ashamed of your shortness. the fact of the matter is -- >> i'm not! >> no, clearly, you are. but it's okay. it's okay. it really is. the one thing that really is confusing -- they're calling us the odd couple. have you heard this? >> who calls it the odd couple? >> the -- they -- them. the thing that's interesting, i couldn't believe that they would do this, because i would never think of you as a slob like that. >> the show starts right now! ah, the big story today, for all of us, out in the cold, we know it, and we'll do something about it. we are, we're talking about it, and we're beginning to mobilize around it, as we all know. good afternoon. i am dylan ratigan. from the great plains to the texas panhandle, millions of us are dealing with a pre-winter wallop from mother nature. meanwhile, in washington westbound d.c., our very own bought and paid for congress is

freezing this entire country out in a place so dysfunctional, very little they do these days surprises us. washington actually managed to surprise us. they did not vote down the senate's payroll tax plan, but, instead, outright refused to acknowledge its existence and consider it at all. so, it's t-minus 11 days and here's what we've got. >> let's be clear. right now the bipartisan compromise that was reached on saturday is the only viable way to prevent a tax hike on january 1st. it's the only one. >> the next up is clear. i think president obama needs to call on senate democrats to go back into session and move to a conference and to sit down and resolve this bill as quickly as possible. >> remember the lump of coal in november of 2012, folks. they gave it to you. >> why don't we just do it now and give the american people a

real christmas present. >> so nbc's capitol hill correspondent, kelly o'donnell joins us. kelly, do tell us what we can expect from here. >> well, the quiet has sort of settled in here on capitol hill, and both sides are waiting for the other to blink, call it a stalemate, a standoff. what happens now is both parties believe they are on the right side of the issue. democrats say, take this two-month deal, keep fighting for a one-year extension come january. it makes the most sense, given the deadline. republicans say, no, a two-month extension of the payroll tax cut, unemployment benefits, a whole number of things, is actually more uncertainty and creates a lot of practical problems for the people who take your tax money out of your paycheck, all that sort of thing. the other part of it, dylan, is that the usual way things get done here, at this point, you would bring house members and senate members together and negotiate a solution. because we're so close to the end of the year, there's a lot of friction about that.

democrats don't want to see that happen. republicans say they should. so both parties think they have good information to tell the public, what the public is hearing and seeing is a lot more friction, fighting with their own money on the line. >> indeed. and their own jobs and their own futures. kelly, thank you so much. i do want to turn now to congressman john yarmuth, democrat from kentucky. and congressman, how does anybody in your position, however well intended you or one of your colleagues may well be on a given day, on a given morning, we know that you guys are all not terrible human beings, that there is an intent and desire that varies from person to person and from issue to issue and from day to day to actually provide constructive results. how is it that you or anybody can move to be respected with the integrity of your intent as opposed to the disrespect that is offered everybody in your office because of money, politics, and all the rest of

it? >> well, you know, it's pretty obvious, dylan, that this is a broken system. i don't think there are many people out there in the country who think it's working the way it should. money has an incredible influence on it. it influences the way we spend our time. we have people calling all over the country, talking to strangers, of courasking them t money, and the only reason they would give it is if they can count on their adherence to an ideological position. so, you know, it's tough. all you can do is go home, try to educate to the best you can your voters on what you're doing and try to do your case work and fight for reforms like the ones that you are working so hard on and that we're working on to try to get money out of politics. >> let's talk about that a little bit. but before we do, connect for me the role of money in politics with the absurdity of this debate that we're stuck in right now. what is going on in the posturing of these politicians' behavior that's either enhancing their ability to raise money

and/or that they're hesitant to breach a given issue for fear of losing money. >> there is one financial hook in this whole issue, and that's related to the taxes on incomes over $1 million. this is kind of where the real sticking point is. both sides agree, we want to extend the payroll tax holiday for a year and extend employment benefits. we want to pay for it by a surcharge on incomes over $1 million. the republicans would be willing to raise taxes on 160 million people to prevent those millionaires from paying a little bit more. that's where their bread and butter comes from. but, really, i think the major issue here right now is re-election, and the people, particularly on the republican side, are scared to death to be getting a primary challenge from right of them. >> yeah. let's talk about your amendment, this is in the context of the great 28 debate, and is a welcome development, i think, from everybody in this country. and yours is the one that most

aggressively, that i've seen that comes right out of the gate and says, forget corporations and people. let's just say forget it. but you really emphasize that money is not speech. that money is property. you say, "financial expenditures or in-kind equivalent," soft dollars, right, "without regard to whether a communication advocates the election or defeat of a specific candidate should not constitute protected speech." money is not speech is the first thing that you say in your amendment that's remarkably attractive to a man of my sort of principled persuasion, if you will. but why is that such an important -- why is that your lead? >> well, this is the heart of the citizens united decision. it doesn't really matter whether corporations are considered people or not if you consider campaign expenditures as free speech. because then it doesn't matter who has access to that right. when you deal with just the corporate side of it, you're still allowing people like the koch brothers on the right or

