i'm andrea mitchell live in washington. in our daily fix today, an exclusive first look at our nbc news/"wall street journal" poll. when the supreme court rules on health care, thursday, the justices will weigh in to a debate on whi surprisingly many americans still have not made up their minds. in our poll, 34% say they would have mixed feelings if the law is found constitutional and upheld. 39% say their feelings would be mixed if the law is struck down. chris cillizza is an msnbc contributor and managing editor of postpolitics.com. chuck todd is host of the daily rundown. chuck, you have gone through the numbers in the new poll. what is this telling you as you look at these different questions of the way people are answering it, whether it is good, bad, indifferent? >> what we have -- there's a consistent -- there's an intensity of opposition that's always been ahead of the intensity of support. okay, the president has always struggled to at least get his supporters to have the same level of excitement about health

care as the excitement frankly the base of the republican party has in hating that same energy. but there is a larger, more fungib fungible part of the country that is clearly waiting, if you will, perhaps waiting for the supreme court to declare, whether they don't understand the law necessarily, haven't fully comprehended it, they don't necessarily know because it hasn't kicked in yet for them so they're not fully sure how to feel about it. so our pollsters really believe when you look at these numbers, 34% mixed feelings, 39% mixed feelings, even look on the idea of whether the mandate helps or hurts, 55% saying not makes much difference. what they're saying is the supreme court's decision will then move some of these voters. you will see there won't be mixed feelings anymore, more of those folks will move off the fence. they're sort of waiting for somebody else -- >> waiting for someone to tell them is this a good or bad thing. >> is it legal or not. correct. >> chris cillizza, what about the political fallout of all

this? as the court ends its term on thursday, we're all anticipating this ruling, whichever way it does go, people are open to arguments. >> you know, andrea, it's funny, i feel like you could basically, you say the poll shows mixed feelings in the american electorate about health care. you could basically show mixed feelings about almost everything. i feel like that's kind of the nature of where we are politically at the moment which is people don't really know what they want. the economy they feel is doing poorly but is it barack obama's fault, is it george bush's fault, is it big business' fault. there's this indecisiveness. i think people want someone to tell them what the right direction is and take them there. i think that's particularly true on health care. i totally agree with chuck, which is that those numbers i feel like 34, 39, my guess is you will see them harden around whatever the decision is. that is, the supreme court, it has fallen a little bit in terms of its estimation in the american public but it's still

quite high. when the supreme court, say the supreme court rules that this law, the affordable care act, is unconstitutional, i think you will see those numbers move, the mixed feelings about it being ruled unconstitutional, that number will drop would be my guess because people want neutral arbiters trying to tell them this is right, this is wrong. it's just so hard to do. we're living in kind of a gray area of time on all of these issues because there aren't any simple answers. >> one of the issues here is that the obama camp had not done the single payer so they didn't have the most compassionate supporters even accepting what the form of health care was. it seemed to me because they opted for a compromise on health care, the opposition was formed but not their supporters and they never yet got to the point of really making people passionate about what did emerge from health care. >> no. >> i want to ask you guys about

baseball. the president ventured into this last night. chris is already laughing because we were all laughing about what the president did and the campaigns now, jake carney is taking on the romney camp for having said the president scored an error by getting into kevin youkilis and going to the white sox. >> what's interesting here is there are some red sox fans who apparently are obama partisans as well as saying no, no, no, perhaps there was a lot more people saying youk in the crowd, when he comes up to bat, there is some truth there. at the same time, you know, the president -- this is boston. baseball, this is one of those things that comes ahead of politics and comes ahead of partisanship. >> chris cillizza, how far is fenway from symphony hall where he was speaking? >> he usually, the president is quite kind of good i think at mixing in sports and the regular guy persona but i will give you another example to chuck's point of why you don't mess with the boston red sox. remember martha cokeley, the

