you could save up to thousands of dollars... because it helps cover some of the out-of-pocket expenses... medicare doesn't. and only these medicare supplement plans... have the aarp name... and cover more people nationwide... than any other medicare supplement insurance carrier. call today and you'll receive a free information kit... with a customized rate quote to help you choose the plan... that's right for you. you'll learn about a choice of plans... that help cover some of the 20% out-of-pocket costs... that medicare part b doesn't cover, making it easier to budget your annual healthcare expenses. oh, grandpa! and you'll discover how convenient and easy... it is to use your aarp medicare supplement insurance. you just show your card. no hassles. at this time of my life, freedom is everything. medicare only pays for part of your healthcare coverage. you have to come up with the rest. it's all about freedom of choice. back in the sixties, i went my own way. why stop now? so call today for a free information kit. when you call, you'll also receive... this free educational guide to help you...

understand your medicare coverage options. it's yours free, so call now. and learn how aarp medicare supplement insurance... can help make your sixties a time of freedom. again. and right now on "andrea mitchell reports," judge sonia sotomayor wins a critical judiciary committee vote, 13-6. senator lindsey graham was the only republican on the committee to back her confirmation. >> i'm going to vote for the nominee. and to my colleagues who voted no, i understand. i completely understand. >> sotomayor's confirmation is now headed to the full senate, where a lopsided victory is expected. two key senate committees are now making progress on separate health care proposals, but the finance committee is. dropping two of the president's top goals. coming up, the finance committee's ranking republican,

senator chuck grassley on his efforts to spark a compromise. and democratic senator, tom harkin, a veteran member of the health committee. also this hour, president obama holds a town hall meeting at aarp headquarters. 100,000 members are expected to dial in their health care questions for the president. and good day. i'm andrea mitchell, live in new york today. supreme court nominee sonia sotomayor has won the approval of the senate judiciary committee by a vote of 13-6. nbc's justice correspondent, pete williams, joins me now from washington. pete, no real surprise there is, except for the fact that only one republican joined her. >> right, we thought orrin hatch might, but he announced late last week that he would vote against her, largely because we think of her position on -- or his concern about her position on abortion and gun rights. but lindsey graham was the only republican who voted for and his comments were quite interesting, andrea, because he said that he was convinced that her statements and her decisions did

not indicate that she decided cases with a personal bias in mind. that was the theme of most of the republicans who said they'd vote against her. and then she said, if she will inspire young women, particularly young latina women, that would be a good thing. america has changed for the better with her nomination. >> you know, you mentioned that he mentioned the latina issue. the republicans are really challenged. at this hour, there's a meeting in chicago of la ross a, the hispanic group, and in fact, the democratic national chairman, governor kane, from virginia, is going to be speaking to them in spanish to emphasize, re-emphasize the fact that m ares are really challenged with hispanic americans and this vote is not going to help. >> and it seems quite clear she'll be confirmed by the full senate when it votes. five republicans have said they'll vote for her. we'll see what some of the border state republicans do.

a couple of other interesting comments that were made. you'll hear from senator grassley, i gather, later on health care, but he was among those who said he would vote against the sotomayor nomination, and he said, i have always regretted that i have voted for david souter, when he was nominated to the supreme court, and he said today that her answers, what she described as lukewarm, left him with the same pit in his stomach that he's had since -- with justice souter's rulings and he hoped would be cured with souter's retirement. >> that's pretty tough talk. thanks so much, cueing up on that later. first, the senate finance committee close to striking a health care deal, but it does not include two of the president's top priorities. instead, of a government-run public option, the bipartisan committee is leaning towards a co-o co-op system. insiders say that plan would not call for an employer mandate. they are also weighing a major

tax on the luxury policies to offset costs. tom harkin joins us now live from capitol hill. senator, great to see you. first of all, what is your view of this pact, the cadillac pact, something that we first heard from john kerry, one of your colleagues. is that something that could become the basis of a bipartisan compromise? >> well, andrea, i don't know, because we really don't know what the finance committee is going to come up with credit. there's a lot of things floating around. i've heard even, maybe, a tax, somehow on soda. other sin kind of taxes, sin taxes, things like that. there's taxes on offshore investments. everything is floating around. nothing, as far as i know, has really kind of gelled yet. >> how frustrating it is for you all who have worked in the health committee to be waiting on max baucus? >> it's a little frustrating, but we did our job. and i think the bill that we reported out of the health

