you end up in a situation where you get $5,000 refundable to you. they would pay you, the government would pay you. and we increased that amount in the near term to $3,600 for every child under the age of 6. $3,000 for dependents between the ages of 6 and 17. the money is already a game changer for working families. it's projected to cut child poverty in connecticut, one of the wealthier states like delaware, in connecticut by 40%. [ applause ] really, it's a life changer. the build back better act says that you get the first half of it paid you and the second half you get paid on a monthly basis. people, hard working families, are getting a check in the mail on the 15th -- today is the 15th, isn't it? -- or their bank account just like your social security check. it's for your children, being able to raise your kids.

that monthly tax cut for parents is going to end in just a couple of months. it's going to be impacting the families of kids during the winter when the heating costs are going up. the bottom line is this. when you give working families a break, we're not just raising our quality of life. we're positioning our country to compete in the future. now, i talk to all you folks out in the playground, i joke, everybody knows i like kids better than people. fortunately they're like me, maybe that's why i like them. but all kidding aside, you all talked about, you all talked about what it means in the families of these children. and granny, you had to cut way back, and because of a lot of things happening, things aren't the same as they were. but these bills are about strengthening the economy for decades to come. both of these bills spend out over ten years. take the infrastructure bill. all those investments in roads,

bridges, highways, high speed internet, clean water, everything represents less than one-half of 1% of our economy each year, if you add it all up over the years. the cost of the build back better bill, in terms of adding to the deficit, is zero. when i hear people say it costs $3.5 trillion, i'll be honest with you, we're not finally going to get $3.5 trillion this year. we're going to get something less than that. but i'm going to negotiate, i'm going to get it done. but all kidding aside, we're going to keep come. because the more we demonstrate it works, the more we can do. it's paid for because big corporations and the very wealthy ought to start paying their fair share. let me be clear. nobody, and since i got elected, when i was campaigning, nobody who makes under $400,000 a year, which is a lot of money, will see their taxes go up one single penny. nobody.

not one. that's why the highway bill, the gas tax, i keep that commitment. there's no reason why, as i said, billionaires should pay a lower tax rate, literally a lower tax rate, than a schoolteacher and a firefighter, a couple. that's what's happening now. and it isn't right that 55 of our fortune 400 companies, the largest companies in america, last year, 55 of the five fortune 500, paid zero in taxes and they made $40 billion in profit. i'm glad they made a profit. keep people employed. i mean that sincerely. but pay your fair share. just pay a decent portion of what we lay out in this piece of legislation. and by the way, i've had a number of fortune 500 companies come to me and say, you're

right, we can pay a higher tax than we're paying now. because they understand the impact if we don't invest like we have to in their long term health and well being. this has to change. working folks understand it. that's why despite the attacks and misinformation, my plan still has the overwhelming support of the american people when they're told what's in it. they understand that when families have a little more breathing room, america has a lot better shot. my dad used to say, for real, my dad was a well-read, well-bred man who was -- regretted his whole life he never had a chance to go to college. he worked like heck. he always came home for dinner and went back to work. we lived in a four-bedroom split level home with four kids and a grandpa. and, you know, my bed was against the wall where my parents' bed was against the add adjacent wall. i remember one night i could

tell my dad was so restless, i was in high school. the next morning i asked my mom, what's the matter with dad? she said, well, honey, his company just told him it was going to do away with health insurance, no health insurance. well, you know what? my dad -- we weren't poor. my dad made probably an average in those days, 20, 22, $25,000 a year, which was a decent salary. but he used to say, everybody's entitled to just a little bit of breathing room, just a little bit. a little bit of breathing room. you know, they know this is about dignity and respect. we built this economy from the bottom up and the middle out. i've never seen a time, and some of you may have, beyond my colleagues in the congress and the press, you may have your masters or doctor's degrees in economics, name a time in

american history when the middle class did well and the upper class didn't do very, very well. we're not hurting anybody. we're just making sure everybody gets a shot. let me close with this. this is not hyperbole. the world is watching. autocrats believe that the world is moving so rapidly that democracies cannot generate consensus quickly enough to get things done. not a joke. i've had hours and hours and hours of meetings and personal conversations with xi jinping. i spent more time with him, i believe, than any other world leader has, when i was vice president and now on the phone. every time he calls, we talk, it's a conversation, between an hour and a half and two hours, not a joke, my word. but he doesn't think democracies can compete because they can't react quickly enough. in my summit with putin,

