nothing, allow this to continue it will collapse on its own. the cost is unsustainable. the premiums are going sky high in state after state and the choices keep going further and further down. so this idea of comparing it to obamacare is a false choice. because they have no choice. it is -- the choice is going away and the cost continues to getigher through every phase.

to assume that the comparison is apples to apples is a false choice. >> you have been critical from this podium of the obama administration, democrats and the way they went about passing the affordable care act. in the interest of transparency you accused them of shoving it down people's throat. should the white house put the legislative details out now. >> i think the white house is working on that, after the -- i think that's a great question for speaker ryan. i know he has been working with the team andet going it done. i think the sooner we can get all the prongs out there the better. i agree with you. but i think the big difference just so we are clear we posted this bill on line, the speaker had it out there, the president tweeted it out. anyone in the country or in world could read it. that's a big difference between after we pass it you can read it which is what speaker pelosi said. i know the speaker is working

with his members to do. that that's an pope question for the speaker to answer. not from me. i know we are trying to work with them. i know there are a lot of members working with speaker ryan and leader mccarthy and frankly in the other chamber as well. but i think that we continue -- i think that's why i think we are talking about all of those prongs and all of the pieces of them so we can start making sure the people understand the comprehensive nature of this. >> will it happen before there is a vote -- >> i think that's a question for speaker rooi. i think the more we get out there the better. alexis. >> back to what mike was asking about senator cotton. why is the white house given senator cotton full running room to go again and again in the media and to denigrate the house house plan without bringing him in, discussing with him what mike was bringing up, alternatives that he is suggesng. why does he have special dispensation to go out. >> i don't think he has special

dispensation. it is a free country. he can say what he wants. our team has been working with his team, with senator paul's team, and anyone else who has ideas. we have been engaged in a robust discussion with members in both chambers who have ideas to move this thing forward. i don't think we are able to tell people what they can and cannot engage in a free society with. senator cotton is obviously able to make any comments that he would like. we would continue to like to work with him and i think the team will continue to reach out to both he and his team to try to get his ideas on this. >> the president spent time talking to him about the ideas on immigration. >> uh-huh. >> has he called him? has the vice president called senator cotton. >> let me -- i know we have had a very, very robust discussion with members of the house and the senate. i would have to get specific details on when we've done specifically with senator cotton. >> is cruz coming today? >> i would have to check on that i know there was a group of individuals. i don't have that list in front of me. >> senators? >> i will get back to you, i

promise. the snowstorm shifted a bunch of stuff up. i don't want to say who can be here and who can't of but i will make sure we have the details out. >> to the pool? >> i will get it to the entire pool. margaret. >> thank you. still on the same subject. does the white house support the house bill as it is or amending it? and there has been reporting that the white house is involved or some white house first are involved in shaping -- what's being described as like a major significant manage's amendment in conjunction with conservatives. >> i'm sorry -- >> we can go back and forth, but i'm wondering is the white house writing this amendment or considering backi the amendment? we can tell them abo it. >> i think speaker ryan is well aware of the manage's amendment. >> okay. >> i think i think as we noted multiple times from the podium when people have ideas that are

supportive or constructive or ones that we have heard about from different members that we have engaged with and ones that the senate and house have engaged with we have shared a willingness. mulvaney talked about secretary price, the president himself, the vice president, part of the reason we are engaging with the individuals is to hear their ideas to talk to them about not just the content but the approach, what can go in, go out, how we deal with the different phases, mike was asking, and when we go. all that is part of a strategy to engage with members who support up, who have ideas want to be on board and constructive in the process and achieve the president's goal of having a patient-centric health care system. we are obviously in talks with house leadership about the contents. as i mentioned the president will be on the phone with speaker ryan and leader mcckaca that he later this afternoon and talk about the path forward. that's part of the legislative process. >> i actually have a second question but to follow up, the

white house is working to help shape that manage's amendment? >> yes. >> and on the visit of the deputy saudi crown prince today. can you talk us through a little bit more details? does that involve the resumption of arms sales, about oil? >> it literally was wrapping up as we were walking over here. i want to make sure that i get a read out. we'll provide that to the pool as we do with all the leader visits. i will have details from that once -- they were concluding that visit as we were coming here. i'll make sure i get it. blake. >> thanks sean n the middle of all of this there is also the debt ceiling. >> yes. >> how urge end of priority is this and how concerned is the administration in tackling think give the letter that was sent out last week. >> the secretary sent out a letter noting under the budget reconciliation act that the congress's debt authority had until march 13th. he notified them of that.