committee is a good bill for america. i think the single most personal thing that it does is it puts a major emphasis on keeping people healthy, prevention and wellness, rather than just taking care of you after you get sick. and that's really where we have to go in this country. if we really want to save money, the focus ought to not just be on how many more surgeries we can perform or how many more prescriptions we can write, but how do we keep people healthy in the first place? >> would you be happy, satisfied, i should say, perhaps happy is too much to expect, but would you be satisfied if the final compromise, if there is one, does not have a public option and does not have an employer mandate? >> no, i believe there has to be a public option. the one thing i think the people understand that we have to have is we have to have choice and competition. and some areas of the country, there's really no competition, because you've only got, maybe, one insurance carrier. at least in rural areas and for

small groups. small businesses, farmers, people like that. so we have to have a public option out there, as a check on the insurance companies, to make sure that we have good coverage and reasonable prices and competition. so we have to have a public option. and we have one in our bill, as you know, that we reported out of the health committee. >> you've been talking about the preventative medicine and those effects that you've talked about, trying to overhaul the health reform to include preventative medicine. and this week, only this week, new research shows $147 billion of the cost of treating obesity. this is a national epidemic. >> well, andrea, that report that came out just yesterday in health affairs pointed out that in 1998, they estimated we were spending about $78 billion on obesity-related diseases, and as you just said, it's up to $147 billion a year now. and it's getting worse. and yet, the center for disease control and prevention is

spending 40 times more on terrorism than they're spending on obesity-related illnesses. so we have got to get in front of this. we've got to start making people more healthy in this country. pitney bowes, for example, they've got a great program they've implemented, that has cut their hospitalizations by 38%, their disabilities down by 50%. mr. byrd, the ceo of safeway, instituted programs in safeway that are keeping people healthy and cutting our costs and that is our only way out of this problem that we're in. we're not going to increase -- we're not going to save a lot of money by just writing more prescriptions, having more surgeries, and having more doctor's visits. we'll save money by keeping

people healthy in the first place. >> i remember that day 19 years ago, i was covering the senate when your americans with disabilities act really propelled, inspired by your brother's struggles with was -- who is hearing challenged. and when you passed that, and it was noted by the president at the big ceremony last week, it was an important anniversary. so we just want to say something, a shout-out to you for the americans with disabilities act, which you really sponsored and pushed through the senate. >> well, andrea, it's a poignant moment to look back over 19 years and see the changes in america. the ramps, the curb cuts, the accessible buses, every building being built in america today is fully accessible. to anyone with disabilities, workplaces being more accessible to people with disabilities, it's just nice to see these changes take place. >> it's more than nice, senator, we can say it, because you've changed the face of america, and we want to thank you. >> you're nice to say that. >> thanks for joining us. >> thank you, andrea.

and in philadelphia today, vice president biden released $1 billion if grants to fund local police units. the cash is part of the stimulus fund. it will safe or create 4,700 law enforcement jobs, they say. some of the nation's largest cities requested the money and they were denied. joining us now, philadelphia mayor, michael nutter. philadelphia is getting enough cash to keep or create law enforcement jobs, but some of your colleagues, fellow mayors would say, why are you getting the money, just because you have a worse crime problem, mayor bloomberg would say, what happened to new york and some of the other big cities who have done a better job at controlling crime? >> well, andrea, one, thanks for the opportunity to talk about it. it's a wonderful day in philadelphia, having vice president biden and attorney general holder, four governors and our own great police commissioner, ramsey. philadelphia put forward a great application and many other cities did as well. but as attorney general eric holder mentioned, at the event today, some of the other cities

who may not be receiving this funding are getting other funding, generally known as justice assistance grants or burn grants, for other projects and programs. so these are competitive programs. mayor bloomberg, of course, is doing a tremendous job in new york, and we look at many of the things that he's doing and commissioner kelly in new york, for some of the strategies that we're employing here in philadelphia with commissioner ramsey. so for the cities and municipalities who are getting the grants out of the cops program, we're certainly very excited. but, you know, we support all of our other cities in getting grant funding from the federal government, from other funding sources as well. >> it's a good day for philadelphia, but as you just referenced, mayor bloomberg said on being denied, "to punish our police department, because they have driven down crime, which fewer sources show the backwards incentives system that is sometimes at work in washington, denying the funding, because new yorkers have already dug into their pockets to maintain our