switzerland, they're betting democracies can't compete. we can't move quickly enough. i'm heading to the g20, came back from the g7. you know how they measure? they don't measure us based on the size of our military. they don't measure us on how much power we have that way. they measure, they want to know, can we get anything done. not a joke. and many of you travel internationally. can we get anything done. can you put anything together to get something done in america. so, folks, they're betting we won't respond to this inflection point in history. but i've always said, i mean, some of you guys who have worked with me know this, i've said it a thousand times. it's never a good bet to bet against the american people. never a good bet. [ applause ] it's time for us to invest in

ourselves. show the world that american democracy works. we've always led the world, not by the example of our physical power, but by the power of our example. that's why the world has followed. and giving us half a chance, there's not a single, solitary thing we can't achieve if we do it together. i'm hopeful. there's a lot of questions the press is going to want to ask me, how are the negotiations going, how are we going to get this done and so on. well, i told you before what my neurosurgeon years ago said when i had that aneurysm. he said, you're a congenital optimist. i'm convinced we're going to get it done. we're not going to get $3.5 trillion. we'll get less than that. but we're going to get it. and we're going to come back and get the rest.

so i want to thank you all and god bless you. i know you're asking about president clinton. i've been exchanging calls. he seems to be, god willing, doing well. and so when i talk to him, i'll let you all know. in the meantime, thank you for taking the time to be here. and i say this again, for all you elected officials, it's like a busman's holiday for you, you have to listen to another politician speak. but i am really -- and i mean this without exception, i'm so proud to be associated with each one of you. you're honorable, decent, smart women and men and there's a lot we can get done. so thank you very much. [ applause ] >> all right, everybody, good to be with you. i'm lindsey reiser and you have been listening to president biden hitting the road in connecticut to push his build back better plan, taking his hard sell directly to voters. in theory, what the president is

pitching shouldn't be a hard sell. we're going to tell you why. people like things like combating climate change, the child tax credit, paid family leave, free day-care, universal pre-k, free community college, expanding obamacare, lowering prescription drug prices and expanding medicare to cover vision and dental and hearing. that's all popular. taxing the rich to pay for it is popular too. the real hard sell is with members of his own party in congress, battling over how much to spend, what to keep, what to cut, and how to get it passed. with all of that up in the air, it begs the question, what exactly is the president selling when he doesn't even know for sure what will end up on the cutting room floor? we just talked about everything that's popular with everyday americans but a new poll shows just 10% of voters actually know a lot of specifics about what's in the plan. you know what they have heard about? the price tag.

$3.5 trillion. at least that's the price tag before the president and nearly all of his caucus wanted in that long list of priorities. but as president biden has repeatedly said, there are two roadblocks standing in his way. senators joe manchin and kyrsten sinema. and sources tell nbc news the white house is losing patience. joining me for more on this, nbc news white house correspondent mike memoli who is traveling with the president in connecticut. and nbc news national political reporter sahil kapur from capitol hill. hello to both of you. mike, we'll start with you. what can you tell us about this patience wearing thin? >> well, lindsey, having covered my fair share of events of president biden over the years, to deconstruct what we just heard from him, i think you hear some of the frustration but also some of the fundamental arguments from the white house but why it's so urgent to get this done right now. first, you heard him really frame the urgency of passing his build back better agenda in

terms of global competitiveness. he talked about the investments other countries are now making in childcare, in their physical but their human infrastructure as well. he said they're now surpassing the u.s. in a way that particularly our rivals like china and russia see as an example of how democracies can no longer even function. but then you also heard him say why he's here, here in connecticut, outside of washington, is because too many people, as he put it, think it's enough to just invest in physical infrastructure, but as he said, you have to invest in people. the president made more than a few ad libs in the course of the remarks. he acknowledged what's likely to pass, if anything ultimately passes, will be less than the $3.5 trillion proposal he initially outlined. he said it's so important to show that what we're going to do works for the american people and if there is success there, it allows us to do more. that's really the message as we are staring in the face, another self-imposed deadline of the end

of october from the president to particularly holdouts in his own party, let's get what we can done now, and i know there might be frustration among progressives about not doing enough, but if we can show that what we're doing is benefiting the american people, we'll be able to do more in the future. we'll see what happens when congress comes back next week with precious little time to get this over the finish line. >> sahil, knowing it won't be 3.5 trillion, where do things stand with democrats? kyrsten sinema has been in europe, fundraising. people like bernie sanders want to see expanded medicare benefits but jim clyburn said let's focus on pre-k, community college, some of the benefits for younger people. >> yeah, lindsey, democrats are not quite where they want to be at this time. they were hoping to get this done last month. we're now halfway through october and they don't have a final agreement on the spending level. they don't have a final agreement on the revenue level. they don't have agreement on policies or even how they go about cutting it.