even george soros to spend millions and millions of dollars. so you need to get at the core of it and say money spent on elections is not speech. therefore the congress can regulate how much you can spend, if you can spend anything, and who can spend it. if you don't get at that fundamental committquestion, co really can't regulate. >> isn't it empirically observable that money is property? i have some money in my pocket right now, believe it or not, and the only plausible use can i think of for it is to acquire some type of property. i might be able to buy myself a cup or a mouse for my computer. i could even buy myself a telephone. this is a fancy new telephone. the battery always runs out, but don't spend too much money, but you can get one of these. where did we lose the concept that money is, by definition, property, and that property, by definition, is a fixed object

that is not speech, obviously? >> well, i don't think the founding fathers ever really thought about the fact that people would be going out and spending tens of thousands of dollars buying campaign ads. they wanted the right of the individual to go to the town square and say whatever he or she wanted to say. everybody still has that right. this whole idea of money is speech is something that be fabricated by those who want to buy influence on the system. and people like my senator, mitch mcconnell, have been pounding this home for 25 years now, and he finally got it institutionalized in a supreme court decision. it was very, very tragic for the country. >> yes, but, fortunately, we're smart people and i think we know that money is property and we'll be able to fix this. lots of screwed up things have happened in lots of places. human beings have this thing where we get to make new decisions every day and we should take advantage of that. section ii of your amendment, congress should have the power

to enact a mandatory election system, which shall be the soul source of funds raised or spent with respect to federal elections. a couple of issues here. why should the congress -- shall have the power? how about mandating the congress must do this. why give a bunch of congress people with the history of getting bought any discretion? >> well, that's a good question. we would have liked to have done it that way. most of the advice that we got that it would be -- that you really can't tell the congress tone act a certain policy. so we basically empower the congress, and i think, you know, with the type of movement that you're generating, and the fact that the american people understand how broken the system is, i think there's going to be mounting public support for a major, major initiative to change the system and to go to a public financing system. >> which is awfully exciting. it sure does feel nice to feel like we have a road forward. we just have to decide to do it. if we decide to do it, it will

happen. >> absolutely. >> section three, congress shall set forth a legal holiday. jimmy williams put the original draft of the get money out amendment. why is that such a big deal? i love it, but i'm interested to hear why you think that's so consequential that it should live in parallel to a section that defines money as being property rather than speech? >> we need to have a national commitment to voting and to get out the vote, to make it easier for people to do it. the idea that people have to negotiate work and child care and all of these other logistical things to cast a vote for the most important thing they'll do as a citizen is nonsense. so this is the best way to do it, to say in the constitution, there has to be one day when you're allowed to vote. >> your thoughts on australia who gives you a fine on your tax i s if you don't vote. >> i don't think the libertarians in the united states would allow that.

but we need to make it as easiest as possible. >> exactly. listen, congratulations on getting this introduced. congratulations on your raising the temperature for all of us with respect to the 300,000 with the get money out and the root strikers. it is delightful to see an increasing of the temperature around this debate. and i'm sure that everybody from, you know, russell simmons to the libertarians to the committee for economic development will be thrilled to have you at tea party. thank you, congressman. >> dylan, thank you for all you do. >> thank you, sir. coming up on the show today, they are playing scrooge to millions of americans, but helping bankers stack up the gold. we told you about capitol hill insider trading. wait until you hear about, well, reverse insider trading. on capitol hill. they can do it any which way you want. they can screw you ten ways. i mean it. also, why our specialist says capitalism as we know it is on the brink and it will be up to the biggest businesses to lead the solution to that problem. plus, a new magic pill -- and no, we are not talking about

the little blue kind. [ female announcer ] where will you be when you have to change your pad? now with stayfree you don't have to worry. inspired by athletic wear, only stayfree has thermocontrol to wick away moisture. so you're dry and comfortable up to 8 hours. stayfree. see? he's taking his vitamins. new one a day vitacraves plus omega-3 dha is a complete multivitamin for adults. plus an excellent source of omega-3 dha in a great tasting gummy. one a day, gummies for grown-ups. [ male announcer ] don't miss red lobster's surf & turf. 3 grilled combinations all under $20.

like maine lobster with peppercorn sirloin, or new bacon-wrapped shrimp with blue cheese sirloin for $14.99. offer ends soon. i'm john mazany and i sea food differently. insurance ... but afraid you can't afford it? well, look how much insurance many people can get through selectquote for less than a dollar a day. selectquote found, rich, 37, a $500,000 policy for under $18 a month. even though dave, 43, takes meds to control his blood pressure, selectquote got him a $500,000 policy for under $28 a month. ellen, 47, got a $250,000 policy for under $20 a month. all it takes is a phone call. your personal selectquote agent will answer all your questions ... and impartially shop the highly rated term life companies selectquote represents for your best rates. give your family the security it needs at a price you can afford.