we continue working with congress. we will be releasing a budget later this week it's part and parcel of our approach forwards fiscal responsibility talking about the path forward how we address both the ending of fiscal year 17 that goes until september 309:this year and then the budget which would be fiscal year 18. but how we address our budge deficits, our debt and spending going forward is a holistic conversation that the secretary and dr. mulvaney and others, the president and vce president, are engaging with congress on. our job under the law was to notify them under the authority that they passed. when it will expire. and i think the secretary will continue to work with congress on a path forward as far as our debt. >> let me get your reaction to jonathan gruber one of the architects of obamacare. he put the plan that you put forward if it's implement a quote scam. your reaction to that would be

what? >> i think the plan that he helped create hasn't done owe well for americans seeking health insurance. again, i don't have to go over the numbers but just think about what he sought out to do. i mean, there was a pool of people that needed hlth care. they got about 9 million of them. you have got 14.4 plus or minus million of people who claimed a hardship exemption. so they have no insurance, they are not receiving medicaid that don't qualify for any other assistance who can't afford obamacare. and then you have got another 6 million plus that have chosen to pay the penalty. so i would argue that just on what he sought to achieve in a plan that heelped craft didn't achieve too many great results. of the people that did get it, their premiums have gone sky high, their choices have gone down and single handedly had a tremendous effect through the rest of the health care system. so people were weren't even affected by obamacare initially have now paid higher premiums

and get less choices. even for the 175 million people who get employer based health care they felt the impact of what he sought out to do through higher prices, fewer choices. respectfully, i think that he should just hang out more time at m.i.t. and focus -- and allow good ideas to continue to come forward so that we can focus on achieving the president's goal of doing what he sought out in the first place. zeke? >> thank you sean. the president several times recently has said that he would like his health care plan to have health care for everybody. >> right. >> the cbo score yesterday seems to indicate that that's not the case. will the white house commit that after these stages two and three if they are implemented, if they are ever offered publicly that there will be health care for everybody. and if you could define that phrase, please. >> i think everybody look at what obamacare did. i ran through the numbers, you have got 30 plus million people. of a -- obamacare mandated under penalty of law that you had to

have health insurance. 9 million of the 30 million plus or minus people got it. 4.5 million said no, we'll pay the penalty. and another 14 or so million people said we'll claim a hardship. that was a government mandated system and had he chose not to do it. i think in many of these cases if people were given the choice and the option to get a plan that sought their needs, was tailored to what they wanted, that wasn't forced down their throat, didn't give them services they didn't want and brought down costs -- i read you some stories of individuals. we have seen tremendous growth from people who got a reasonably priced plan on the individual market, $119, $150 a month which i think for people who aren't getting their services through medicaid because of their financial situation, for maybe middle class families while it is still a struggle it is an attainable goal in some case. when you are talking about $350,

$5000 on the market that's a huge chunk of their take home pay. allowing those individuals who aren't getting employer based health care to get a tax credit is going to give more people the option to have health care and to give more americans thatable. right now they are choosing not do it. >> more people. that's still not everybody. >> no, no. everybody has a choice to get it. that's what i think we want to do. everyone who wants to get health care the financial ability to get it is what the president is trying to achieve through this. and i think this is the system that will get them there. right now, they are being forced to get it by a government-run system. and huge margins is choosing not to. is i think that's the system. by the way, they are getting a system that's failing and that is collapsing on its own and is only going in the wrong direction with higher price, higher premiums, higher

deductibles and lower choice. i mean that's what you have got now. if you are an american citizen on the obamacare exchange you are paying more, you have a higher deductible, and your choice is going down. s that an unsustainable, unacceptable outcome for americans who need care. dave? >> thank you, sean. on immigration a group that tacks the number of sanctuary cities in the u.s. came out with a report today saying there is now neay 500 sanctuary cities across the cotry and that number has grown by about three dozen just this year. does that concern the white house and does it say that your warnings about withholding federal funds is not getting through to people? >> i think the last poll i saw on the sanctuary cities was 80% of american people don't support them. they don't want their tax dollars used to finance people in this country illegally. i think if you are a mir or councilman or a state representative or a governor in