there is this procedural logjam on capitol hill that's kept everything stranded right now where the progressives are demanding that the centrist holdouts, specifically manchin and sinema, come forward and say what they support and what they don't support. they want to have that debate. manchin and sinema have a different view, that they've conveyed their preferences, either publicly or in the case of sinema, to the white house, and they want party leaders to build the packages around those perspectives. progressives don't want that, they want to have that debate on issues where sinema's office has been silent and has not said where she stands, they think she should come out and say it. there's not agreement about how to cut these provisions and how to shrink the bills that president biden says is necessary. at the end of the day, there are two schools of thought, one is

to have fewer programs and do them over a longer term period which is have speaker pelosi seems to be coming down, and the other, backed by progressives, is to do many programs and have them expire earlier if they need to, they don't want to cut any of those programs. but when speaker pelosi tries to nudge them in the direction of fewer programs, she gets that pushback from the progressive caucus. something has to give here, there's a logjam that needs to be broken and the white house is struggling to break it, which is why you see president biden going on road, trying to reframe the debate toward the specific policies in the bill which are absolutely very popular with the american people, specifically the child tax credit, and corporations and upper earners, i was struck by the fact of this being a referendum on how democracies work. >> sahil kapur, excellent analysis there, mike memoli, thank you as always. congresswoman barbara lee of

california, congresswoman, you know any time you'll come on msnbc for an interview, you know we're going to ask, what goes? how do you make those tough decisions here about what stays and what goes? >> sure, and i don't really think this is a logjam. let me just remind, the last four years were really filled with a trump strategy of my way or the highway in terms of a very dictatorial type of presidential agenda. what you're seeing now is democracy at work. this is how we craft legislation. we're going to have different points of view. and the president is absolutely correct, as the chief negotiator going on the road, talking about what's in the build back better bill and how these investments will be transformative, they'll be sustainable, and they'll help the quality of life for everyone in our country and in fact our global leadership is really being tested right now. and we've got to show that

democracy does work and that democrats -- because we see that the republicans aren't looking out for their people, their constituents, so we're putting this together. and i think we're going to put it together. but this is how the process works. and we're going to make sure that these investments are going to be investments that don't leave people behind. >> congresswoman, i've spoken to many of your colleagues over the last several weeks and some of them are okay with cutting out free community college because they say my state already offers that. some people like bernie sanders, they want to see that dental/vision/hearing, et cetera for medicare. then you have people who really want to see expanded family leave and universal pre-k and childcare help. again, i'm going to ask you, how do you decide what stays and what goes? where are you leaning right now? >> sure. well, first we have to determine who wins and who loses. quite frankly, we have to also look at the housing issues. and i want to raise this because

there's a housing crisis in our country. and several cabinet members are going around the country talking about the build back better bill and how it's going to impact their lives. yesterday, in my district, secretary marcia fudge was here, secretary of hud, and we talked about the housing components of the build back better bill, and they're extremely important, because there's so many unsheltered people. we have a housing crisis. the affordability crisis in our country is everywhere, especially here in california. and so we have to have negotiations and make some determinations. i think when you look at 98% of democrats, i'm a member of the budget committee and we voted out the build back better bill, we agree with that. so who are they willing to take off of the table? i think that's the question that has to be asked, do we take children, the child tax credit off of the table, do we take childcare off the table? and we know so many families,

especially women, want to get back into the workforce. they cannot afford childcare. we know that our elders deserve home care and our caregiving economy deserves good paying jobs to take care of our elders. those that are opposing the build back better bill, the biden agenda, needs to talk about who they're willing to sacrifice. that's the question we have to ask. >> congresswoman, quickly, before we let you go, we know that polling shows a lot of people don't know what's in this bill but they know the cost. right now, are republicans the louder voice in the room here? are democrats doing a good enough job explaining these benefits when they're so popular? >> i think that's why you see the president going on the road, that's why you see secretary fudge and other cabinet members talking about this throughout the country. because in fact all of the polling data shows that people believe in these investments. they know they're going to transform their lives. we have justice issues, we have issues around climate change.