city's sound fiscal stewardship and pay for our exceptional policing doesn't make sense." >> you know, i wasn't on the application committee. i'm just applying and trying to do the best i can for philadelphia. and i'm sure that mayor bloomberg will be a strong advocate for new york and take up the issue with the federal government. but for philadelphians, we're very, very excited. we've had some tough times and this funding could not have come at a better time. so we're just excited to have the federal government in philadelphia, recognizing some of the opportunities and the gains that we've made, but also recognizing the many challenges that our city still faces. it's a great announcement for us here today in philly. >> mr. mayor, let me ask you what lessons you may have taken and other mayors and police chiefs may have taken from the dispute over whether or not there was racial profiling in the cambridge, massachusetts, case, involving professor gates and officer crowley. have you taken any steps, as

your police chief taken any steps to reeducate, reinform, use it as a teaching moment, as the president said, a teachable moment for your police officers? >> well, our policy here, and commissioner ramsey, of course, is the enforcer of that policy, is that we treat every citizen with dignity and respect. that racial profiling or anything like that, of course, is not tolerated. and we do everything we can to make sure all of our officers treat all of our citizens with dignity and respect. unfortunately -- >> oh, i'm sure that there are lapses, mr. mayor. >> -- the cambridge incident. >> but we all know that there are always lapses. you can have zero tolerance, but is there some impetus now to set out an alert, to have classes, to have sensitivity sessions, or do you think that those lessons have already been learned? >> well, commissioner ramsey and i believe in constant and consistent training. that is part of the key to effective policing. and i'm sure that he has

reaffirmed to his command staff and on down the line that that kind of incident or notion of any kind of profiling is unacceptable and will get reaffirmed in the continuous training programs that we have here in philadelphia. >> michael nutter, the mayor of philadelphia. thank you very much. >> andrea, thank you so much. and coming up, the senate finance committee is inching closer to a deal, but at the expense of the president's top priority. senator chuck grassley, the committee's ranking republican about a potential compromise, also member of the judiciary committee and voted against sonia sotomayor. and this programming note, for the first time, we will be broadcasting live from africa next week as secretary of state hillary clinton embarks on her seven-nation trip. so don't miss it. this is "andrea mitchell reports," only on msnbc. ♪ that r relationships and hurt your pride ♪ ♪ it's the credit roller coaster ♪ ♪ and as you can see it kinda bites! ♪ ♪ so sing the lyrics with me: ♪ when your debt goes up your score goes down ♪ ♪ when you pay a little off it goes the other way 'round ♪

♪ it's just the same for everybody, every boy and girl ♪ ♪ the credit roller coaster makes you wanna hurl ♪ ♪ so throw your hands in the air, and wave 'em around ♪ ♪ like a wanna-be frat boy trying to get down ♪ ♪ then bring 'em right back to where your laptop's at... ♪ ♪ log on to free credit report dot com - stat! ♪ vo: free credit score and report with enrollment in triple advantage.

the full senate vote on sonia sotomayor's confirmation before summer break will be, begins in about ten days. senator lindsey graham was the only republican on the judiciary committee who voted today in support of sotomayor, and defended her against critic inside his own party. >> quite frankly, i feel good about judge sotomayor. >> i base my vote on qualifications, and i came away after the hearing believing that she was well qualified. that the american bar association gave her the highest rating anyone could receive, and that meant a lot to me and it means a lot to me now. that she was competent, not just qualified. and it's not me saying that, it's what everybody who has worked with her has said. and she's of good character. >> senator charles grassley is the ranking republican on the finance committee and also serves on the judiciary committee and voted against sotomayor's confirmation today.

senator, you just heard lindsey graham. he said, she's not only qualified, she has the aba, ranking. why did you vote against? >> well, nobody -- nobody is going to disagree with the fact that she's qualified and got a good academic background. in fact, you know, it was a tough vote for me, because this is the first time in 29 years that i voted against a republican or democrat nominee to the supreme court. but i did it this time, and so then to answer your question, because all of these good qualifications are very basic. but we want somebody on the supreme court that's going to interrupt law and not make law. and let me explain that it's my job to make law, because you can vote me out of office if you don't like the law that i make. but judges should be restricted to interpreting the law to the

reason that they have a lifetime appointment. in other words, that means that she has to keep her personal biases out of it. and you have to realize, over the course of 15 years as a judge, she's made a lot of statements that have raised a lot of concerns about whether she can leave her personal views out of a case that she's got to decide. >> let me play a little bit more of what your colleague, senator graham said, because he is a very different view and you couldn't exactly call him, you know, a raving liberal. he said, "i'm not worried about my path of least resistance politically. i'm worried about the future of the judiciary. i don't know how you could say she's not qualified for the job. her record is long and deep, left of center, but within the mainstream. her speeches disturbed me, but i'm not going to make the judgment based on a speech. i'm going to look at her actual record." what's wrong with looking at her record, not at her speeches? >> well, i looked at her record, as well as her speeches. and as i look at that record, i don't find the respect for the