call this number or go to selectquote dot com. selectquote. we shop. you save.

excuse me. happy holidays. just a glass of water. it's fine. new poll numbers out today, highlighting the need for electoral reform in this country, and how many americans would probably support the so-called against line if their actual intentions and desires as voters were to be measured versus all of our presidential candidates, including new data from "usa today" that fewer than half of us, a majority of

americans, believe that all of the 2012 candidates would not make a good president. and we already no how americans feel about congress. a mere 3% think the democrats are doing an excellent job, while 2% think the republicans are doing a good job. which is why the democrats always look so good. they're a full one percentage point better than the the republicans. 3%, 2%. so instead of being forced like fooled of having to choose between the lesser of two evils, cancer or heart disease? no thanks to both. i'd like to be healthy. why not give us, the american people, the vote against bad options, open up a primary system, and actually allow us to elect the people that would represent us. the tuesday mega panel is here. karen, susan, and jimmy. karen very compassionate today and very concerned about our ability -- yes, the peace. but it's good. and your point is, whether it's my narrative outside the machine, criticizing it, or your

narrative inside the machine, trying to find the way towards better outcomes, it comes down to our ability to cultivate changes, not just from the rabble rousing on the outside, but from the inside of the machine. >> right. >> i look at that and get skeptical and say, listen, by the time they grow up to be big boys and girls in the political world, they're in a gerrymandered system that's being purchased. so even if we get susan and jimmy to run for office and they're heroic in their intentions, by the time i get them into the power structure that they end up being, basically, losing all of their power by virtue of the system. >> but that's part of why i think it has to be -- it's not one solution, all right? it's a multi-faceted solution. i tend to go back to the civil rights movement. some say, we're going to go for the legal strategy, some say, we're going to go for the burn the doors down strategy. and some say, look, we're going to try to change social opinion. so i think what you're saying is

right. we need more people to participate in voting so there are more consequences for people not doing the things we want them to do. but i also think we need more choices. and that means more people running. i was talking about the example of los angeles. the person who introduced you know, that measure -- >> which i love. >> which you love. >> yeah. >> i mean, that individual probably wasn't necessarily in office 20 years ago or 10 years ago. and it takes people with new thinking and new ideas and people who are not afraid to say, i'm not going to do it that way. and the rest of us on the outside say, that's who we're going to give our money to. >> and karen's referring to the los angeles resolution, who declares corporations are not people. really it sounds like what karen's describing is another version of what we call the tsunami strategy, which is that it is only with a pervasive effort at every nook and cranny of the dam and every situation and every moment and every time to hammer the narrative of realigning our interests, our electoral process, our banking

process, our trade agreements. just the loss of the justice narrative, the fairness narrative in this country, which is really what we all aspire to, is what's at risk. >> this is the wave you talk about, boiling pot of water, per se. but here's the problem. the problem is it cannot be a left of center idea. it cannot be a left of center movement. >> it can't even be politically left or right at all. >> it's got to be post-partisan and a justice narrative. >> left, center, right, nonpolitical, hyperpolitical. it's got to be all of these people. now we have 14 constitutional amendments, right? >> which is awesome. >> by the way, the amendment is fantastic. >> awesome. >> but tif you don't appeal to conservatives -- >> that's a big-time endorsement from dylan ratigan. it's awesomely awesome. yarmuth can use that on his campaign trail. >> susan del percio, i'm not

sure your liberal, but a democrat. the point is, it's got to be post-partisan. look at congress right now -- >> but hang on a second. it is post partisan -- >> but it's not. >> it is for the american people. just because our politicians want to slice everything into a reason to fight with each like a bunch of yeehaws doesn't mean that the rest of us have to actually -- we don't have to -- believe me, everyone i talk to says that's right. it's just that it's a function of a shattered media and a shattered political apparatus that makes money like a blender chopping up our souls for money. anyway, go ahead. >> what happens if you get all of these things done. here's the bigger problem, who's going to run for office what quality of person is going to subject themselves to what they have to do to run for higher office? >> i think that they're going to get much better. i think as people get more comfortable, to go to karen's compassion narrative, right -- >> but then you have to go through -- >> no, no, no. so as we develop more compassion. so say dylan ratigan's going to run for office, okay -- i'm not

running for office -- but let's say i am, okay. so i say, i'm going to run for office, but you have to understand, i've got a bunch of a illegal aliens that work for me, have a long history of drug usage, and all these different things, there's this, there's this, everybody's got things, okay, whatever that may be, and you walk in the room and say, this is the deal, but the prism we're going through is a narrative. whether it's a conservative justice narrative -- and i think where we lose ourselves is in promoting the -- demanding and promoting the illusion of these politicians, which is a lie to begin, and then when we catch them in the lie they created, we're like, oh, you're a liar. in the meantime, we're like, lie to me, lie to me, lie to me. tell me how good it is. anyway, it's crazy. do you think that would work? >> maybe, in another universe. >> susan's like, no way! >> i think it's important -- without being --

