i'm sam sachs in for tom hartman in washington d.c. here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture. progressives release their budget per merican this week and unlike paul ryan's budget for the wealthy it's a budget for all ryan said we have a choice to make about our future so what choice should americans be making also the you fight over obamacare heated up in a two of oral arguments before the supreme court or the five right wing justices on the hard court ready to put politics ahead of the health and well being of millions

of americans and america is the only democracy in the western world that still uses the death penalty. when will the u.s. government stop saying shinning the deaths of its own citizens. need to know this based on the republican budget released last week we know where congressman paul ryan and his republican party want to drag the nation their view of america's future is one in which more than fifty million americans will lose their health insurance disabled and senior citizens can't receive the care they need and impoverished families can receive the food assistance they need all the while the top one percent of americans receive a three trillion dollars tax cut that they don't need. in the coming days paul

ryan's budget for the one percent will come to a vote before the full house of representatives and it will likely pass but well we won't get a vote in the people's house and will be ignored entirely by speaker of the house john boehner and majority leader eric cantor is the budget for the ninety nine percent the budget for all introduce this week by the house progressive caucus not only does the progressive budget achieve a six point eight trillion dollars in deficit reduction as this chart shows which is more than paul ryan's republican budget it does so without hurting middle class americans here's some of the numbers deficit reduction is achieved by making the super rich pay their fair share in taxes again letting the bush tax cuts expire for the top two percent at the years end and then creates a new tax bracket for millionaires and billionaires to make them pay rates closer to fifty percent still well below what they paid during the republican

administrations of eisenhower nixon ford and even the beginning of the reagan administration the budget ensures that capital gains are once again taxes ordinary income so people like mitt romney will pay the same tax rate as middle class americans it cuts down high frequency robot trading on wall street by knocking out financial speculation tax and it closes corporate tax loopholes and ends corporate welfare in the form of taxpayer subsidies for transnational oil corporations like exxon mobil that earned forty one billion dollars in profits last year yet paid only thirteen percent in taxes a number that would make even mitt romney jealous. and it cuts the bloated defense budget but the progressive budget isn't just about closing the budget deficit it's about investing in the nation's future it includes a two point nine trillion dollar investment in our infrastructure to put millions of americans back to work rebuilding our roads modernizing our schools and greening

our economy and also keep social security solvent for the future by getting rid of that capital as wealthier americans pay a lower social security tax than working americans and it creates a public option so that uninsured americans can finally get health insurance without dealing with for profit corporations finally a progressive budget takes on corporate corruption corruption of our government by adopting a system of public financing of elections restoring one person one vote democracy when paul ryan was selling his budget last week he told the american people they have a choice of what kind of future they want now that we know what the progressive alternative is which do you choose richard usko joins me from our los angeles studios now he's a senior fellow at the campaign for america's future richard welcome good to be here great to have you know so on one side we have the paul ryan plan ends medicare as we know it it pulls the social safety net out on the working people and makes

absolutely no substantial investments in our future and then on the other side we have the progressive plan that preserves and strengthens medicare and social caribbean mates and citable investments in modernizing our infrastructure economy so isn't this a no brainer. it should be a no brainer i mean the only surprising thing if you look at it from a rational person fact that the only two surprising things about this are that they call the progressive budget a progressive budget because most of its provisions are supported by a majority of republican voters if you look at the polling it's really a very modest proposal when you look at the politics of the country at large as opposed to the politics of the beltway and the second thing is that it's also modest in terms of you know rebuilding infrastructure you know i could make an argument for two to three trillion dollars in infrastructure spending it doesn't go there it is a very very reasonable down the middle in the best sense of the word proposal as

opposed to this radical insane proposal being put forward by paul ryan so the amazement is that our dialogue so distorted that it's looked at in any other way you know well i mean pretty good i think there was a poll done a few months ago that says progressive is the most positively identified political term in america right now and you're right if you take these issues one by one they have overwhelming support among the american people but let's talk about the insane budget you just mentioned ryan's budget it's a top down approach and supply side economics once again thirty years of it it's we're going back through it again whereas the progressive budget is a bottom up approach help the middle class invest in the middle class see what happens which one jives more with economic reality as far as how we know economies work which one fits the bill here. well that's a no brainer i mean a whole trickle down theory is a fantasy it's always been a fantasy there's no real life example of it working anywhere at any point in

history whereas the kind of budget that this so-called progressive budget represents the c.p.c. budget we know works because we we've had that kind of budget in this country under dwight d. eisenhower who would be considered an accepted clee radical is a left this nowadays we had a budget where the top part marginal tax rate for the wealthiest people was not forty nine percent and as the c.p.c. budget has it was ninety one percent and we were building the federal highway system and we were preparing for the space race and gearing up for our g f k's you know a race to the moon so we know what works in this country and that's what and c.t.c. budget represents and the other is just a flimsy excuse for transferring even more wealth to the war to the very wealthiest among us it's as simple as that right now i don't think any one of the time is calling eisenhower a socialist when tax rates are ninety one percent and he was building all these