kurt schilling famous bloody sock, she had no idea who curt schilling really was and that became cultural currency she didn't get. this to me is not that but i would say sports, number one, politics number two for people like chuck and i but probably politics number 464 for most people. do not violate their sporting, who they want to root for. you're in dangerous territory. >> the one thing a lot of people do give the president credit for, he has stuck with his white sox. >> true. >> that's not the most popular thing necessarily. not the cool thing to be in chicago, being a cubs band wagon person is usually the cooler thing to do. >> reminds me of a certain senate race in new york. that's a whole other story. >> go, nationals. >> that's the safest bet. thanks, chris cillizza. thank you, chuck todd. more on the poll of course tonight at 6:30. mitt romney has criticized

the president's stance on immigration and said he is disappointed in the supreme court's ruling on the arizona law. but he's still avoiding specifics. just what he would do, how would he overhaul the immigration system. here's how he addressed the issue less than a half hour ago. >> the supreme court had to step in because states had to step in. states looking for a way to solve the problems he didn't address, tried to address it in their own ways. now the supreme court's looked at it. what we're left with is a bit of a muddle. what we know is the president failed to lead. he failed to do what he said he would do. >> joining me, mark mckinon, former advisor to president george w. bush. george w. bush took on the immigration issue and tried and did not succeed. as did other presidents and other senators. now we've got a case where both sides are accusing each other of failure of leadership. >> yeah, that's the difference

between george w. bush and our current nominee in the republican party. george w. bush embraced the issue of immigration and tried very proactively over a number of years to get something done. it was clear by his tone, clear by his rhetoric, this was something he recognized as part of the american dream. now it's being portrayed as part of the american nightmare. mitt romney said it was model legislation in arizona. what the courts have said -- >> they would point out to you when he said that in the debate, he clarified that he meant the e-verify portion. the campaign has been very specific about that. wasn't speaking about the arizona law per se. at least that's what they say. >> well, what is clear is that it is muddled and we need leadership on this issue and that the courts have now said, rightly so, i think, it's a federal responsibility. you can't blame the states. they're saying the federal government hasn't done their job. so president obama had an opportunity in '07 and became part of the reason that it didn't happen in '07, and more

recently, put forward a good idea i think on the deportation issue with children of immigrants. what we really need now is for mitt romney, from a republican perspective, i want to see him step up and talk about how it's part of a bigger -- get specific on a plan, how it's part of his broader vision for the country and also part of the macro economic plan which it ought to be. get people out of the gray economy. figure out what we're going to do, talk about how the hispanics in america represent the 11th largest country in terms of trade if we just talked about those citizens. >> we're going back to george w. bush, you had a feeling it was not just politics, not just that he came from texas. it was part of his dna. he really believed in the aspirational aspects of it. >> he did. >> not just an economic argument about immigration. >> he did. it was real. it was authentic. there was no question in my mind, i remember i was there, it was something he believed but we also realized from a political point of view we had to have that support in order to win the presidency. we had to have 40% in 2000, 44% in 2004 and we did.

>> but are hispanic americans really going to forget where mitt romney was during those debates, because i just pointed out his corction on the arizona debate, but in fact he did in a number of debates take positions that were to the right of rick perry and other candidates, and really joined that, you know, that -- >> in many ways he won the republican primary but having a harsh position, going after people like rick perry on his law in texas. >> is that why he's trying to be so ambiguous now? >> hopefully he'll go from ambiguous to clear. hopefully there's a transition period he's got time to do it but it has to be -- it can't be seen as purely political. that's why i think that he can and he should at a certain point or over time make it clear this is part of an economic framework. i understand his winning message will be about the economy and jobs. there's a way to make this message about the economy and about our overall economic power. >> he should talk to his friends in the business community and

the chamber of commerce. they're all making the case. >> that's right. agricultural workers are, universities are, the job creators are making the same case. we need these people here. >> thank you so much. great to see you. up next, inside the roberts court. plus, it's the story that has women talking. why can't we have it all is the headline. anna marie slaughter explains coming up. this was how my day . a little bird told me about a band... ♪ an old man shared some fish stories... ♪ oooh, my turn. ♪ she was in paris, but we talked for hours... everyone else buzzed about the band. there's a wireless mind inside all of us. so, where to next? ♪

there it is ! there it is ! where ? where ? it's getting away !