>> glass half empty, glass half full. >> i am one of the most cynical people you will meet. at the same time, i think it's important that we offer some hope -- >> just a realist. >> and that there is a way for things to change. >> emergent factors. >> imagine if 100 of the people from occupy wall street movements from across the country ran for office. >> we can exhibit new behaviors -- >> we are not rocks in the garden. we can make choices. >> this is america. >> yes, this is america. >> this shouldn't be much of a surprise, but "the wall street journal" reporting today -- that was a crazy conversation -- today that many investors have had meetings with top lawmakers. this is a scandal -- hold on. you've got to pay attention to me now, because you're about to become angry and feel scandalized and it's important. top lawmakers have been selling firsthand information, market-moving information to hedge funds in new york. we call it reverse insider trading. on wall street, all the time, if

there's a place you can get information, you send somebody -- is it's like a biotech company. you pay somebody to go to the courthouse and find out what's -- that, by the way, is not illegal. a courthouse is a public venue. if you want to pay somebody to go to it, that's -- this seems to be a little over the line, or a lot over the line, insofar as people are actually paying money to get meetings with legislators, susan, so they can get insight on policy. basic example, public option is dead, nobody else knows it, go buy public insurance stocks, thank you, congressman sleazeball, this is how we do business. that's what's going on. >> they created a cottage industry of the dating service, basically. they put tlehe elected official and the money people together and said, let's see if we can find a nice match. that's all it is. it's the same old story. >> it is interesting, though -- >> but to a new height, though. >> and you wonder why people get

cynical. >> you mean there's politics in politics? >> we laugh because it's so preposterous, but at this point, whether it's the insider trading by the congresspeople themselves on policies, considering, again, not to be so self-referential, but i will be. as an anchor at cnbc, the restrictions on my investments were preposterous. i mean, literally, no interaction with the financial -- nothing! i didn't ever make a policy in my entire life, i've never influenced the course of a tax code, i never influenced the course of a trade policy, a bank policy, nothing. meanwhile, the people who are writing the policies are trading the money and they're getting paid by other hedge fund guys to give them information so they can trade it. and this is apparently okay. >> well, what you do is you get lobbyists, like i used to be, to call their old bosses -- >> like you used to do. >> no, i want to be clear. that is actually not funny, because i never did it. >> okay, fair enough. it was a joke at your expense, but it was inappropriate. >> because all lobbyists are evil --

>> nobody said that! >> we like lobbyists, just not lobbyists that fund-raiser politics -- >> that's the point. there's no money that's transacted on these things, okay? but what you're doing is -- so you're a downtown lobbyist, and what you do is you get your old boss to go up to wall street or to connecticut, talk to a room full of very, very smart men and women, then they leave. the lobbyist gets paid to do this, right? the politician gets nothing for it, except, oh, wait, business cards from every one of these people that were sitting at that table. those business cards then go to the fund-raiser. the fund-raiser wasn't a meeting, by the way. so it's this level upon this level upon this level, and it's crazy! it's crazy talk, the idea that you can do this. >> it's really crazy. >> do you realize that there's not a ban on insider trading. that "wall street journal" story took it halfway through and it's a throwaway line. >> ironically, newt gingrich was

doing -- he's not a lobbyist, but that's exactly what he did. he said, you paid my group $200,000, i'll put you in a room with these people >> the man's a historian. the panel stays. just ahead, you broke it, you brought it. our specialist who says the only people who can get our current economic mess on the right track are some of the very big businesses that took us off the track. harvard's joe bauer joins the mega panel right after this. we know a place where tossing and turning have given way to sleeping. where sleepless nights yield to restful sleep. and lunesta can help you get there,

like it has for so many people before. when taking lunesta, don't drive or operate machinery until you feel fully awake. walking, eating, driving, or engaging in other activities while asleep, without remembering it the next day, have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations or confusion. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. alcohol may increase these risks. allergic reactions, such as tongue or throat swelling, occur rarely and may be fatal. side effects may include unpleasant taste, headache, dizziness and morning drowsiness. ask your doctor if lunesta is right for you. then get lunesta for $0 at lunesta.com. there's a land of restful sleep. we can help you go there on the wings of lunesta. ♪

♪ [ male announcer ] everyone deserves the gift of a pain free holiday. ♪ this season, discover aleve. all day pain relief with just two pills.