we have to look at the care economy, as i said, and housing. so these investments, now people, as we get out into the country and talk about them, people embrace them, they know this is what president biden campaigned on and this is what they expect us to deliver. and we're going to deliver it. but these are negotiations that are taking place. and i think the last four years didn't allow for the process to come forward, for the public to understand how legislation gets put together and how negotiations get put together. 98% of democrats support what we're doing. the public supports what we're doing. and let me tell you, we're going to get this done. >> congresswoman barbara lee, so good to be able to speak with you on this day. thanks for being with us. >> thank you. and we have breaking news from the fda. an advisory panel has unanimously voted to recommend johnson & johnson's covid booster shot for everyone 18 and older at least two months after the initial dose. the panel met for a second

straight day after analyst voting to recommend moderna's booster for seniors and those at high risk. today's vote wasn't quite as cut and dry. they had a few questions to answer. is johnson & johnson's booster safe and effective? if it is, how soon do people need it? and is the johnson & johnson's booster the best for recipients or do they need the pfizer or moderna booster for better protection? dr. peter hotez of texas children's hospital, dr. hotez, the breaking news, the j&j booster and the timing, we know the fda voted to recommend it as early as two months after an initial dose, this is earlier than the other two. but the fda committee looked at two-month data and six-month booster data. why did they decide after two months? >> well, first of all, lindsey, you know, i've been saying since january, this is going to be a two-dose vaccine. and the reason for that, when you looked at the phase 1/phase 2 trials, the amount of virus

neutralizing antibody and other immune responses clearly benefitted from that second dose. so i was actually surprised when it came out as a one-dose vaccine. so i think this is kind of an auto correction and a welcome one. the two-month concept is based on the fact that their large phase 3 clinical trial on the two doses was done 56 days apart and it looked really good. it increased vaccine effectiveness from 60 to 70% to over 90%. so i think that's probably where the two-dose idea comes from. this is a somewhat unusual vaccine compared to the mrna vaccines. and even though the single dose has lower overall effectiveness, it seems to be pretty durable. so in this case, you know, for the pfizer biontech vaccine, to some extent the moderna, the reason for the booster was because of waning immunity but

in the case of the j&j vaccine, it's not so much that the immunity is waning, it's just that the level of protection would clearly benefit from the second dose, now that we have that data. even though technically it's being called a booster, i think of it more as a -- really doing the correction from a one-dose to a two-dose vaccine. >> what do i do if i got the j&j? there was that question of whether the j&j booster is the best for people who originally got j&j but a study out this week showed the j&j recipients had stronger immune responses with a pfizer or moderna booster. >> yes and no. first of all, the preponderance of data is in the court of doing the two-dose j&j vaccine, because those are bona fide phase 3 clinical trials. the problem with that preprint that came out two days ago, it's a great study, but it's tiny.

it's 450 people, blind groups of 15 people each. and the study is done in a way that actually stacks the deck against measuring the effectiveness of a j&j booster versus the mrna. so even though there's a lot of press saying the mrna is a preferable booster to the j&j, it's not so cut and dry because the kinetics of the immune response of the j&j are such that there is a delayed effect, it goes up much later, and that study cut it off at 29 days whereas the higher vaccine effectiveness occurred 80 days or more. so there's going to be an update on that nih study that came out a couple of days ago. so, you know -- >> with a larger sample size? >> yeah. no, same sample size, but more information. >> all right, peter hotez, this is why we bring you on, thanks so much for helping us today.

ahead, in contempt. the january 6 committee signals it will bring criminal charges against steve bannon for refusing to comply with its subpoenas. and later, coronavirus and the classroom. a rough start to the year in one school district where nearly 5,000 students are in quarantine. ♪ there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. ♪ at humana, we believe your healthcare should evolve with you, and part of that evolution means choosing the right medicare plan for you. humana can help. with original medicare, you're covered for

hospital stays and doctor office visits but you'll have to pay a deductible for each. a medicare supplement plan can cover your deductibles and co-insurance, but you may pay higher premiums and still not get prescription drug coverage. but with an all-in-one humana medicare advantage plan, you could get all that coverage plus part d prescription drug benefits. you get all this coverage for as low as a $0 monthly plan premium in many areas. humana has a large network of doctors and hospitals, and telehealth coverage with a $0 copay. so call or go online today and get your free decision guide. discover how an all-in-one humana medicare advantage plan could save you money. humana - a more human way to healthcare.