a state you need the answer to the people that elected you, whether or not you are going to support this. from a federal perspective, i think the president has been very clear that we are not going to use federal taxpayer dollars to support cities that support services to people who are here in this country illegally. but i think at the end of the day this is a question for mayors and council members at the local level who have to answer to the people that elected them with clearly a position that is not in keeping with what most americans believe. ayman. >> thanks sean. you mentioned the call with the ceo of anthem health. can you tell me what this proposal means for health insurance companies? will their profits go up or down under the president's proposal. >> i don't think that has been the focus of the president's proposal. it is a not about them. 'about patients. i think what it means for then is they finally get to create more choice and more plans and allow people to choose a plan that fits them of the right now they don't have that choice. frankly in more and more markets

companies like anthem, united health, cigna, are pulling out. aetna. because they don't have the choice, and because of the government mandate. i think what we want to do is allow competition and choice to exist so they can offer more options for the american people. >> will those companies make more money under the easy were's plan or less? >> i don't know the answer to that. that's not been the focus of what we are doing now. at the end of the day they are pulling out of market after market leaving americ peoe with fewer and fewer choices. right now it's not a question -- from the last i checked i think many of them are doing well. but it's the american people and its patients losing under the current system. i think there is a way you can do a little of both. hunter. >> yes. we've seen the white house and secretary price push back on calling this health care bill trump care. does anything need to change for the president to be comfortable putting his name on the bill? >> well, i don't -- i mean, i don't think the obama administration didn't label it obamacare. they call it the aca. i mean, this is the american health care act.

the president is proud of it. the president is proud of the fact that we are working with congress. but this is a bill that's not his. it's a joint evidence thffort te worked with the house and the senate on. easy proud of it. proud of the impact that it's going to have an american patients. so i don't think this is about labels and names. this is about getting a job done. john? >> couple things, sean. you keep pointing out that the cbo did not take into consideration phases two or three. some people might say the white house has been criticizing the cbo for not taking into account phases two or three in their scoring of the first phase of this. how were they supposed to take into account something that doesn't yet exist. >> i think that's a question for the house to offer. there are constraints put on the cbo in terms of what they can consider. i think the point that we want to make and it came up yesterday at the he have brooings, if members are going to base their rote off a score they need to understand the totality and the comprehensive nature of the

entire program. so to base your score off of one piece of information is literally -- hold on of course let me answer the question -- i understand that. what i'm saying is that the question that keeps being asked is to see all of the reports on this about how it's going to impact, and not note -- i mean i don't recall too many packages thattan ran on the evening news last night or too many stories noting it was one piece of a comprehensive package, prong one of a plan that was three prongs. when we go out here we are trying to make people understand the comprehensive nature of what is happening and why it has to happen. it wasn't by choice. there are certain ways of how it had to be conducted in terms of how it was constructed in the first place in terms ems of how it gets repealed and replace. the firit is the pre ces-- proc

have to follow because of the senate rules. when we talked about this -- when you guys, when there is a report out on the evening news or the cable news or in the paper and it doesn't explain the comprehensive nature, it just says the cbo says this, full stop. it is our responsibility to make sure people understand it's part of a puzzle, explaining to people how the whole thing comes together. i think that is a very important piece of explaining how this whole thing is going to matter and impact the american people. >> the other thing i'm curious about, too, thek this thing, the president called it a big beautiful e in. people like jim jordan say it is a big beautiful dud. is there a way to ham they are into shape.