all right. we're back with today's specialist who claims big business will ultimately be our country's economic saver, because we as a country will decide to give them rules and incentives to work with us to solve our problems, as opposed to, well, whatever else is going on now. joe bauer, harvard business professor, author of "capitalism at risk: rethinking the role of business," and this is not just a concept, professor, countries around the world have realized that if they form their tax trade and capital policies, they can influence what those large businesses do in a way that

realigns those business' interests with their own countries. it's the case. >> that's the goal. and some do it, yes. exactly. >> who's doing this? >> well, i mean, i think if you look in asia, you've got latin america -- brazil's quite interesting. i mean, brazil's got an energy policy, so long before they found oil off the coast, they were using biomass to -- then they passed laws that said the cars had to use that. >> and it's big businesses that are developing those resources through the policy lens of those governments. >> go ahead, jimmy. >> so, in your book you talk about specific corporations in the united states, right, that are doing right by -- they're doing what you're talking about. >> right. >> who are they? >> well, let me give you an example. it's interesting, because it's two -- china mobile is the largest mobile telephone provider in the world. so like their government said, you know, to the companies, won't you do something about rural china? 700 million people are poor.

please help. like a lot of businesses in the world, those companies said, you know, we're busy on the east coast. >> with the rich people. >> with the rich people. and then a new guy ran in 2004. he said, wait a minute. we're winning, we're going to saturate our markets. how are we going to grow if don't have those 700 million? and they built a distribution center down to the businesses. the chinese postal system only goes to the counties, so they went down. >> so all of a sudden you have this social liberation through an actual investment of an actual business. >> they brought those people into the market system. those smartphones give them data on the market, and their sons are on the east coast, they send remittances. >> so they can read about how screwed up our government is online. >> what does that sit on? it sits on an ibm platform. what is the indian phone system that's doing the same thing to help rural agricultural? it sits on a ibm platform. if we look at -- >> what are the dollars that

flow around in a situation like that? billions? >> oh, a lot, billions. >> hundreds of billions? >> yeah. >> go ahead, guys. >> so here's a question. we've heard a lot in the political discussion here in the united states about how we can incentivize companies to do, whether it's, you know, tax breaks or you name it, has that worked? what are we not doing here that we should be doing? >> a lot of our politics, frankly. you know, teenage boys play computer games -- >> it's like teenage boys. >> it's politics, and it's about -- it's really not serious. and it's really frightening, because our big multi-national companies know how to redeploy assets and go where the action is. where's high-speed rail? we're not doing it in the united states, so the ibm lab that's building high-speed rail is in china. >> but -- so are you suggesting, then, at the government advocates we need to be building high-speed rail and we're going to give this kind of a tax break for companies that would invest in that, it doesn't -- >> i'm old enough so i don't --

dwi dwight eisenhower had a national highway program, right? that's a republican, right? he even had a commission, i recall, goals for americans. can you imagine today's republicans having goals for americans? >> not really. >> like, imagine -- >> goals for wealthy americans. >> i do. >> no, no, imagine that we had an infrastructure program for america. imagine that we had like the ced in the second world war, 3,000 groups and communities, how regoing to employ people coming out of the soekd worsecond worl war? so we're writing this book saying to business, don't wait. >> just re-deploy the capital and invest in the renovation and updating of america. >> okay. southern indiana, cummins engine is out there leading a program to fix the schools, get the kids

so they can work in cummins factories, because they were going to move their factories. >> so they're now investing in the education forces so they can get what they need. >> but it's not just to do good, it's so they can build great engines. >> when you talk about companies being able to do things in india or china, they open up the doors. they say there's basically no regulation and if there is, they'll change it. if you want to do something in the united states, there's 18 different kinds of city, state, federal regulations you have to go through. we talk about business and tax incentives, but that's not what gets people to spend their capital. it's the ability to do it without too much regulation and get the job done. >> my own view is that it's the uncertainty as to what the regulation is, and we keep changing it. my wive's in trust in the states, we don't have a tax law. so anybody who's trying to plan their estate, they're rolling a dice. we've just got to get serious. >> and really, that's what it is. is if you look at the way

capital is managed in a private sector environment, at a fortune 500 company, and the way decisions are made at an oil company, at an industrial manufacturing company, at a steel company, they are made with thresholds that diminish the value of any one ego at the table or what somebody wants, and they are made with a threshold towards producing better steel. there's some larger goal. is the lack of seriousness that we see from the entire political apparatus a function of a lack of that prism, that larger set of goals, and absent that larger set of goals that is infrastructure, is efficiency, is health, is education, broadly, absent that, there's no reason to be serious. >> right. big piece of the problem. another piece of the problem, we've got capital markets that are so big and so volatile and so vulnerable. so when we went around the world talking to business leaders before the crisis, they said, we're going to have one and we're going to keep having them