building all these things up on the issue of social security. the progressive budget gets rid of the cap over the next five years which is that a hundred six thousand eight hundred dollars anyone all the income tax that we did normal tax rates everything else is exempt from the tax. that would keep the program sold them indefinitely why is that not a viable mainstream option why is why are we instead talking about privatizing it or raising raising the retirement age i mean isn't the tax raising the caregiver the the easiest option we have just a bit of a. of course it's the easiest option it's the only one that makes sense actuarially it makes up the only reason social security has any long term shortfall at all is because the wealthy are making so much more of our national income than anyone predicted back in the eighty's so of course it's the only thing that makes sense and the only reason why that's not the solution of choice is because

a lot of people are spreading money around washington d.c. like pete peterson the billionaire to make sure it doesn't become the logical solution of choice said richard usko from los angeles thanks a lot for coming out. about my party when paul ryan unveiled this contract on america tom also weighed in saying that americans have a choice and he gave this rant about what the right choice is moving forward. congressman paul ryan said about his budget it's up to the people to demand a choice between two futures the question is which future would you choose that is the question indeed will we choose a future in which the middle class once again can thrive in america like you did for fifty years after the new deal until ronald reagan blew everything up or we choose paul ryan's plan path to an ion aranda dystopia which only the super wealthy can go to good schools and see doctors and everyone else is left with it trickles down from the tables of the rich and we used to have this thing called the american

dream if you worked hard kept your nose clean you could raise your family buy a house new car take an annual vacation have health coverage safely retire with a comfortable nest it that american dream was made possible by big government programs government protect their workers' right to unionize so those jobs paid well and had decent benefits government trade regulations import tariffs good manufacturing jobs here in the u.s. making the middle class possible government provided free public school education to everybody in america and until reagan put bill bennett who wanted to end the department of education in as secretary of education americans with a simple public school education could get into the world best colleges government was the employer of last resort in the one nine hundred thirty s. and forty's and got us out of the great depression government sent an entire generation of young men through college for free the g.i. bill of the one nine hundred fifty s. provided either free or nearly free college education states from california to new

york before ronald reagan ended it in california's governor and ended it across the nation as president or at least began the process you know we have a trillion dollars in student debt right now when reagan came into office student debt was pretty much unknown of the government provides the legal and financial framework for companies to function with limitations a liability through corporations you start a corporation you get all these benefits limitations a liability special tax breaks for corporations. you can talk to your wants you can deduct your. business travel all these kinds of ways but and government also provides a stable monetary system and a court system so that you can so that a corporation a business going to judy and kate contracts those government is necessary for business to work government provides business with an educated workforce with good roads with rails with the airports for transportation safe streets protected by police and firefighters in these programs that you know are big government

hands just a second here big government government is twenty one percent of the u.s. g.d.p. it's fifty four percent of the canadian g.d.p. it's over half of the g.d.p. of every other country developed country in the world through these programs and it's not begun we say it's arguably has the smallest government the developed world but it's through these government programs that the american dream was possible and as these government programs are slashed by people like paul ryan's republicans the merican dream is fading and nothing's if you want the american dream back go to cut to go to college or the debt and have a good job a reliable health care live knowing that inaction or sickness wipe you out and work to keep these radical reactionary republicans out of government. coming up after the break today was the second day of arguments before the supreme court over the constitutionality of obamacare and things aren't looking too good so the right wing radicals this report willing to put politics ahead of the best interest of the nation and strip americans of what should be a fundamental right. we

just put a picture of me when i was like nine years old like to tell the truth live. live. live i'm a contestant i'm going to get a sense that i love rap and hip hop music and. he was kind of the just today. i'm very proud of the all that i'll just see it's played. live live. live . you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so horribly sleep you think you understand it and then even

something else you hear see some other part of it and realize everything you thought you knew you don't know i'm sorry welcome to the big picture. for.