where is it ? it's gone. we'll find it. any day can be an adventure. that's why we got a subaru. love wherever the road takes you. wow, there it is.

we all await the supreme court's decision thursday on health care. we can already draw some conclusions about the rulings of the roberts court this term. nina totenburg is the veteran legal correspondent for national public radio and joins us today. it is great to have you here. >> great to be here. >> the roberts court. now, of course, thursday is the big day. can we infer from the way the

decisions have been assigned so far that the chief is assigning this one to himself? is that a fairly safe assumption? >> i think that's a reasonable assumption. >> you never know. >> with these folks you never know. >> so far, what we've seen in the court is first of all, justice roberts, what is his imprint on the court? >> you know, i think that's a story yet to be told. he has always said that his -- the person he would seek to emulate was the great chief justice hughes, who was the chief justice during the new deal era, was a republican, moderate republican who brought the court out of being so controversial. but so far, the chief justice has not been able to do that. now, yesterday's decision in the immigration case was what he talks about aspiring to, sort of a compromise, not going too far in either direction. i'm not sure how you do that in health care, but we'll see. >> what they did was, even

though they permitted the most controversial aspect of the immigration law to continue, they sort of warned the state we'll be watching how this works in practice, to see whether you are denying people's rights. >> the court struck down most of the arizona law. it left the most controversial part intact but said to the arizona law enforcement folks if you do much beyond consulting, checking on people's status, if you do much beyond that, you could be in real trouble. >> now, when we look at health care, there are obviously any number of ways this can break down, you can have a mixed decision, you can have all sorts of ramifications, but how much does the court do you think look at the political impact of a decision like this? >> you know, if you ask individual justices, they say they don't care, and to some extent, that's true, but each of these members of the court is going to make a decision based on what their view of the law is, what their view of the

national experience is, and they don't individually think they're making a political decision. but if it ends up 5-4 with five republicans -- republican appointees on one side and four democratic appointees on the other, i think that is what has led the court to lose some of its credibility with the public. it's not in desperate straits. it's much more popular than the other branches of government and certainly more popular than our profession is. >> that goes without saying. >> but it no longer is viewed with the same strong support that it was even i would say 15 years ago. >> don't you think that's really happened since bush v gore, where there was so much politics involved in the reaction to the most important decision, let's say, of generations. >> i think that's partially true but the court recovered a lot of its credibility really after 9/11. bush v gore seemed like a footnote. then it sort of evaporated again in the times we live in. >> one of the things that'seen

noted is since sandra day o'connor left the court, no one has had elected office in their resume. unlike justice warren, chief justice warren back then and a lot of the others, he was governor of california, as you well know. there has not been anyone on this court with hands-on political experience and you wonder when they do something like citizens united and the montana case, that they overturned a century old law in montana on campaign financing, whether they really understand the ramifications of what happens when they rule one way for unions and another way for corporations. >> well, a lot of the criticism of that decision is that it has no recognition of the corruption of money, and you know, justice suter had one elective office although most of his life was as a judge. he had run but he was very much opposed to the decision, citizens united. and justice o'connor wrote the predecessor opinion that uphold

the mccain-feingold law that was struck down. it may be the court's legacy. if you were looking at the court at the moment in the times we live in and looking at the sort of political system awash in money, unaccountable money because congress has passed no disclosure law, you would have to say that that at the moment is the legacy of the court. whether that continues to be so, i'm not clairvoyant. >> could change two days from now. >> could. >> nina, great to see you. busy week for you. thanks so much. we will be listening to you. up next, the politico briefing. the showdown escalates between darrell issa and eric holder. michael phelps is officially going for the gold again despite a loss to his rival on monday night in the 400 meter individual medley at the u.s. olympics trials. phelps qualified for the team, becoming the first male american swimmer to qualify for four olympic teams.