until we get the system fixed. so that's a big deal. if you're trying to run -- >> now you're talking my language. it's the only deal. you got $700 trillion in swaps with no money in them, i'm sorry. >> and if i'm trying to run something for the longer term, and i know that there's a good chance i'll get kicked out if i, for some reason, have a down quarter, we've got a problem. so it's not just the legislature, also the financial market. >> yep. that's -- it's nice to see you, professor. >> good to be here. >> i'm going to read this book. >> me too. this was enjoyable. i feel like we've solved some things. >> happy holidays. >> yeah. i feel you've inspired me. between you and the professor, i'm certain we're going to fix this whole turkey. >> okay! >> we've got everything we need, we've just got to do it! it's a pleasure. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you, susan, karen, jimmy! next, is an amazing magic memory pill on the horizon? do stay with us. [ male announcer ] tom's discovering that living healthy can be fun.

see? he's taking his vitamins. new one a day vitacraves plus omega-3 dha is a complete multivitamin for adults. plus an excellent source of omega-3 dha in a great tasting gummy. one a day, gummies for grown-ups.

at bank of america, we're lending and investing in communities across the country, from helping to revitalize a neighborhood in brooklyn to financing industries that are creating jobs in boston or providing funding for the expansion of a local business serving a diverse seattle community and supporting training programs for tomorrow's workforce in los angeles. because the more we can do in local neighborhoods and communities, the more we can help make opportunity possible.

well, for any of us who ever misplaced the keys, fretted over whether the front door was actually locked or forgotten whether that special anniversary was on the 16th or 17th or maybe misplaced your candy cane pen, what if i were to tell you that you could pop a tiny pill that could not only help you remember all that stuff, but your high school locker combo as well. new research suggests an amazing memory pill may soon be reality. scientists have discovered that suppressing a certain molecule in the brain of mice improved their memory function and their ability to learn new tasks. and researchers think that they may soon be able to create a drug to work the same in humans. now, here's where it gets interesting. this magic sci-fi-sounding pill could not only be a big help for people battling alzheimer's, which it could, but could also give folks with normal brain function give people superhuman

memory powers. personally, i like this for its more serious applications. we finally may have a way to prevent nations of the world to repeating mistakes of the past. want to run the country? take the pill. ahead, the real role models in our educational systems, the students themselves, as they work harder than ever to make the grade and harder than ever to get a job and pay off student debt. how we can work to change a system that works against them and not for them. matt siegel joins us in just a moment. [ gasp ] [ mom ] my husband -- he thinks it's a 3-sheeter. i say 1-sheeter. bounty can clean the mess with less. [ female announcer ] in this lab demo, 1 sheet of bounty leaves this surface as clean as 2 sheets of the bargain brand. ♪ dance cooking? bring it. super durable. super absorbent. super clean. bounty the 1-sheet clean picker-upper. and try bounty napkins.

i took some steep risks in my teens. i'd never ride without one now. and since my doctor prescribed lipitor, i won't go without it for my high cholesterol and my risk of heart attack. why kid myself? diet and exercise weren't lowering my cholesterol enough. now i'm eating healthier, exercising more, taking lipitor. numbers don't lie. my cholesterol's stayed down. lipitor is fda approved to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke in patients who have heart disease or risk factors for heart disease. it's backed by over 19 years of research. [ female announcer ] lipitor is not for everyone, including people with liver problems and women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. you need simple blood tests to check for liver problems. tell your doctor if you are taking other medications, or if you have any muscle pain or weakness. this may be a sign of a rare but serious side effect. [ man ] still love that wind in my face! talk to your doctor. don't kid yourself about the risk of heart attack and stroke. if lipitor's been working for you, stay with it. lipitor may be available for as little as $4 a month with the lipitor co-pay card. terms and conditions apply. learn more at lipitorforyou.com. terms and conditions apply.

♪ sen♪ co-signed her credit card - "buy books, not beer!" ♪ ♪ut the second at she shut the door ♪ ♪ girl started blowing up their credit score ♪ ♪ she bought a pizza party for the whole dorm floor ♪ ♪ hundred pounds of makeup at the makeup store ♪ ♪ and a ticket down to spring break in mexico ♪ ♪ but her folks didn't know 'cause her folks didn't go ♪ ♪ to free-credit-score-dot-com hard times for daddy and mom. ♪ v.o.: offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com yes. but lately we've been using k-y® intense™. it stimulates arousal so the big moment is... (announcer) k-y® brand intense™ - intensifies female satisfaction.

but my nose is still runny. [ male announcer ] truth is, dayquil doesn't treat that. really? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms, plus it relieves your runny nose. [ deep breath] awesome. [ male announcer ] yes, it is. that's the cold truth!