constitutional right to the private property. i don't find the respect for the fundamental right of owning a gun that's already been defined by the supreme court as a federal right. i find fault with a lot of decisions that she has made, that she has not made an in-depth justification for those decisions. and one of those was a personal property case, where i think she cited the kilo supreme court case in connecticut wrong. and then the rationale behind the ricci case, the new haven policeman case, recently overturned by the supreme court. and then you've got to remember that eight out of her ten cases that have gone to the supreme court have been overturned by the supreme court. and in one other one, they expressed outright disagreement with her, even though they affirmed the decision. so i think there's enough evidence that she is going to

use the position of the supreme court for personal views or maybe reading the constitution in a way that denies certain personal rights. >> let me switch subjects. i know that you're not going to be persuaded on sonia sotomayor, but let me ask you about compromises on health care in the finance committee. are you any closer to decisions and do you think that the final product will not include the employer mandate and a government option? >> it will not include an employer mandate. it will have more competition for our health insurance companies, so that there's more competition. but it's going to be done through a cooperative, as opposed to a government-owned and regulated insurance company that would be a very unfair competition with crowdouts that would eventually do away with private health insurance. now, we're making progress by

inches. a lot of people wonder how long it's going to take. it's difficult to say how long it's going to take. we're hoping to get a bill out of committee yet before we go for summer break, august the 7th. we may not make it. and if we don't make it, people might wonder, well, what's taking so long? but we're talking about life and death issues here for the american population. we're restructuring health care, and it seems to me it ought to be done in a very considerate way, not rushed through. because we're finding so much wrong with the house bill, for instance, that came out. and i'll just give you one example. you know, after five years, the self-funded programs that big companies have and they're protected by the arissa laws passed in 1974, it does away with that protection. so the president's promise that after -- if you want to keep the insurance that you've had, and that's a promise he made in the election, after five years, that

will no longer be true. so we've got to take some time to study some of these other bills and that's why senator baucus and i are not rushing this. >> and just quickly, the cadillac tax on expensive insurance plans, is that very much in the mix right now? >> yes, but you may be asking that question because of raising money. it's really being considered by the committee because all of the health care economists, as well as the director of cbo say that this is the only way that we're going to be able to bend downward the inflation cost curve of health care over future years. and that discipline is one of the central points that senator baucus and i are trying to accomplish. >> senator grassley, thank you very much. >> you bet. coming up, willie geist. he's here with us even though it's practically his bedtime.

we'll get the scoop from the source on willie's brand-new tv show. it's way too early. most for headaches. for arthritis pain... in your hands... knees... and back. for little bodies with fevers.. and big bodies on high blood pressure medicine. tylenol works with your body... in a way other pain relievers don't... so you feel better... knowing doctors recommend tylenol... more than any other brand of pain reliever. sandra..."that's just gonna be four dollars." sandrai went to pick up my prescription and i was told... i said, "you're joking." amandai know sandra personally. and she was only able to afford a week's worth of medication at a time. sandrasome of my medication was $100 for one prescription. amandabut now, she's able to get a whole month's generic prescription for $4. amandashe's also able to get a three-month supply for just $10.

sandrai just want to say thank you, from the bottom of my heart. vo: save money. live better. walmart.

if you haven't heard, there is a brand-new show on msnbc, and it airs weekdays at 5:30 eastern. i watched this morning. it is terrific. if it sounds way too early, well, willie geist agrees with you. that's the title of his show. >> it's way, way too early. >> i can't figure out, is it way too late for you now, bedtime or -- >> i guess you could say we're coming up on nap time. i have a 2-year-old and a 2-week-old at home. we all nap together, wake up together. >> knowing that you have a nursing baby at home to talk the bosses into giving you a show that would coincide with your baby's schedule. >> it meets the target demographic. nursing babies, people coming