>> i hope so. >> where you can satisfy conservativ conservatives. or do you have to rip it up and start all over again. jim jordan just this morning was saying that the fundamental aspects of what was promised to the american people by house members when they ran for election in the fall and the president when he ran for election is not in this bill? >> respectfully i would suggest it has gone through two house committees that consistent of over 50 members with unanimous support. >> not a freedom caucus member on either one of those committees. >> i don't know that that's true. >> well -- >> i understand that. i'm going to use major garrett to fact check you. >>. i'm saying they didn't get a chance. >> or john roberts. >> i did not say that. >> now, but my point is i think we've got tremendous support. the president, as i have stated wants to work with them. there will be a manager's amendment. and i hope that ultimately,

yeah, i would love to have every member support this on both sides of the aisle. i think the president's principles and goals are going to benefit every american. obviously the more support we get, the better. as we continue to meet with them and talk with them and get their ideas i think we will have an phenomenal outcome for this bill. there is a lot of ways that we continue to get gather input and ideas. the more that we can get that will achieve that goal, great. i hope that he continues to provide us with constructive ideas and we look forward to getting as many of them in as possible. major. >> let's continue that conversation. the manage's amendment is a testament that the bill as written can't pass. >> i don't think that's -- no, it is an admission of what we stated at the beginning of this process, which is that the president was going to engage with members to hear their ideas, he welcomed them. director mulvaney stated it several times, and secretary price, the vice president. we are not -- this has never been a take it orally it. i have said it from this podium.

the president talked about it as you mentioned just a second ago. this is an opportunity to hear from individuals and groups and insurance an victims of obamacare and doctors. >> freedom caus support. >> hold on. it's not about. >> or the tax credits or some other alteration. >> it is a not about one caucus or one member. >> it's not? >> no, i think this is about bringing people together. if we have great ideas that will achieve a better outcome for the american people then we are going to listen to them and incorporate them. i don't think this is -- we have been clear from the get-go. if you can come with a good idea that will strengthen this bill that will benefit american patients we'll do it. so the manager's amendment. >> it's about getting votes. you can't have a strong bill that can't pass, right? >> absolutely. but you can jam through a bill and get it out and get 218 and send it over to the senate. i think that we want to get the strongest bill through the house with as many ideas and opinions and facts that will help strengthen this as possible.

so i'd rather, instead of getting a bill through with 218, 219, work on a process as the officer and majority leader have done that brings in additional ideas and if we can vote the number higher we will. >> to tom's point, you talked about it a second ago, prongs two and three. he went out of his way to describe that process, two and three, because the third part is going to require 60 votes because it's outside of justification as mythical imaginary and just spin. he is telling them don't buy into the second and third prong agent because they are mythical and magical and don't exist. if you walk the plank, his words, not mine on this first initiative you are not going to get second and third phase of this process because it can't get through the senate? >> a couple of things. first, this is the only vehicle that seeks to achieve what people on our side of the aisle have been talking about since

2010. this is it. if we don't get this through, the goal repealing obamacare and instituting a system that will be patient centered is going to be unbelievably difficult. this is the vehicle to do that. and so we welcome senator cotton's ideas. but the second prong of this is administrative in nature. it is something that is delegated to saturday lean is a bill yas the secretary of health and human services to do. prong two is relatively easy to do. the same authority that that seth had is now under the us a spiss of dr. price. i think he notede his office has been going through and doing that. that phase is easy to do. the third prong, which is all the things that conservatives have been championing for a long time, and frankly many democrats agree with us on, the ability bring down costs through selling over state lines and allowing small businesses to group together is something that we have been talking about over a

decade. >> and you can get 60 -- >> is not just 60. i think this is something that should bring people together. i think there is bipartisan support for almost every one of these things. because they benefit -- there is no one that doesn't benefit. who could be against for allowing insurance to be sold over state lines? it's something you can do with your car insurance -- there was no other product that i can think of -- i'm sure someone will fact check me on that, for the most part the american consumer, you can go on line, go to a store, you have a choice, go to a store across state lines, if you live in maryland you can drive to the dprk and shop around. with our insurance we don't have that ability. there is no question that increased competition drives down costs. it is just tan economic certainty. allowing choice will do the same thing. i think any senator that has that concern there is no entity

that i can think of that greater dhois and greater competition doesn't drive down choice significantly. all we have to look at are obamacare. i read off three individuals who the president met with yesterday who are victims yesterday. every one of those cases the insurance premiums were skyrocketing when choice and competition went away. most insurers in the market eight or nine years ago will tell you depending on the plan you could get a plan for as low as $100 and change, now the cheapest plan is easily in the $3,000. so the question you have to ask yourself is, what changed? competition went down and choice went down. i think allowing both of those to re-enter the marketplace will achieve in itself that goal. and going through the additional reforms will achieve those things. there are so many ways we can achieve greater choice and competition that unquestionably bring down the choice of health care that benefits everyone american whether or not you are in the exchange or on an