the first time he was beaten in this event. on the women's side, elizabeth beisel took first place in the women's 400 individual medley. dana volmer took first in the individual fly. they will all head to london to compete in the summer games. watch the 2012 london olympic games right here on the networks of nbc universal. it's very important to understand how math and science kind of makes the world work. in high school, i had a physics teacher by the name of mr. davies. he made physics more than theoretical, he made it real for me. we built a guitar, we did things with electronics and mother boards. that's where the interest in engineering came from. so now, as an engineer, i have a career that speaks to that passion. thank you, mr. davies. that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything.

only about 80% of your part b medical eenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and save you up to thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about. and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. there's a range of plans to choose from, too. and they all travel with you. anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp,

an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay -- expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you up to thousands in out-of-pocket costs... you'll be able choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and you never need referrals. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request yourree decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions, and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you.

in today's politico briefing, the house has scheduled its contempt vote against eric holder for thursday, when it will clearly be overshadowed by the supreme court's health care ruling. but oversight chairman darrell issa is not backing away from his showdown with the attorney general. joining me now is politico's congressional reporter, jake sherman. seems to me that the leadership could certainly schedule this at a time when it would get a lot more attention, perhaps they don't want it to get that much attention? >> some aides have signaled that this is a welcome distraction

for them, the supreme court hearing. they don't want a lot of attention on this, a lot of people say. they do think they're in the right. they think eric holder has withheld a lot of documents and president barack obama's executive privilege which was asserted last week just added fuel to the fire. darrell issa wrote a letter to obama saying that his executive privilege was bunk, essentially, that he had no right to exert executive privilege over these documents and even added that it signals that obama might be involved in the fast and furious scandal which he has vehemently de denied. it's another crazy wrinkle in the week on capitol hill. >> what about, i know you guys are all so busy chasing all of this, the transportation bill, the highway bill, is that coming together? >> actually, aides have started to signal this morning and harry reid on the senate floor said this morning there's a better than 50/50 chance they get this done which is a huge sea change,

because a lot of people were saying the music was about to stop playing on this, they were close to collapse, these talks, they were not going well. now they're talking about a strategy that would marry the student loan bill and the highway bill, put them together, and pass them before the week is up. that would avert a huge legislative train wreck at the end of the week and would pass two must-pass things before congress leaves for its july 4th recess. >> there are about 3,000 jobs that could be at stake in that highway bill plus the student loan, the impact on that. seems to me that would be a very popular compromise before they go home for a july 4th break. thank you. >> yep. >> thanks very much. coming up, the debate over work life and family life. anne marie slaughter explains why she's questioning whether women can have it all. plus, how hispanic voters are reacting to the supreme court's split decision on immigration.

the supreme court's mixed ruling on arizona's immigration

law makes it certain that this issue is going to be a bigger factor in the election campaign. how are some people in the important voting bloc, the hispanic community, reacting to the ruling? joining me is president of the national council of laraza. great to be with you. we've had 24 hours to absorb all of this. what is your read? >> it's been a lot. i think it's fair to say that we had a victory, not a pure victory. it was a lot of good news in that decision. it was clear this a lot of people thought the whole bill would be -- the whole statute would be upheld. in fact, the major provisions, three of the four provisions were struck down and on the fourth one which is one we focus on, because it is important, particularly to everyone but for latinos in particular, the section 2b, one that's still problematic but the supreme court seemed to open the door wide open for follow-up legal challenges. so i feel that we're well positioned to move forward and challenge that, but for us, it

was troubling that they didn't really take that provision also and move forward on it in the same way they did with the others. overall it was a good decision. >> when you look at the show me your papers provision, the one you're referring to, they basically said it's okay, they were very specific, it's okay if you hold someone whom you've stopped and check their status, but not if you hold them longer than you otherwise would have. so they played out the parameters. so arizona is on notice and i assume that you and other active groups are going to be watching. >> absolutely. we're going to be monitoring very carefully. there will be follow-up legal challenges. already on the books there are many challenges to that particular aspect of the law. even though it wasn't fully implemented when the supreme court received it, and that was one of the reasons why they didn't look at it. but we felt it was important that they probably could have, they had the prerogative to look at it. so the civil rights issues were of great concern to us.