home from the bars on the west coast. >> what is the philosophy behind the show, other than calling your colleagues and getting them out of bed. >> that's a good one. we call people and we'll be calling you at some point. get ready. wake-up calls. people don't have to come to a camera. we called donald trump today. he was -- >> yeah, i heard that. there was a long conversation about sheets that -- >> so you're going to get a little weird conversation. it is the middle of the night, after all. but it's 30 minutes, really fast-paced and we want to get everything you can download in one, short shows. news, business, weather, sports, pop culture, everything you need to have a conversation at work you'll have it at 6:00 a.m.. >> you know whom you could call, because she's going to have a lot of free time on her hands, and it's four hours earlier out in alaska, you can see russia from there. this is how jon stewart, at least, dealt with the sarah palin, the problem we have now of losing sarah palin as the governor. >> we're going to miss her. >> because i love alaska this

much, sir, that i felt that it is my duty to avoid the unproductive, typical politics of usual, lame-duck session in one's last year in office. >> by the way, when you have 15 months to go in your first term in office, i don't think that's lake-duck status. i think that's just, you're bored. >> that's so funny. as i watched that, andrea, when she was talking about it on sunday, she said, a message to hollywood, it's this whole us versus them thing, she said, see, there goes jon stewart again, calling me an idiot, and there he goes, saying, she's an idiot. >> and we've got this thing going forward. this is another part of jan stewart interacting with sarah palin. >> our new governor has a very nice family too, so leave his kids alone. >> he has a family, does he? i want to know, orthodontic records, yearbook pictures, schoolyard rumors. i will break them.

>> evil people in the media. you are also doing sports in the morning. >> yes. trying to get in some highlights for people trying to go to bed early. >> what about michael vick? the commissioner says he can go back to the nfl, but what about all those peta demonstrators. what can you expect? >> i believe he should have a right to play again, he's served his time, but it's going to take a pretty brave team to bring the michael vick circus to their city. you'll have protests at every game, the huge media contingent, and how do you have your fans that you have a guy who electrocuted, drowned, hung dogs. you want to bring this guy on to your team? it's a tough pr sale. and the other question is, is he still the player he was when he went to jail almost two years ago now. it's a terrible fun, but football years are a little bit like dog years. if you start approaching 30 years old in the nfl, you're pretty washed up. >> but he is a pit bull.

>> he is. you said it, andrea. >> just want to let you know, anytime you want to come on this show at 1:00, this is a red sox free zone. no barnicles, nobody from boston. >> joe scarborough, the fake red sox fan from atlanta, everybody's piling on. but, hey, who's in first place, we are? >> we are. >> we plan to stay there. >> if it's way too early, it's willie geist. >> thank you, andrea. we'll be calling you soon. >> and catch "way too early with willie geist" weekday mornings at 5:30 a.m. eastern right here on msnbc. sonia sotomayor's nomination is on its way to the full senate, despite early unanimous opposition from republicans on the judiciary committee. is the republican party, though, shooting itself in the foot? stay with us. to a good breakfast. one coffee with room, one large mocha latte. medium macchiato, light hot chocolate hold the whip, and two espressos. make one a double. she's fiber focused! i have two cappuccinos, one coffee with room,

one large mocha latte, a medium macchiato, a light hot chocolate, hold the whip, and two espressos, one with a double shot. gonna take more than coffee to stay this focused. stay full and focused through the morning... with a breakfast of kellogg's® frosted mini-wheats® cereal; an excellent source of fiber that helps you avoid... the distraction of mid-morning hunger. no thanks, i'm good. has the fastest serve in the history of professional tennis. so i've come to this court to challenge his speed. ...on the internet. i'll be using the 3g at&t laptopconnect card. he won't. so i can book travel plans faster, check my account balances faster. all on the go. i'm bill kurtis and i'm faster than andy roddick. (announcer) "switch to the nations fastest 3g network"

committee has voted 13-6 to

approve the nomination of sonia sotomayor to the supreme court. now that goes to the full senate next week. joining me, joan from "usa today," woz beshe is author of coming out in november, "american original." anthony scalia, and also the author of a great book. thanks so much for ginning us. first of all, what the you see as the role that sotomayor will play on the court? we've seen from your reporting and i've seen an advanced copy of this terrific book on scalia, the important effect he has had, and there are interesting coalitions that would be surprising to outsiders, this scalia/ruth ginsburg friendship, for instance. what role do you think she will play as she enters the court? >> sure, andrea. for starters, i think it will be an ideological wash. she's probably just about where david souter is on the

ideological spectrum in terms of being a liberal appointee. so we're probably not going to see too much of a change in terms of the voting. in fact, on some criminal law matters, she might be a little bit to the right of him. but you're right to talk about what goes on behind the scenes and in conferences, because another woman coming on to the bench would certainly add a new voice in that way. the ferris latina voice, the first hispanic ever in u.s. tree on the bench. i think she might offer a new experience to the justices. she also is one of the few justices in recent history who comes from a, you know, lower middle class background. we have to reach back to clarence thomas, to somebody who really experienced a near poverty in her youth. so i think she'll add a new experience to the court, but in terms of building a coalition, i think it will be too early to see, because as you know, andrea, these justices work over the long haul. they lay some seeds, that don't actually start to grow and really bloom until later in their tenure.