a news group news health insurance access for tens of millions of americans may be interrupted today in the second day of oral arguments before the supreme court the constitutionality of president obama's health reform law was put into doubt specifically we're talking about the constitutionality of the individual mandate the primary component of obamacare the requires all americans to purchase health insurance. the point of the individual mandate is simple in order to open up the health insurance market to millions of americans who might be sick they're not able to get health insurance because they have preexisting conditions or they simply just can't afford it and you also need to bring healthy americans in the fold to control the costs so not only will private health insurance companies be getting a bunch of sick new customers but also get

a bunch of helping new customers to balance everything out this mandate was originally a conservative idea it was promoted by the right wing think take the heritage foundation in the early ninety's it was supported by a new penkridge when president clinton was pushing for health reform back in one thousand nine hundred four and it was the cornerstone of mitt romney's health reform plan in massachusetts take a listen. i am for people individuals exactly like automobile insurance individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance and my plan says no they can't do that no more free riders people have to take personal responsibility i consider it a conservative plan it's something i think but once president obama proposed it conservatives declare the mandate unconstitutional and it appears as though the five conservative justices on the supreme court might agree that oral arguments today justice anthony kennedy who many regard as the pivotal swing vote on the court seem to be skeptical of the obama administration's arguments in the sense of

the individual mandate to be told solicitor general donald verrilli the man arguing the case on behalf of the obama administration that the government has quote a heavy burden of justification in this case so we've seen what skeptics such as myself thought would happen and that is that the five right wing justices on the high court would put politics ahead of the best interest of the nation and jeopardize health insurance access for tens of millions of americans. joining me now to discuss this is richard pallor democratic strategist and john mccain well in a defense attorney and a libertarian richard john welcome the show thanks for having me sam thank you john let's start with you so it looks like. there's a likelihood that the individual mandate might get struck down based on the reports that are coming out today there are something like fifty three million americans who don't have health insurance and if you're not going to give them subsidies to

go get health insurance a lot of those people share young people who don't want it there's a considerable amount of people who do want it but are sick or can't afford it we're happy to give them subsidies to go get it on their own and require insurance companies to take set them and we're not going to do a single payer national health care plan what do we do about this problem. well that's the that's the a budget issue that's not a constitutional issue with this case this obamacare i should say the affordability act is strictly based on the commerce clause specifically article one section eight clause three and the issue before the court in the supreme court is does the federal government have broad powers under the commerce clause to force this law upon people remember if this last passed if i don't want to any part of this law i get penalized now whether you call that a tax or penalty the government is actually reaching into my pocket and pulling up money because i'm not doing what the government says that i should be doing and that is violative of the commerce clause remember the reason why the commerce clause was first inactive in seventeenth seventy six is because the union the

states that were just federalized in other words under the united states government they wanted to have free trade between all of the states so in order to avoid the trade barriers this commerce clause is supposed to protect interstate commerce through intrastate commerce with which means all the states have to act in unity now if you read the article it section article one section eight it deals with three things that deals with commerce relating to foreign nations within the states and indian tribes that sit ok all this other mumbo jumbo that you know you on the news about rights that need to be given is a level that's not a complete poppycock in the book or in poor and you're a cheerleader appearing to cite that in the arguments had the justices even said if we had a national payer system this would be an issue you know that's an alternative you guys could look at i mean i'm asking you forget about the legal so there's forty thousand americans who die every year because they don't have access to health insurance in the wealthiest nation on the planet what do we do about that get

a war stop stop this nonsense war on the country save your money slash the military budget by fifty percent bring our troops home and use that money to pay for homeless people to pay for health care that's right think she's supporting national payer system. i do not i supported individual rights system where individuals choose what they want to do based on their needs right but we've already established they can't ritually jump in the people who can't pay for their needs on this right below zero is ordered for this is pretty simple sam i think what john fails to realize is that those security and medicare which are both where the government takes money out of your pockets even though you don't want them to you are just as all justified under the commerce clause if we if the courts tonight are the couple over the next coming months rule that obamacare is unconstitutional that means that god forbid that mitt romney because president ited states his health care plan will also be unconstitutional requires c allows you to buy across state borders the internet interstate trade which is wrong end of the day what it was down to sam is that everybody is part of the health care market that is where the

commerce clause come in you go to that you go to the hospital twice when you're born and when you die that makes you part of the market just that support george is this about person that would like to build your argument that maybe we should have burial insurance well no i don't know that that's that's completely different i think we're arguing is that every every at some point in time you live your part i'll hear hard guy that's a guarantee that costs money are billions of dollars spent out of other people paying for somebody else's burial insurance like health health insurance is isn't this about personal responsibility all of us are going to go into the health care system at some point and there are going to be people who are going to die of something too i know but isn't right isn't this about billions of dollars this is a considerable proportion of our g.d.p. our economy that we're trying to address this is bankrupting our nation our current health care system. but i didn't argue about should legal or sick people eat healthier that'll save money well i think we tried that and you know when michelle obama said that she wanted every all the all american home i can see better the republicans said that you know you can't go telling people how to eat so i mean in the end they would have been wheeled out of the hotel and you could let me win if