we want to get to some breaking news from washington. a capitol police officer appeared in federal court this

afternoon after being arrested on obstruction charges, charged with trying to protect a man who was later accused of illegally entering the capitol during the insurrection. officer michael riley allegedly told the man repeatedly to delete all so many that would prove he was in the building that day. according to the indictment riley sent a facebook direct message to the man that read in part, i'm a capitol police officer who agrees with your political stance, just looking out. last hour in court, riley did not enter a plea and was allowed to remain free on the condition he not possess any weapons and stays away from certain unnamed individuals. we're seeing a significant escalation next week in the congressional investigation into the attack on the u.s. capitol. the committee will vote tuesday to recommend criminal contempt charges for former trump adviser steve bannon who defied a subpoena to provide testimony this week and indicated he has no plans to cooperate, citing donald trump's claims of

executive privilege. committee chair bennie thompson said in a statement, quote, the select committee will not tolerate defiance of our subpoenas so we must move forward with proceedings to refer mr. bannon for criminal contempt. the vote will be a critical test for the select committee of just how far that panel is willing to go in its investigation. joining me right now, associated press white house reporter jonathan lemire and university of alabama law professor and former u.s. attorney joyce vance. jon, is he seeing this executive privilege as a way to keep stalling things? >> i think there are a few things at play here. first of all, let's remember that when president trump was in office and the democrats took control of the house, the administration stonewalled every attempt to investigate. the motto here was just say no, the trump official would not cooperate with subpoenas and other congressional inquiries. bannon now, who had fallen out

of grace with the president and is now back in, is certainly the one carrying trump's message of electoral fraud, suggesting that he would be returned to office some day. and he is not going to cooperate. he could be punished here. there are fines, essentially even a year in jail. but even if that were to happen to him, and it's unclear that this committee will go down that road, but they still wouldn't necessarily get his testimony. there's no way to force him to actually testify. but he is setting a tone here. other officials, former chief of staff mark meadows, are cooperating at least to a degree with investigators, they haven't been threatened with consequences, at least not yet. the biggest question of all is will former president trump himself be served with a subpoena? will he give his testimony? i think the obvious answer is no, and a political fire symptom would erupt on capitol hill. >> joyce, what happens next, how does the process move forward? >> if the committee refers charges, they'll be considered by the u.s. attorney in the

district of columbia. and that's a serious consideration. it's not a gimme that the u.s. attorney would make the decision to prosecute. they have to first determine whether they have sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction and sustain it on an appeal. can they prove every element of the offense. that seems likely here, with bannon in open defiance of the subpoena. they also have to decide, though, whether it's in the national and to bring the prosecution. and that's a more subtle question than it might appear to people who really are demanding justice here. doj will have to balance whether this will set bannon and trump up to play the martyr and whether that would harm the national interest. ultimately, though, the question is this, lindsey. there has to be some way for congress to enforce its subpoenas. none of its mechanisms are perfect. it could engage in a civil lawsuit to try to enforce it but we know that takes a long time. so doj is really the last, best option here if congress is going to retain its status as a

co-equal branch of government that can enforce its subpoenas and conduct the oversight investigations that are among its constitutional duties. >> jonathan, we'll snowball off of that, bennie thompson says they'll use every tool at their disposal. what's in the toolbox? >> i think joyce has outlined some of it here, there could be referrals for criminal charges. it certainly could lead eventually to a hefty fine or even a jail sentence for steve bannon or anyone else they choose to go after in this way. but bannon is openly defying this, even though the executive privilege argument hasn't worked out yet. in fact the current administration, the biden administration, has said they won't help the trump people with executive privilege. often presidents -- it's almost a courtesy to their predecessors, not always but on certain issues, to allow executive privilege to happen, to keep some things shielded. that's not going to be the case here, white house press secretary jen psaki has said repeatedly that january 6 is a singular and dark day in our nation's history and they don't

want to be a party to that, they feel that every piece of evidence in truth needs to come out, particularly since there are so many republicans on capitol hill who are still carrying that flag, who are suggesting that even president biden was not legitimately elected and that president trump was. so this is going to be open defiance here. and i think it is a test, as joyce said, of what congress can actually do. can they force bannon and others to adhere to the rule of law. it's another moment where democracy itself seems to be on what shaky ground as we deal with the aftereffects of the trump presidency and gear up for what could be his candidacy. >> rule of law, joyce, we've heard people talk about law enforcement. at what point could u.s. marshals potentially get involved? >> well, that's an interesting question. i've seen that bandied about. typically defendants who are indicted, particularly on misdemeanors, which is what this charge would be, are permitted to appear in court for their arraignment. it's unlikely that bannon would