employer based plan. again, we have to have 24 conversation in the context of what's going on now. talk to somebody that's on medicare or medicaid. ask them if the doctor and services that they used to be getting are available to them. i know so many times now when you walk into the doctor they have a sign that says we no longer accept medicaid that used to be a given, almost. and now, for older americans, for americans at the lower end of the income scale, it's becoming harder and harder to find place that even takes your insurance. and i think that to find that an acceptable income the question has to be asked to people who oppose this no matter what side of the aisle they are on is what is your alternative? because the ideas that they propose we can incorporate. we can make this bter and better. but to sit back and act as though there is a choice -- doing nothing is not a choice. trey. >> thanks sean. as you know the doj has a an additional week to produce evidence that president trump

was wiretapped by the obama administration. how confident is president trump that evidence will arise to support his claim? >> i think he is extremely confident. i'll let them do their job and let the doj report this. as i've commented in the past i think there is significant reporting about surveillance techniques that existed throughout the 2016 election. i'll leave it to them to issue their report. but i think he feels very confident that what will ultimately come of this will vind cat him. >> a quick follow up. >> sure. >> when a decision is announced whatever evidence or potentially no evidence is released, will he make a statement about the evidence or lack of evidence? >> i have been asked this i think at least three times. and i don't want to prejudge what's going to come. i'm sure you will do a fine job of asking me the question when there is a report to be asked and i will not be able to escape it but i don't want to get ahead of what the president may or may not do. >> evidence will be presented?

>> i don't want to get ahead of -- as i mentioned, i'm not going to -- >> the house intelligence committee has given administration until monday to -- >> it has given the doj. >> right. >> and the department of justice -- again, we covered this yesterday. but i'm not going to get ahead of what they may or may not submit. >> possible, or may be nothing? >> no that's not -- from where we stand we know there is significant reporting on this subject that -- >> something will be presented? >> i feel very confident of that. yes. >> a follow up. >> of course. >> on coverage. you were saying that you know, people, if they can't get access to insurance they don't hve coverage >> right. >> if you remove the individual mandate you are going to have people who are not going to buy coverage. they are not going to buy insurance. getting back to the congressional budget office score, would you concede that there will be some coverage losses? perhaps in the millions? that there will be millions of people who will not have health insurance as a result of what

you are doing? >> again, sure, except you have to look at the current situation. you are mandated by law to buy insurance right now under obamacare. 13 plus million people have asked for a hardship exemption. and then 6.5 plus million people have determined to pay the penalty. so currently, if you -- if we look at the universe and say it's roughly 30 million people. only 9 million people engaged in the exchanges when required by law. the majority, almost two thirds, if my back of the envelope math is right, about two thirds, have chosen to either apply for a hardship exemption or pay a penalty. >> the mandate forces people to buy insurance. if they don't have insurance then you have a free rider problem in the system. >> look at what is happening. >> in the obama administration you have free riders. they are in a car accident and show up at the emergency room and the health care is much more expensive. >> my point is under obamacare they created a system to force

people to buy plans they did not like that were mandated by the government in terms of what was part of the plan, what it can to cover, the deductible, et cetera, et cetera. and yet roughly two thirds of the people either paid a penalty or asked for a hardship exemption. they didn't do it. so the idea is actually if you could bring down costs and choices and allow people to find a plan that fit their budget that was tailored to their needs there is actually a higher likelihood they will find something they want at a price they can afford as opposed to right now custom is i get a plan that i'm forced to buy that has a deductible that i can't afford but i have got a cute plastic card that i can wave around. >> get you coverage. if you show up at the emergency room hit by a bus you are not paying out of pocket to the hospital. you are going to have some sort of catastrophic coverage that willic sure you have insurance. >> thank you. that's a great advertisement for -- thank you. that's exactly what the president is trying to do. right now, you have got -- of the attempt to get 30 million