you let me finish the job at the end if they would have boils down to sam as are the simple what it when it comes in days now has what to do with burial insurance because bill insurance is now is now a bill or tablets paid for by the american people but when you go to the hospital you can afford the bill and you've married people from the money for you so regardless of what happens the american taxpayers are paying for on insured workers and therefore if we can live we in the system that under the under the exchange of the president's created it will do two things one if you already have insurance already sitting on the bus additionally if you don't have insurance and you're under the and you're under a certain ceiling you the government would help you provide that insurance for you if you don't have insurance in your book that stealing the new should pay for insurance because a new hospital have insurance always paid the bill john we have thirty seconds left i'll give you the last word on that it's not granted in the federal government this is all great i mean i'm all for this as an individual i want to see people have health care i want to see people have food but here's the bottom line it's not authorized in the commerce clause and that's a lot of volatility in medicare is authorizing the commerce clause the should be as well as just that some and it shouldn't be it was wrong that was

a caseworker versus filbert eight hundred forty two and then i write as i said that's what under the reagan administration and other all the republicans and some security medicare they have not made no protest about our pressure hopefully now to get change on how to hopefully not all be repaired or refresh on time john richard i think you made a good point there was i think our nation's better off with social security and medicare even though it was a president sent to make those set to make those things and just sort of quote constitutional richard chrysler has lost their. thank you but here when the supreme court decided to take up the case of obamacare tom predicted that the law could be in jeopardy so we offered this alternative something we all need to think about as obamacare is well it could be in limbo right now. regardless of which way the high court tilts on the constitutionality of about right here our nation is headed for a health care crisis in fact with more than fifty million americans uninsured we're

already in a crisis as a new kaiser report about health premiums and it's really it's really quite extraordinary this is the. they've increased one hundred thirteen percent since two thousand and one is you can see on this graph down here which means that they're going to be over thirty two thousand dollars by two thousand and twenty one this is with obamacare i mean the affordable care act it seems to have a political correct and so what are we going to do about this i mean this is an absolute screaming disaster that you know where there's you're going to more employers kicking more people off the rolls here and more families having to spend twice as much or three times as much or in this case four times as much on their health care every year you're going to have more people unable to afford insurance in the united states you're going to have health care in america is basically going to turn into a hellish dysfunctional system not that it's not already there to a large extent compared to the other countries in the world speaking of the other countries in the world i think that that's really an important thing we need to

have radical change in how we deliver health care in the united states the delivery mechanism right now is the health insurance is for profit health insurance companies that are skimming ten twenty thirty forty cents out of every dollar forty dollars out of every hundred dollars so that they could pay their c.e.o.'s hundreds of millions of dollars bill mcguire made over a billion dollars as the c.e.o. of united health care just about the same as stephen helmsley so right i mean this seems just fundamentally dysfunctional and u.s. needs to do what the rest of the world is successfully doing look at what we're getting for you know. according to the o.e.c.d. the organization of economic cooperation development these are the thirty four most developed nations the world the money we're spending on health care is is absolutely a disaster and what are we. again for there is life expectancy for example for japan is it with numbers across the bottom seventy five eighty three years or japan's at the top they have a national health care system switzerland is number two they have a national health care system it's a little different than most countries not

a single payer system but it's a national system spain has a national health care system israel has a national health care system sweden luxembourg the united kingdom has a national health care system it's different from the rest of them in that it's genuinely socialist medicine that is to say in the u.k. or close to it in the u.k. the government actually owns the hospitals and clinics the rest of them are more like you know private clinics and things like that so there's a variety of ways to do this but they all have national health care systems ireland portugal even slovenia and here's the united states down at the bottom in terms of life expectancy and then at the same time you get these guys around but we do something about it about social security because social security is going down in flames because we're we're about to run out of money and then infant mortality just profiles and live births infant mortality this is incredible mexico that's for live births fairly high you know where you would expect it's from a developing nation that has a real crises and turkey is fairly high chile is fairly and there's the

united states this is infant mortality now who's doing better than us in terms of in from new zealand the united kingdom you know what's in common with all these countries. national health care systems new zealand united kingdom australia israel korea italy japan slovenia. it's time for us to say that health care is a basic human right and it's time for us to take healthcare out of this whole political nonsense of the left is right is that is that the free market or the the the rest of the world has demonstrated a national health care system works when you start on the promise that health care is our right and not a privilege and that the government is there to guarantee those rights and make things work then you can have a health care system that works and that's what we need to do in the united states medicare part d. easy for everybody just like everybody buy into medicare problem solved. after the

break national released a study this week finding out the united states is one of the nations in the world that executing its own citizens so what can we take away from this startling fact it will there to ever abolish the death penalty. see a story and it seems so easy to understand it and then something else here see some

other part of it and realized everything you saw. i'm sorry welcome to the big picture.