be detained pending trial unless the government established that he was either a flight risk or a danger to the community. so i think it's unlikely that we'll see the marshals putting him in handcuffs anytime soon. of course if he were to be convicted at trial, there's a mandatory minimum 30-day sentence that comes with this charge of failing to comply with the congressional subpoena. at that point in time one would expect he would be either taken into custody or given the opportunity to report. >> all right, joyce vance and jonathan lemire, thank you both. breaking news, former president bill clinton hospitalized with a non-covid-related infection. we'll have the latest on his condition from california. and later, covid and the classroom. the story of a single school district where nearly 5,000 students are in quarantine. in e

hi sabrina! hi jen! hi. so you're the scientist here. i just have to ask. does my aveeno® daily moisturizer really make my dry skin healthier in one day? it's true jen. really?! this nourishing prebiotic oat formula moisturizes to help prevent dry skin. one day? for real! wow! aveeno® healthy. it's our nature.™ i gotta say i'm still impressed. very impressed. new daily moisture for face. everything you love for your body now for your face. ♪♪ this... is the planning effect. this is how it feels to know you have a wealth plan that covers everything that's important to you. this is what it's like to have a dedicated fidelity advisor looking at your full financial picture. making sure you have the right balance of risk and reward. and helping you plan for future generations.

this is the planning effect from fidelity. oh! are you using liberty mutual's and helping you plan for future generations. coverage customizer tool? so you only pay for what you need. sorry? limu, you're an animal! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪♪ hi mr. charles. we made you dinner. aww, thank you.

♪♪

inside your bespoke post box you might find the perfect bag for a weekend getaway. or a hand forged damascus steel blade. a cocktail smoking kit. or a fire powered siphon for brewing your morning coffee. whatever you're into, bespoke has tons of boxes and handpicks one just for you each month. head to bespokepost.com and get a free gift with your first box when you enter code free. more breaking news this afternoon. former president bill clinton is in the hospital with an infection. a source tells nbc news that the original diagnosis was a urinary infection that morphed into something broader. he was admitted to the icu as a precaution. the former president is undergoing treatment at the university california irvine

medical center where he has been since tuesday. joining me right now is nbc news correspondent steve patterson, he's outside the hospital in california. also with me is nbc news senior medical correspondent dr. john torres. steve, how is the former president doing at this hour? >> lindsey, yeah, we have some updates for you. my colleague miguel almaguer just spoke to members on the former president's team about a half hour ago, first, a corroboration of what we do know. this was a urological illness. they diagnosed him with a more severe blood infection related to the urological illness. he was given an iv and antibiotics and his body responded extremely well according to doctors. as far as we know, right now they're walking around, talking to the staff and in good spirits. meanwhile, here's some new

information. we're hearing that in the next 30 to 90 minutes, we should know more about his possible release. that doesn't mean that he will be released at some point today. but we should know more about when that timeline is or at least a more firmed-up timeline. it may well be today. but we'll know more in just a few minutes. meanwhile we also know that former secretary of state hillary clinton is up there with her husband as we speak. we're learning more about who's not up there. the former president's daughter chelsea is not expected to show up. his grand kids, not expected to show up. that's important because it sort of indicates the posturing here, that this is not and maybe was not ever a life-threatening situation. obviously a very scary situation, especially when you take into account the health history that the former president has had with heart illness, but nothing to indicate that he was in extremely bad shape. one last thing, he was taken to the icu, but never underwent

intensive care. this was all for privacy concerns as the former president. but again, in about 30 to 90 minutes or so we should know more about a possible release. back to you. >> all right, steve. dr. torres, walk us through what we know about his diagnosis and the treatment. >> so there's a big spectrum of illnesses here that could possibly have happened. he seems to be going along the spectrum. but luckily it seems like he stopped early on. we talk about this urological infection, a lot of people call it urinary tract infection, where the bladder or kidneys get infected for a variety of reasons. as you get older it's harder to recognize that you've having symptoms and that means it can progress. once it progresses, it can actually get into the bloodstream and that infection then reflects the blood, we call that bacteremia. it's the second step along that spectrum. if it gets caught early enough, it gets treated with antibiotics, iv fluids for hydration, that's usually where

it stops and people can be stabilized very quickly and they're only in the hospital for a few days. if it progresses even more it turns into sepsis, that's a life-threatening area where the organ dysfunction starts happening. in other words, the kidney, the live, the brain, the lungs, aren't working as well as they ordinarily do and that's harder to treat. if it's not treated as well as we would like to, then it can turn into septic shock which has a 40 or 50% mortality rate. that's where we don't want them to get. it sounds like he got to the second stage and didn't progress beyond that because of the rapidity of being given antibiotics and fluids and being monitored over the last couple of days. >> that's certainly good news. dr. torres, the former president is 75. he went to the hospital because he was feeling extreme fatigue. do symptoms manifest differently in somebody the former president's age versus someone who is younger? >> a great question, they certainly do.