people covered 14.4 or 14.5 million people applied for a hardship exemption. they are exactly the people that you are talking about. another 6.5 million people paid the penalty and don't have it. we have roughly 20 million people in this country who were supposed to be paying -- required to buy health care that have chosen not do it, who fall into exactly the category you are talking about. the question -- >> that number is massive by the year 2026. >> right. and so the point. >> 20 million americans. >> but if they actually had choices and had a plan option that was down at a bmt they could afford there is a higher likelihood they would buy a plan a tailored to them and b that they could afford. to your question about cat cattic right now that's not an option. in a third of all the counties in the united states. they have one choice. in five states they have one choice. can you imagine if they could buy a plan. >> it's just a talking point. there is coverage in those

states. that option of coverage. if you pull this away then you are going to have people in a lot of states that don't have access to any coverage because they can't afford with it the tax credits you are going to pry. >> you have got 175 million americans that get their insurance through their employer. frank will he right now they are the ones paying higher and higher premiums because a system that was only supposed to help people get access and require them, get a government mandated, government-run health care has actually gone amuck. and right now. >> government run health care. medicare is government run. >> right and what is happening. >> senior citizens screaming they want you to get rid of this their medicare. >> get outside and talk to some of them. more and more medicare recipients aren't able to get coverage. it is one thing to have a card. another thing to walk into a doctor's office and them to tell you we no longer accept medicaid anymore. >> but the president is okay that there are going to be

millions of people. >> no, no, the president's goal is to provide health care coverage to every american. right now they are not getting that. by giving them more choices at a lower cost, more americans can either buy health care for their family or themselves in a lot of cases for their business without paying a penalty, which is what a lot of people are forcing them into exchanges that have fewer choices. the system now is not working. the costs are going up. the choices are going down. and deductibles are going up. that is not an option. for every american -- i mentioned this earlier, to make this look like a choice, there isn't really a choice. the system that we have now is failing. the choice is whether we give them an opportunity to have real care. and in a way that is tailored to them and their budgets. jeff? >> sean, on a different subject, the intelligence committee yesterday when responding to the department of justice's request for more time basically issued a subpoena threat. does the white house have a reaction to that?

do you think it will come that far? >> as i said, as has been noted the department asked for an additional time. and that will be up to the intelligence committee to grant that time. but they are working on that. >> and on a separate note, you mentioned the president's call with the ceo of anthem today. >> yeah. >> does he have a position on anthem's effort to merge with cigna, which was challenged by the justice departmentunder president obam >> i don't -- i'm not aware of that i don't know that that would -- the esident's ever expressed any personal view. i think that would come under the ftc if i'm correct and i'd refer you to this. >> one follow up on margaret's committee on the meeting that was finishing up as you were coming here. can you give us a sense of what was on the agenda before they sat down. >> i think the president had a call earlier with the king a couple weeks back. i think they talked about safe havens in syria. they talked about the threat of isis. i would expect all of those came up of again, i think i will

provide a readout to you all, to everyone in the pool about what happened, that will more clearly define that. john gizzi. >> thank you, sean. coming up in the rest of the year are four special elections for the u.s. house of representatives. all of which are sure to draw national attention as venues for debate on the american health care act. does the president plan to be involved on paragraph of the republican candidates and perhaps appear on their behalf in the districts as this may well be a barometer of where people feel about the american health care act? >> you are also going to have elections in virginia and new jersey as far as i'm aware. and i think as we get further into the schedule and get chosee closer to elections we'll obviously entertain requests from candidates at variety of ballot levels to gauge the president's support. he has been very supportive of candidates in the last cycle.

i don't see him not giving continued support for people that want to fight hard for the agenda. we are not at that point yet. i can probably give you more as we get closer to the elections. a lot depends on whether there a request from the candidate or not. julie. >> are you saying that the white house is not going to come out with -- >> that's not something that o and b does. >> if you are advocating for a plan that you say the president wants to cover everyone, how are you going to be assess whether you are sum of you are not going to project that yourself and cbo's projections you are saying are invalid. >> i think if you look at what the goal is, which is make health care available to every american, as i said, i mean, you have a choice right now that is either we support a failing system that there is no choice and that the premiums are going up or you provide them with a system that we are looking at, whic