all right. welcome back. time to break it down. as working americans, as we all know, are worried about a little bit of a tax hike action here at the end of the year, political theater, from a not-serious group of people, as our friend at harvard just pointed out, some students have new reason to be worried about paying for college, which is a very serious issue. as part of a $1 trillion spending bill, the president of the united states signed this week, excuse me, the pell grant program, which many see as the backbone of college financial aid to the most needy students has taken a hit. the new law cuts the maximum number of years students can get aid, a change that is estimated to affect at least 100,000, mostly low-income or part-time students who will be the ones most in need of that assistance. and yet, at the same time, controversial for-profit

colleges, they keep the profits, are getting a reprieve after a nearly $12 million lobbying effort, or fund-raising effort to buy off some politicians, is really what we should call it, that $12 million to buy off some politicians got them new rules that -- or got them to strip new rules of these schools for federal funding for failing to graduate students. to so basically, it used to be, if the student graduates and gets a good job, then -- we should like to see, the student graduates and gets a good job, we'll give you a positive tax treatment. giving you tax subsidies as a for-profit college for you to then put our people, our students in debt so that you can graduate them with no job, whether you're a for-profit college or a non-profit college is full-on fruit loops. like crazy town. joining us now, matt siegel, co-founder of our time, an organization standing up for the interests of young americans. no one has more idea how insane

this is than you are. on the one hand, our president, our government says we will continue to provide tax benefits to educational institutions, for-profit and not-for-profit, that do not produce paying jobs or functioning economic environments for their graduates, but do leave them with massive amounts of debt. why would they do that? >> well, it's bought. i mean, it's that simple. we have a for-profit college lobby that just spent, once, $12 million in your lead-in was actually $16 million. >> thank you for the correction. >> to essentially water down regulations that would have said, you need to graduate students with 65% of whom at least have jobs, who are not in staggering student loan debt, and who do not have tremendously high default rates in order to get taxpayer moneys. >> so if i want to open a for-profit college and i'm coming to the government and i say, i want you to help me, and you're saying, dylan, if you're going to get my help, you need

to meet this standard. >> exactly, which is a fair and decent standard. >> and i'm paying the government to say, forget that standard. >> meanwhile, the protection for student borrowers are nil. you can't discharge student loan debt in bankruptcy, unlike gambling debt, with unlike credit card debt -- >> housing debt. >> so essentially what we're doing, it's kind of like a subprime issue. some of these colleges, a few of the really bad actors went in and were paid by how many people they've recruited. so they tried to get more and more people in the door, to go into for-profit schools, except the schools couldn't meet performance bench marks, they couldn't deliver. so you had these students who had a lousy education, graduate with terrible student loan debt, default on their student loan debt, have bad credit the rest of their lives, and there's no protection for them. meanwhile, the for-profit college industry runs off scot-free. >> and they're taking my tax money and your tax money from your labor and your work to subsidize those schools! >> yeah, the real issue, and by

the way, everybody should go to ourtime.org, because we do a daily translation on this stuff. but if you look at our website, the real issue is the cost of education in the first place. so, meanwhile, in this lunacy, we're talking about cutting pell grants, which will make college more affordable for low-income students. we've basically said, you can only qualify for pell grants now in our budget cuts for 12 semesters, as opposed to 18. you're only eligible if you make $23,000 a year as a household income as opposed to $30,000. so we've made it tougher to get that kind of aid. and on top of that, you know, we haven't imposed other standards to make college more affordable. we have this race to the top where colleges and their presidents, who are, by the way, being tpaid millions of dollarsa year -- >> funded by borrowed money against the students -- >> exactly. so while tuition continues to go up -- >> meanwhile, the cost of learning continues to collapse by virtue of the internet and everywhere else. so simultaneously, the cost of actually learning things is the

cheapest it's ever been, but the price for an education is the highest it's ever been. >> you're right. and they're in a race to get the highest endowments, because the highest endowments equals the best score in the u.s. news and world reports, but they're taking that endowment and investoring it in football fields -- >> or the swaps market. harvard has put a lot of money in the swaps market. >> harvard has lost track of their money, they have so much. >> they must be friends with corzine. >> exactly, did he go there? >> i don't know, but they're both good at losing a few billion here or there. >> at the same time, they're not making that money eligible for grants and scholarships for students who couldn't otherwise afford an education. >> and i'll take this to the big crescendo, that i agree with you and you agree with me that the only way we can deal with the insanity of what we're talking about is by eliminating the ability of the for-profit colleges to purchase our government, to change the rules, to suck your tax money and my