>> justice thomas is notoriously quiet, silent on the bench. she has a reputation for being a really tough judge for really firing questions at lawyers before the court. do you think she will be that outspoken? >> i think she will. >> or take more time to develop confidence? >> that's an interesting question. because she'll probably be slightly self-conscious about speaking up, but i don't think she's going to be intimidated. you know, i kid that she's from the bronx, justice ginsburg is from brooklyn, alito is from new jersey. we have a lot of people who have that new york, new jersey thing going and who are outspoken. and it's still dubbed the second circuit, where judge sotomayor is now. and the supreme court is very much of a hot bench. you're right to say that clarence thomas doesn't speak out during oral arguments, but just about everyone else does, and they often trip over each other. justice scalia is quite active from the bench, and so is our

chief justice, john roberts. so she might have a little bit of trouble getting a word in edgewise in the beginning, but i don't think imagine that she would be intimidated during oral arguments. >> and you had that interview with justice ginsburg in "usa today" where she talked about wanting another woman and the importance of another woman, and in particular over the argument of the case that was decided in favor of the young woman who had been strip searched and how offensive that was to justice ginsburg, that her male colleagues didn't quite get the invasive nature of that search. >> you know, it was interesting, during the q&a, in the oral arguments in that case from arizona involving a 13-year-old girl who was strip searched for prescription strength ibuprofen and who sued, saying that her fourth amendment rights to privacy had been violated, in the end, andrea, as you know, the supreme court sided with the young woman, but during the oral arguments, there was a lot of questions from justice

ginsburg's male colleagues about, what was the big deal, essentially. in gym class, kids take off their clothes, what was the big deal. and she said afterward to me, they'd never been a 13-year-old girl. and i think some of her comments from off the bench and also in their private conference, i think, got their attention. >> indeed. you always get our attention with all your reporting from the court. thank you very much. >> thanks, andrea. and with today's judiciary committee vote, sonia sotomayor is one step closer to becoming the nation's first latina supreme court justice. but do republicans further alienating the latino base by voting against her? let's bring in bob shrum and nbc political analyst, pat buchanan. side by side. if you guys have -- >> he's to my left too. >> go figure. >> you don't see it, but there's a glass partition between us. >> schrum, first to you, what about the fact that tim kaine is

speaking to la rozza today and not a single republican is going to speak to them. are they shooting themselves in the foot? >> yeah. i think george bush was very effective in reaching out for the hispanic vote. it's very hard for a republican to win the presidency, without 40% of that vote. bush got 44% when he was narrowly re-elected in 2004. mccain got about 35%. i think the republican party, by taking pat's position on immigration and sotomayor is guaranteeing that a higher and higher percentage of hispanics are going to vote democratic. so i kind of welcome that and i think that we will see 75% of hispanics moving toward the democratic party, if the republican party continues down this road, and apparently, with sotomayor, they are. most are going to vote against. she's going to get 65 votes and lose most republicans. >> well, i don't expect buchanan, for you to agree with shrum, but let me play a little bit of lindsey graham and see if you can agree with the republican senator from south

carolina. >> we're 200 and something years old as a nation. this is the first latino woman in the history of the united states to be selected for the supreme court. now, that is a big deal. >> pat, isn't it a big deal and won't republicans be marginalizing themselves if they don't look at the demographic changes in this country? >> well, obviously you look at the demographic changes, but i think this is far more important. we're talking about the united states support. and let me say, philosophically and ideologically, the president of the united states, barack obama, opposed chief justice john roberts and sam alito. on the same ground, republicans should stand up and vote against justice -- or judge and future justice sotomayor, because i think ideologically and philosophically, she has believed in race-based politics. i think she's going to bring that to the supreme court. i agree with chuck grassley. she's going to be a judicial