the racial profiling aspect of great concern. but we're confident that we will prevail on the follow-up and the supreme court was very prescriptive in terms of what arizona can and can't do. that's a good sign to other states. there's no green light here for other states to take on this mantle. if anything, they put up a clear hard red stop sign for any other states who would move forward on this. i think for us, that's a victory. >> more broadly, what do you think about the conflicting arguments from the president and governor romney about whose failure is the failure of leadership here, the romney camp saying this shows that president obama has not delivered on the promise of comprehensive reform. the president is saying that governor romney has been ambiguous at best and has shown no leadership. >> well, it's pretty clear that having seen candidate romney last week in orlando, that his

tone has softened as it relates to immigration, but frankly, he's tip-toeing on an issue, when he should be leaning forward and providing much more vision and specifics if he wants to win latino voters over. what we saw in the primary was that he dug himself in a big hole and he has a long way to go before winning the hearts and minds of latino voters. it's been disappointing and shocking that he hasn't pursued a strategy of much more engagement with the latino electorate and on this issue of immigration. president obama, on the other hand, with the announcement he made related to the dream act, the executive authority that he used, i think played out quite farably for many latino voters and the latino community and people see that as a good step in the right direction. of course, it's still a promise unfulfilled but it's a good downpayment that we see him still working hard to try to

address this issue. so there is a contrast right now and i think that romney has some time to try to move in this direction and to try to appeal to latino voters, but he doesn't seem to be capitalizing on it right now. and i think that that could end up, you know, being a bad decision. there's a lot of missed opportunities right now and i think he'll see the result of that on election day if he doesn't take some effort right now to step into this issue and really lean forward with a very aggressive strategy to court the latino vote and to be more specific on his vision for immigration. >> thank you very much, janet. good to see you. topping the headlines right now on "andrea mitchell reports" tropical storm debby is threatening to drop more than two feet of rain on parts of florida. inching along just three miles an hour. the storm has flooded major roads in and around tampa bay and st petersburg, closing parts of interstate 10. 31 republican senators have

today signed a letter to attorney general eric holder insisting that he appoint a special counsel to iestigate intelligence leaks rather than having u.s. attorneys do it. today, arizona republican senator john mccain acknowledged that new efforts to crack down on violators but he said a lot more has to be done. >> the professionals are outraged and i know that the director of national intelligence believes that within his realm of authority, this is the best and most that he can do is increasing the polygraphs and checks on information that may have been leaked. it still means we have to have an independent counsel to look at how all this happened. and turkey is today warning syria that from now on, any military units near the border will be seen as a direct threat and a military target. the turkish prime minister says he changed his country's rules of engagement after syria shot down that turkish jet last friday. the passionate debate over

the "atlantic's" cover story coming up next. hi, i'm phil mickelson. i've been fortunate to win on golf's biggest stages. but when joint pain and stiffness from psoriatic arthritis hit, even the smallest things became difficult. i finally understood what serious joint pain is like. i talked to my rheumatologist and he prescribed enbrel. enbrel can help relieve pain, stiffness, and stop joint damage. because enbrel, etanercept, suppresses your immune system, it may lower your ability to fight infections.

serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, and nervous system and blood disorders have occurred. before starting enbrel, your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if, while on enbrel, you experience persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. [ phil ] get back to the things that matter most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biolog medicine prescribed by rheumatologists.