65 seems to be kind of that age group that once they get above 65, number one, they don't notice having that urinary tract infection as much because they don't have the same symptoms as people younger than them have and if they don't notice it, it can take its time and develop and build throughout the body. plus they don't have the reserves younger people have for fighting off these infections, their immune system might not be as strong as it was 20 or 30 years ago when they were younger. that means the complications build up and it's more likely for them to have those complications, and need that hospitalization, the iv antibiotics, the iv fluids, and the monitoring, lindsey. >> thank you, dr. jhn torres and steve patterson. dr. rochelle walensky has said she is preparing a strategy she hopes will cut down on how long children exposed to

covid-19 will need to quarantine. quarantine has affected tens of thousands of kids nationwide. in places like montgomery county, maryland, where 5,000 students have been quarantined so far this school year, it might be the solution they need to keep kids in the classroom. joining me right now is nbc news correspondent heidi przybyla. heidi, you've been following schools' response to covid nationwide, i see you every week at a different school. what's been happening in maryland? >> lindsey, some parents are calling it quarantine jail, school kids sent him for ten days with no live instruction regardless of whether they test positive. that's actually happening all over the country. it's exacerbating what many parents have said are steep learning losses from last year. for instance, second graders in montgomery experienced a 35-point drop in literacy last year. take a listen to the president of the montgomery county teacher association talk about a situation two weeks into school when 2,000 kids were in quarantine. >> many students with headaches

or stomach aches or sneezing were being put into quarantine or sent home to get a negative test. if the family has the time and energy and resources to go immediately and get a test, then kids can come back the next morning. but if not, then it might be a day or two or three before that child is tested and all those students are in quarantine for that period of time. >> so lindsey, the district realized that it needed to make a change. first, rapid testing centers embedded in the schools. and now, they're embarking on a new program that the cdc will recommend for all schools nationwide called test to stay. that just means even kids exposed to covid may not have to quarantine as long as the school system has enough tests to check them every day for a week to make sure they are not positive, lindsey. >> heidi, are there logistical barriers to test to stay? schools have had to revamp

ventilation, they already have infrastructure issues. yes, any got extra money from the federal government for that, but i imagine some districts don't have the resources to do wide scale testing. >> health experts say this is the superior model all schools should be following. first of all, a lot of districts and states didn't buy the tests. in massachusetts, for instance, the state bought all the tests and supplied them to the schools. but secondly, the systemic issue is that our tests, our rapid tests, are just more expensive in this country. for instance, in the uk or in germany, you can buy a huge batch of them for $35. in those same countries they have 86 different rapid tests approved. by the fda here, only about eight tests, lindsey. >> very interesting. heidi przybyla, thanks so much. up next, from court packing to term limits. inside the findings of a commission tasked with examining possible supreme court changes.

♪ there are beautiful ideas that remain in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. ♪

ok everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. whoo hoo! ensure, with 27 vitamins and minerals, now introducing ensure complete! with 30 grams of protein. this afternoon on the near total abortion ban in texas. the justice department is going back to the supreme court in their fight against the texas law. here's a statement saying they

intend to ask the supreme court to vacate the fifth circuit's stay. late last night the fifth circuit court of appeals denied the biden administration's bill to block the texas law. leaving the ban in place. this is the second time the fifth circuit allowed the law to remain in effect. this comes as a panel tasked with reviewing supreme court reforms is ready to share some of their initial finding. 200 pages of graft talking points and internal discussions deleased this week from that biden appointed commission. the panel will work to complete a report with their official findings. the commission covered term lengths for justices, size of the bench, how the court selects its cases and the court's role in upholding the constitution. bring in mark joseph stern, staff writer at "slate" focusing on u.s. courts. what stood out to you on this draft? >> what really stood out to me is that the commission said it

would not may any recommendations and draw any conclusions? et it seems to pretty clearly in this draft draw the conclusion that most reperforms to the supreme court are unwise and unwarranted. the report is very sour on the idea of court expansion, luke-warm on the idea of term limits passed by statute. pretty dubious about the idea of limiting the court's power over democratically enacted legislation. this is a report that essentially says, everything is more or less fine now. let's not tinker with it and ruin destroying the whole system. >> what are the arguments, then, for expanding the courts? and, by the way, we've been warned this process likely won't end with definitive recommendations. what do you think comes out of this? >> i think that today's meeting over this draft report was very illuminating, because some members, such at cherilyn eiffel, prez of the naacp legal defense fund strongly criticized