activist. and here's the political point. john mccain was pro-immigration and is pro-hispanic has any candidate who ever ran. he got 32% of that vote. republicans lost because they've lost the strong conservative base they've got. 40% of the country's conservative, about 20% republicans. the first thing for the gop to do is get back that conservative base. and one way to do it is to vote against justice sotomayor. >> okay, pat, if you and bob will just hang on for a second, the president is now speaking at aarp. this is his pitch for health care. obviously, a willing audience at that telethon. let's watch. >> -- our financial security and has given us all the peace of mind to know that there will be health care available for us when we're in our golden years. today, we've got so many dedicated doctors and nurses and other providers across america, providing excellent care, and we want to make sure our seniors and all our people can access that care. but we all know that right now, we've got a problem, that

threatens medicare and our entire health care system. and this is the spiraling cost of health care in america today. as costs balloon, so does medicare's budget. and unless we act within a decade, within a decade, the medicare trust fund will be in the red. now, i want to be clear. i don't want to do anything that will stop you from getting the care you need. and i won't. but you know and i know that right now we spent a lot of money in our health care system that doesn't do a thing to improve people's health. and that has to stop. we've got to get a better bang for our health care dollar. and that's why i want to start by taking a new approach that emphasizes prevention and wellness, so that instead of just spending billions of dollars on costly treatments when people get sick, we're spending some of those dollars on the care they need to stay well. things like mammograms and cancer screenings and

immunizations, common sense measures that will save us billions of dollars in future medical costs. we're also working to computerize medical records, because right now, too many folks wind up taking the same test over and over and over again, because their providers can access previous results. or they have to relay their entire medical history, every medication they've taken, every surgery they've gotten, every time they see a new provider. electronic medical records will help to put an end to all that. we also want to start rewarding doctors for quality, not just the quantity of care that they provide. instead of rewarding them for how many procedures they perform or how many tests they order, we'll bundle payments so providers aren't paid for every treatment they offer to a patient with a chronic condition like diabetes, but instead are paid for how are they managing that disease overall. and we'll create incentives for physicians to team up and treat

a patient better together, because we know that produces better outcomes. and we certainly won't cut corners to try to cut costs, because we know that doesn't work. and that's something that we hear from doctors all across the country. for example, we know that when we discharge people from the hospital a day early, without any kind of coordinated follow-up care, too often they wind up right back in the hospital a few weeks later. if we had just provided the right care in the first place, we would save a whole lot of money and a lot of human suffering as well. finally, we'll eliminate billions in unwarranted subsidies to insurance companies in the medicare advantage program. giveaways that boost insurance company profits, but don't make you any healthier. and we'll work to close that doughnut hole in medicare part "d" that's costing so many folks so much money. drug companies, as a consequence of our reform efforts, have already agreed to provide deeply discounted drugs, which will

mean thousands of dollars in savings for the millions of seniors paying full price when they can least afford it. all of this is what health insurance reform is all about. protecting your choice of doctor, keeping your premiums fair, holding down your health care and your prescription drug costs, improving the care that you receive, and that's what health care reform will mean to folks on medicare. and we've made a lot of progress over the last few months. we're now closer to health care reform than we ever have been before. and that's due in no small part of outstanding team that you have here at aarp, because you've been doing what you do best, which is organize and mobilize and inform and educate people all across the country about the choices that are out there, pushing members of congress to put aside politics and partisanship and finding solutions to our health care challenges. i know it's not easy, i know there are folks who will oppose any kind of reform because they profit from the way the system

is right now. they'll run all sorts of ads that will make people scared. this is nothing that we haven't heard before. back when president kennedy and then president johnson were trying to pass medicare, opponents claimed it was socialized medicine. they said it was too much government involvement in health care, that it would cost too much, that it would undermine health care as we know it. for the american people and members of congress understood better. they ultimately did the right thing. and more than four decades later, medicare is still giving our senior citizens the care and security they need and deserve. with aarp standing on the side of the american people, i'm confident that we can do the right thing once again and pass health insurance reform and ensure that medicare stays strong for generations to come. so i'm hoping that i can answer any questions that you have here today. i'm absolutely positive that we can make the health care system work better for you, work better for your children, work better

for your parents, work better for your families, work better for your businesses, work better for america. that's our job. so thank you very much. >> president obama, speaking to a friendly audience of seniors, members of the aarp, and making another pitch for health care among a group that has been a strong supporter of the government program and of the white house initiative. we're still with pat buchanan and bob shrum, and joining us now, steve pearlstein, business columnist at "the washington pos post". steve, first of all, are we any closer to a plan emerging from the senate committee and the house committee that would make sense and that you think could actually control costs? >> yes, we're closer, but we're not there yet. and, you know, things are getting a little rocky, politically, right now. you're now getting pushback from liberals who say they're being left out of the conversation that is among centrist democrats