coming up in just 15 minutes on "news nation" we've got new comments from governor mitt romney on the supreme court's immigration ruling. romney has been criticized in the last 24 hours for pivoting the blame to president obama, but not following up with what he would do to reform the immigration system and whether or not he even supports the decision rendered by the supreme court yesterday. plus, after saying congress does not have proof of a white house cover-up in fast and furious, congressman darrell issa today sends a letter to the president that is raising the stakes in the standoff between congress and attorney general eric holder. democratic congresswoman jackie speier will join the "news nation" live. whatever happened to that reset button, the body language

said it all when president obama and president vladimir putin met last week for the first time since putin resumed the presidency. does that signal trouble ahead for a host of problems that we need our relationship with russia on, starting with syria. the president tried to put the tension in the best light. >> we agreed that there's still time and space to resolve diplomatically the issue of iran's development of nuclear weapons as well as its interest in developing peaceful nuclear power. and finally, as mr. president mentioned, we discussed syria, where we agreed that we need to see a cessation of the violence, that a political process has to be created to prevent civil war

and the kind of horrific deaths that we've seen over the last several weeks. >> joining me now, the former prime minister of russia. he served with president vladimir putin for four years but since his dismissal in 2004, he has become one of putin's sharpest critics. he is currently the leader of the new people's demratic union, a new opposition party. welcome. very nice to meet you. >> good afternoon. >> let's talk about vladimir putin because a lot of us are mystified about vladimir putin. he has been a striking figure obviously in russian politics but he seems to be very, very tough customer for president obama. what is your read on vladimir putin? >> let's talk about politics and just what positions he has taken. that's important. i think in this period of time en russia's government and the administration have relations have reset and for instance, the

problem of syria affair, talking about international affairs but simultaneously, we have internal problems because putin from my perspective, my party supporters, is not legitimate president. >> why is he not a legitimate president? >> bought both elections, were not legitimate, were not free because only selective candidates could participate, selected by putin. not fair because even those who were allowed to participate had no equal access to media and other instruments of interacting with people and also the elections were not credible because massive falsification took place. that's why more than 50% of the population don't see president as legitimate power. >> despite the protests and the opposition that we've seen, he seems to have his hands on the reins of power. one of the things that got you in trouble as prime minister is you challenged the security apparatus. >> the problem is that in fact, putin just destroyed within short period of time, two years

after my departure, within six years, all features of democratic state have been abolished. there is no separation of power. there is no independent judiciary. there is no free media. only just couple of radio stations could be considered as free. that's why in such circumstances control, just power structures, that's why putin believes everything is under his control. but massive protests during the last six months showed that's not. people are waking up. >> people may be waking up, but i'm interested in the white house's reaction because they seem to have some wishful thinking, perhaps, that vladimir putin will eventually abandon assad and without putin, assad would not have rearming and have all of the support and maybe then would be vulnerable to some sort of diplomatic or political solution. do you see any scenario where vladimir putin would give up on

assad? >> i think so. i think so. first of all, putin trying to get some kind of legitimacy abroad. that's why he would like president obama and other western leaders just to treat him as a legitimate president. >> and to come to him for the solution to this very difficult problem. >> exactly. i'm very much disappointed that government of my country behaved so irresponsibly. that's why i think just in the near future, there could be a solution and of course, as on many other international issues, russia should play a constructive, crucial role together with the united states, being responsible for global security. same to iran this year. i wish my government of my country would behave more in a responsible manner. >> i know we don't have any more time but let me ask you quickly, do you ever worry about going back home? >> in fact, not but in my country, unfortunately today,

just human rights just violated every day by people. that's why i fully support this piece of legislation would be supported, would be voted today in the senate foreign affairs committ committee, there will be individual actions and sanctions against individual bureaucrats who are responsible for torture and killing people in jail. that's why today in russia, they should be worried about just freedom. >> pleasure to meet you. the former prime minister of russia. thanks for being with us today. here at home, let's discuss why women still can't have it all. this provocative argument is now being raised a half century after "the feminine mystique." a whole new generation of women are debating what had been thout of as settled wisdom. this cover story in the "atlantic" magazine written by a former top official in hillary clinton's state department, princeton professor, anne marie