the draft report saying, look, you're saying you're not drawing conclusions but so sour on court expansion it's clearly one-sided. there's a real chance members like cherilyn eiffel may push back and ultimately force the commission to force a report that is neutral, pick both sides of the arguments more fairly. end of the day, i really doubt there will be any truly favorable unqualified language for one single reform. again, the members of this commission are very much institutionalists. none of them have publicly advocated for something like court expanse in the past, and it seems like vast majority are willing to stick to their guns and not break the great american democracy. and appointments at a time people didn't live until 80 or

90 years old. what would term limits mean for the court? >> yeah. so the idea of term limits in this report is basically to put justices on a rotating 18-year schedule. so that every new president gets to appoint two justices per term. some members of the commission say this could be enacted through statutes. you have junior justices and senior justices, and you sort of cycle through a justice from junior to senior after serving 18 years, giving the president the power to put something new on the bench. a lot of constitutional law scholars think this is a good idea. a lot of political scientists think it would stabilize our system and a lot of folks across the political spectrum think it would be constitutional and yet the language in this report is really wary of the idea. luke-warm, throws cold water on the statutory term limit.

and lifetime appointments are not something any of our pure nation doss and nothing get by and i doubt the commission will say anything overly favorable about it in the final report. >> mark, quick. got to let you go. what about current justices? have any of them weighed in on this? >> the justices like to claim they won't weigh in on public controversy and then do so anyway. >> they do! >> four justices recently gone on a p.r. campaign to say that you know, there's no problem with the court. it's totally legitimate. we should never were e question it and it's non-political. i think they're feeling heat and why they're pushing back. if they read the draft report they'll breathe a sigh of relief and realize there's no real threat. no way it will affect the ability for them to serve as long as they want. >> thanks for joining us. that does it for me today. see you tomorrow at 6:00 a.m.

eastern. hallie jackson picks up our coverage next. next. they do things differently. yeah, it's wireless with unlimited data and if you join a group it's as low as $25/mo. all powered by verizon. 5g included. woo! just get together and save! we look goooood! what's everyone's handle? visible. unlimited data, as low as $25/mo all-in. powered by verizon, 5g included. wireless that gets better with friends. hi sabrina! hi jen! hi. so you're the scientist here. i just have to ask. does my aveeno® daily moisturizer really make my dry skin healthier in one day? it's true jen. really?! this nourishing prebiotic oat formula moisturizes to help prevent dry skin. one day? for real! wow! aveeno® healthy. it's our nature.™ i gotta say i'm still impressed. very impressed. new daily moisture for face. everything you love for your body now for your face.

i brought in ensure max protein, with thirty grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks! ( sighs wearily ) here, i'll take that! ( excited yell ) woo-hoo! ensure max protein. with thirty grams of protein, one-gram of sugar, and nutrients to support immune health! ( abbot sonic )

ever wonder how san francisco became the greenest big city in america? and nutrients to support immune health! just ask the employee owners of recology. we built the recycling system from the ground up, helping san francisco become the first city in the country to have a universal recycling and composting program for residents and businesses. but it all starts with you. let's keep making a differene together. it's another day. and anything could happen. it could be the day you welcome 1,200 guests and all their devices. or it could be the day there's a cyberthreat. only comcast business' secure network solutions give you the power of sd-wan and advanced security integrated on our activecore platform so you can control your network from anywhere, anytime. it's network management redefined. every day in business is a big day. we'll keep you ready for what's next. comcast business powering possibilities. (man 1) oh, this looks like we're in a screen saver.

(man 2) yeah, but we need to go higher. (man 1) higher. (man 2) definitely higher. (man 1) we're like yodeling high. [yodeling] yo-de-le-he... (man 2) hey, no. uh-uh, don't do that. (man 1) we should go even higher! (man 2) yeah, let's do it. (both) woah! (man 2) i'm good. (man 1) me, too. (man 2) mm-hm. (vo) adventure has a new look. (man 1) let's go lower. (man 2) lower, that sounds good. (vo) discover more in the all-new subaru outback wilderness. love. it's what makes subaru, subaru. we are tracking breaking news as we come on the air. a veteran u.s. capitol police officer indicted. accused of helping hide evidence of a rioter's involvement