and centrist republicans and the leaders of the house and senate and the liberals think they're going to get sold down the river, so you're going to get some pushback from them. you hear it from jay rockefeller and henry waxman. >> but if a plan is going to emerge at all, doesn't it have to have buy-in from the blue dogs in order to get passed and doesn't it have to have those members of the senate finance committee, max baucus, leading them to come up with some compromise that can get through the senate? >> yes. everything's necessary, but i think one thing to remember is that this is a game of poker, andrea. and at the end of the day, whether you're jay rockefeller on the left or jim cooper, the centrist democrat in the house, you have to think long and hard about a final vote against health care reform, because even though it may not be everything you want or there may be things in there you don't like, that's a vote, it's up or down, you've

got to vote yay or nay, and if you vote no, there are people in your district and the country who are going to hold you responsible for the fact that health care reform did not pass. >> steve pearlstein, as this vote continues, as the debate continues, and no votes contemplated yet. we'll take a break and be right back with pat and bob.

welcome back. we're with pat buchanan and bob shrum. guys, let's talk a little bit about the beer at the white house thursday at 6:00. is this just a glorified photo opportunity or non-photo opportunity or a real chance to try to repair whatever damage is done? pat, first to you. >> well, i think the president did a wise thing. a thing as wise as he did on friday as he did foolish on wednesday when he came out and said the police officer acted

stupidly when the officer went by the book and his black partner backed him up and every police force i've heard backed him totally. the teachable moment offers an opportunity for the president of the united states, the governor of massachusetts and for professor gates to really look at what they did this rush to judgment and reversion to a racial stereotype about what all white cops are supposed to do in these kinds of encounters. it was dead wrong. i think the white police officer behaved exactly correctly. i think the president was wise to back away and eat a little humble pie here. so i think this ends with most folks in the kcountry saying tht the president and professor gates were wrong, and that cop is dead right. >> bob, you wrote in your blog post on the week.com, the president weighed in a as he did at last week's press conference

that he knows from personal experience that he backed from the truth without betraying it because on race his abiding hope for america is to heal, not divide. that's worth a beer. overall, is it a net minus for the president? or did he win something here. >> no prit cal consultant would have advised him to commit the truth on wednesday night. the police officer acted stupidly. the more we find out about this, the temperature we know that is. the police report, for example, says the woman who called in the suggestion that the house was being broken into mentioned the race of the people who were breaking in, two black men with backpacks. it turns out on the 911 tape that's not true. the officer then said that she told him that it was -- that they were black. it turns out that that not true. she denies it. it is not a crime in this country to tell a policeman he's stupid. maybe there's a cardinal rule that you're supposed to be obsequious, supposed to be nice.

but the idea of handcuffing and arresting a 58-year-old man who has an artificial hip and has to have a cane to stand up on the grounds that because he may -- and we don't know this for sure -- he may be saying what he thinks of the misconduct you've engaged in, and you have to protect the neighbors from his anger is pathetic and ridiculous. >> the president defamed that officer. >> the president told the truth. >> i'll leave you guys to shrug it out. >> the president did the right thing friday. >> we'll have to leave it there. bob shrum, pat buchanan. as always. and what political story will be making headlines in the next 24 hours? chris alyssa joins us. chris? >> i hate to interrupt a spat between pat and bob. that's great tv. >> join in. >> exactly. i do think the vote today, the judiciary committee, only one republican, lindsey graham who

we knew was going to vote for sonia sotomayor. two people, or rin hatch from utah and chuck grassley, both republicans, who had never cast a vote against the supreme court voting against her. this shows the climate hasn't changed as much as some people would have hoped. i'm interested to see how this hands out, not first with sonia sotomayor, but more broadly about the health care debate. are there going to be republicans playing a critical role who will be willing to cross the political aisle and be willing to meet the president halfway or more than halfway. >> thanks chris. that does it for me this hour. i'm andrea mitchell. live in new york. on the show tomorrow, congressman mike pence. a i knowm out. they were old so... old! they are rollover minutes. they are as good as new. ya know not everyone gets to keep their unused minutes. and these days we can't afford to be wasteful.

saving minutes... ...saves money. yea. (announcer) only at&t's family talk with rollover saves your family's unused minutes. and saving minutes saves money. for back to school, get the lg neon for $29.99 after mail-in rebate. meet jack. recently turned 65. glad he's now got medicare on his side. but jack knows that medicare doesn't take care of everything.