slaughter, challenges conventional wisdom about women and work. she joins me now from new york. great to see you again. you have set off a storm in only six days, 900,000 people have gone online to read your article and on facebook, it's one of the most liked articles ever. what have you started and why did you write the article? >> it's great to be on with you. i have to say i thought that this article would strike a chord because i knew many, many younger women were not happy with the answer you can have it all but i had no idea that the reaction would be just this powerful. but i think what i've started is exactly what i wanted to do which was to start another round of feminist conversation, conversation about how in fact we can deliver on the promise of equality for men and women for allowing women to have the same choices as men, which i think right now is not true for the

vast majority of working mothers. i don't have all the answers but i definitely wanted to launch a conversation and i think we have. >> you certainly launched a conversation. one of the things that set you off and one of the contrasts that has been shown is sheryl sandberg, who just now joined the facebook board as the top lieutenant to mark zuckerberg, this was a bit of her commencement speech at barnard college last year. >> studies show very clearly in our country in the college educated part of the population, men are more ambitious than women. they're more ambitious the day they graduate from college. they remain more ambitious every step along the career path. we will never close the achievement gap until we close the ambition g. >> so is it women's fault? do we have to be more ambitious and work harder? >> look, first of all, congratulations to sheryl sandberg on being the first woman at facebook on the board. i hope there are many more.

but i don't buy that. i'm not saying there's not women who say right now no, i don't want to be ceo but many of those women are looking at being ceo and thinking to themselves to be ceo means i either can't have a family or i can't spend any time with my family and that's not a choice i'm willing to make. so before we talk about an ambition gap, let's talk about an accommodation gap. let's talk about a workplace that is not accommodating the realities of working mothers' lives. if we accommodate those realities, give them the flexibility that they need, give them the technology that means they have to travel less, let them work from home more and this will apply to working fathers as well, then let's ask them what their ambitions are. i think you're going to find there are many women out there who have that ambition but don't think they can realize it consistent wh having a family. >> some critics would say that when you take a top job in the

top foreign policy councils of the state department or the white house or you join a campaign, that you take this on, whether you have children or problems at home or parents, you know, or other family issues, that anyone, man or woman, is taking on something that is 24/7. i just want to get your response to that. >> i mean, look, absolutely, there are 24/7 jobs that men or women if they take them, they know that they are going to have to meet them, you know. somebody wrote me if you're a surgeon you can't say hang on, hold that appendix while i go pick up my kid from school. i get that. but let's look at it this way. i was commuting from washington -- from princeton to washington. i was home on weekends with my kids. i was in washington for two weeks -- during the week. i know a number of men who are in that situation. they miss their family, too, but their wives were back there, they were taking care of their kids, they felt those pressures quite differently than i did.

and i am saying that women absolutely, you know, if they choose to be home more with their kids, they have to understand there are some jobs that they're not going to be able to hold, but then, and that's what's critical, then we have to redefine our cultural expectations so that when they're ready to come back and hold those high pressure jobs, those jobs are still possible for them to achieve. >> let's just establish and stipulate that we are talking about an elite subset of women who have very good educations, very good jobs, very good opportunities. we're not talking about single parents, not talking about the vast majority of american men and women struggling to take care of family, jobs, two and three jobs at a time. we are talking about a certain subset. that said, what do you see happening and what are you hearing from young women, and you hear from a lot of young women on campus. what are younger women telling

you, because this is generational, ageneratio generational. >> young women with almost universally are writing the insane thank you for the challenge. women are waiting until their late 30s to have a kid. you see that you made it to the top, but you never saw your kids. those were choices that my generation and your generation had no choice about. but these younger women are saying we have been raised to believe we're equal and we can make equal choices and we don't think just saying you can do it