tax money out to subsidize their scam, which is enindebting all these students. >> we need to regulate ourself against our worst vice, which is the proclivity for money as opposed to serving the public interest, and the only way to do that, as you likely said in the lead-in, you're going to have to spend a lot of money to beat an initiative to get money out of politics. let's raise a $100 billion people's fund to get money out. and that way people and lobbyists are out of the game and politicians have to be more accountable to young people and all people. >> and the irony, and we'll pitch this to nick penman and jimmy williams when they come through. i've said, i really think we need to raise $100 billion, because if money is speech, then if people want to speak, then we'll use their rules to change them. >> we'll starting a fund-raising effort on ourtime.org soon and we'll have microdonations to it. everyone should pitch in. >> you have my pledge immediately in that direction. and it won't be nearly the $1 billion that you're going to need, but i'll do everything that i can to help you elevate

that message, matt. in thank you, dylan. good to see you. >> you as well. have a good holiday. and thank you for helping me completely comprehend how screwed up everything is. it's therapeutic for me. >> my pleasure. coming up on "hardball," the person who may be able to benefit the most from the gop's nasty family feud in the war between cancer and heart disease, it is our presidential election. all of a sudden president obama looks pretty good. but first, from the home of the liberty bell at independence hall, david goodfriend with a daily rant on our founding fathers. [ male announcer ] what can you do with plain white rice?

when you pour chunky beef with country vegetables soup over it... you can do dinner. four minutes, around four bucks. campbell's chunky. it's amazing what soup can do. ♪♪ ♪ if you're like my patients, you want to hear you've done a good job caring for your mouth. that's why i recommend a rinse like crest pro-health multi-protection. it helps you get a better dental check-up. because not all rinses provide all these benefits.

so be ready for your next dental check-up. crest pro-health multi-protection rinse. [ male announcer ] try any crest pro-health rinse. complete satisfaction guaranteed, or we'll buy it back.

well, from the birthplace of

america, david goodfriend with a rant on what the founding fathers would think of the antics. our friend from harvard just visited and said these people are not serious. i'm interested in your channeling of the originators of this fine nation's document. >> well, to that end, dylan, i wanted to get out of washington, d.c., today. the latest tea party temper tantrum against payroll tax relief has me particularly steamed. and we all know who funds the tea party, anyway. the billionaire koch brothers and their fellow oligarchs. it's all a cynical sham. and i'm sick of these people, draping themselves in the flag and telling me that they represent the real america. so i drove up here to philadelphia, the city of brotherly love and birthplace of our republic, to ask for myself what would the founders say about today's politics? and would they support the growing movement to take money out of politics? you know, in particular, since the supreme court's recent citizens united decision concluded that the first amendment prohibits most restrictions on campaign

finances, i wonder if the founders would have agreed with that. it was here in philadelphia, independence hall, 1789, that our founders adopted the constitution, including the first amendment. congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. many historians credit benjamin franklin as a first amendment champion. franklin was, himself, a journalist and a printer. his brother, james, started one of the early colonial newspapers and was jail repeatedly before the revolution before his incendiary statements. if i could only talk to ben franklin, i'd say, mr. franklin, surely you supported the first amendment as a way to make sure that the people can speak freely, without interference, right? you didn't intend it to be used as an excuse for corporate cash to buy off politicians? ah, my good friend, franklin would say, you have hit the nail upon the head. we didn't revolt against the king only to be taken over by

multi-national corporations to buy ads and indirect campaign contributions, no! franklin would have been on our side, dylan. i'm convinced of it. the guy was a populist, a man of the people. and he no doubt wanted the first amendment to protect speech, even unpopular speech. not to establish moneyed interests unlimited campaign expenditures. can the supreme court make a mistake? of course it can. it has many times. and when it comes to campaign finance, it has made a huge mistake. starting with the 1976 buckley v. vallejo decision that said campaign spending is speech. right up to citizens united, recently, that allowed corporate campaigning. the court is plain wrong. and i think, just as sure as i'm sitting here in philadelphia, franklin and the other founders a spinning in their graves about it. fortunately, our founders gave us an out. the constitutional amendment. so let's do it! adopt the 28th amendment to

allow for real restrictions on campaign finance. it would make our democracy work a lot better and maybe at long last mr. franklin and his colleagues can get some rest. dylan? >> you have a sympathetic audience, david, but i'm certain that your interpretation is 100% correct, word for word, straight from ben franklin's mouth. i'm encouraged, even with the accent, i'm encouraged by the john yarmuth amendment, which i think is perhaps the most aggressive yet and the most pinpoint accurate in saying money is not speech, at going beyond the corporations are not people narrative. are you encouraged by the -- by at least the escalation of this debate the past few months? >> i totally am. and listen, dylan, if we get the process of constitutional amendment started, it may not have to go that far. after all, the supreme court has changed course when it sees political tea leaves moving. it happened during the new deal, it could happen again. the supreme court made some very anti-freedom decisions in its course and it changed cou