all all at once is enough. so i'm hearing from a lot of younger women who want everything that their partners want, but don't think our society is structured to make it possible. >> let me just also point out that karen hughes went back to texas for her daughter mary madeleine, we have had different women in different administrations, that women do make these choices and you're not the first, you're the first to write about it this provocatively, though. and one thing you've pointed out in your article that i haven't really observed earlier, that women are having children at a different time and taking that break, so now if they have children later, they're coming back into the workforce where it's almost impossible to establish a high-level career. >> i think that's one of the biggest changes from the first

time airing "a generation of women" when they didn't really have many choices, they had kids in their 20s, they didn't have professions open to them. then by their mid 40s, they could go completely committed to their professions and make it to the top. whereas me, if you had kids in your late 30s, then in my mid 50s, i have got teenagers that really need me. and when it comes down to that choice, i'm going to choose my kids, i. when my kids are in college, i will definitely be older and we're saying, look, we need to redefining the length and the arc of careers to allow women to still have professional choices when they want to take them. women and working fathers who also choose to make different choices along the way.

>> this is only the beginning of the conversation, thanks for starting it. they will. it's a steakover! the steak is excellent. very tender... melts in your mouth... so delicious... tonight you're eating walmart steak. what? it's good steak. two thumbs up. look, i ate all of mine. it matches any good steak house if not better. walmart choice premium steak in the black package... it's 100% money back guaranteed. try it for your fourth of july barbeque. did you know honey nut cheerios is america's favorite cereal? oh, you're good! hey, did you know that honey nut cheerios is... oh you too! ooh, hey america's favorite cereal is... honey nut cheerios ok then off to iceland!

honey nut cheerios what happens when classroom teachers get the training... ...and support they need? schools flourish and students blossom. that's why programs like... ...the mickelson exxonmobil teachers academy... ...and astronaut sally ride's science academy are helping our educators improve student success in math and science. let's shoot for the stars. let's invest in our teachers and inspire our students. let's solve this.

and that does it for this edition of andrea mitchell reports. news nation is tamron hall is next. meone took mid-sized sedans and broke the mold? if we took our best-selling altima back to its essence, kept its dna, then reimagined nearly everything in it? ♪ gave it greater horsepower... ♪ ...and a lighter and stronger body... ♪ ...advanced headlight technologies for greater visibility... ♪ ...and zero gravity seats that reduce fatigue? ♪ yeah, that would be cool. introducing the completely reimagined nissan altima... ♪ ...with best in class 38 mpg highway and better acceleration than camry and accord.

it's our most innovative altima ever. nissan. innovation that excites. ♪ nissan. innovation that excites. an intense burning sensation i woke up with this horrible rash on my right side. like somebody had set it on fire. and the doctor said, cindie, you have shingles. he said, you had chickenpox when you were a little girl... i said, yes, i did. i don't think anybody ever thinks they're going to get shingles. but it happened to me. for more of the inside story, visit shinglesinfo.com

are so amazingly good, you'll get lost in an all-beef hot dog world. what was i supposed to wish for? why am i wearing a bow-tie? where did i leave my bicycle? after all, when you're enjoying the beefiest, juciest bite of pure kosher beef, nothing else matters.

goodness gracious, that's kosher. with no fillers, by-products, artificial flavors or colors. hebrew national. the better-than-a-hot dog- hot dog. hi, everyone. i'm tamron hall, the news nation is following, big developing news in this hour, an intense vote against attorney general eric holder just a short time ago. jay carney insisted yet again, this is all about politics as congressman darrell issa suggested to president obama. abusing his power when he went to the white house. he's saying that obama should use his executive privilege in turning over more documents in the fast and furious program. either you or your most senior

advisors were involved in operating fast and furious and the fallout from it. or you're asserting a presidential power solely for the purpose of further obstructing a congressional reputation. this is a much different conversation than the congressman had on sunday. >> do you have any evidence that white house officials were involved in these decisions, that he knowingly left congress and that he was involved in a cover-up. >> and we're seeking documents that we know to exist until december, that in fact people knew about brian terry's murder and who know and why people were lying about it. >> congresswoman, thank you so much for joining us again, it's pretty interesting, this letter that was sent by congressman issa does not contain the house gop