i'm learning mr. ball go back to the big picture i'm tom hartman coming up in this half hour if the supreme court overturns obamacare on thursday will really be a disaster for our country or could it be just what the doctor ordered for real comprehensive health care reform also yesterday the supreme court reaffirmed their citizens united decision saying montana can't keep corporate money out of its elections we'll talk with congressman adam schiff and see where the fight to get money out of politics stands after this latest blow and questions are flying around romney and obama as the campaigns heat up but there is one question no one in america is asking that maybe the most important question there is explained tonight

steely take. in the best of the rest of the news with the supreme court's decision looming progressives across the nation are organizing to take advantage of a possible ruling against obamacare several progressive gloop groups including the national nurses united and the progressive change campaign committee arguing that a supreme court strike down of obamacare could renew hope for a national single payer system like medicare for all is that of green the co-founder of the p.c.c. c told t.p.m. if the supreme court opens the door for democrats to campaign in two thousand and twelve on medicare for all the republicans are left campaigning and paul ryan's plan to end medicare that clean contrasts could be the game changer that gives democrats a clean sweep in november. he's right even though we could be days away from one of

the most politically motivated supreme court decisions in history it could be just the thing needed to bring about truly revolutionary health reform in america here's the big picture health care and health insurance provided via a mandate have a long history some people think it originated with ronald reagan who signed into law a mandate that hospitals with emergency rooms must take in and treat anybody who shows up at the door of the taxpayers picking up the tab others think it originated with the heritage foundation which proposed mandating that we all buy health insurance from a for profit insurance company back in one thousand nine hundred three counter bill and hillary clinton's health care proposal twenty republican senators by the way co-sponsored the mandated coverage in the u.s. senate that year again as a way of pushing out hillary care that heritage foundation proposal of course was picked up by this guy mitt romney governor of massachusetts and put into law in his state in two thousand and four romney care but the real origin of health care mandates preceded romney or clinton it all started as harvard law professor dr

einar. pointed out in an article for the new republic it all started out in seventeen ninety that's right seventeen and not one hundred seventy seventy ninety the president was george washington and twenty of the founders men who signed the declaration of independence were in congress along with several in washington's cabinet including jefferson and madison washington proposed in congress passed a law mandating that all companies that operated ships must purchase and provide at no cost health insurance for the men who worked on those ships which included both the cost of doctor's visits of drugs washington then mandated a socialist form of medicine every soldier of the united states had to be vaccinated against smallpox again one of the founders objected and then in one thousand seven hundred ninety eight during the john adams presidency congress took the health care mandate for seafaring men even farther requiring individuals to buy hospitalization insurance. only four of the founders in congress objected and none

of them objected on constitutional grounds but even with that history going back to the founders who pretty much knew their original intent when they started this country so-called originalist antonin scalia is determined to do his best to blow up anything that comes from a democratic president and the odds over it in trade right now around seventy eight percent that scalia will prevail and that the individual mandate will be knocked down on thursday so here's the good news if scalia does this president obama the democrats should take the concept that we're all in this together which after all is the core concept of obamacare and the mandate they should take that a step further this country already has a really good single payer health care system which has worked marvelously for several generations it's called medicare and it's so be loved by its users that they'll show up at tea party rallies with sighs and say keep government out of my medicare you damn socialists medicare is already in place already working already tied into social security numbers citizens only ready to go for the rest of us who

are not over sixty five so real simple the president should propose a new health care bill that is one line long just a single sounds one piece of paper health care bill that says quite simply the eligibility age for medicare of sixty five years old should be eliminated and all american citizens should be covered by the program. president obama did a great thing by pushing through obamacare which got all americans realizing that we're all in this together that there are shared costs that we need everybody in to be able to cover the big risks if the supreme court is going to make it impossible for congress the president to accomplish national health coverage using our broken for profit system and the very high quality already functioning medicare option is already available to us and perhaps most importantly if obama and all the democrats running for office this fall were to push for medicare for all they'll sweep the board winner in a landslide. we're

going to have to wait and see just how congress reacts to a supreme court decision that strikes down obamacare but we're already seen some reaction from congress over a different decision yesterday the high court's ruling on monday to uphold citizens united and prevent the state of montana from enforcing its own laws to ban corporate spending in their state elections joining me now is one of the members of congress has been leading the good fight to get money out of politics and overturn citizens united congressman adam schiff representing california's twenty ninth district congressman welcome thank you great to be with you thank you for joining us did the supreme court's recent decision surprise you as specially after two years now of watching the corruption the citizens united has brought to our political process it didn't surprise me although it was very disappointing there was at least a shadow of hope but based on the comments of some of the justices that they ought to reexamine citizens united in light of the just the explosion of anonymous and multi multi million dollar baby billion dollar spending since that tragic decision

it was a shred of hope that they might revisit the decision but but unfortunately they doubled down on a bad idea and now we're going to be stuck with its consequences until we can either change the constitution through amendment or take you know i think that initial step with an act like the disclose act that requires at least transparency and see if the court will hold up at least that or or try to do everything we can to make sure that the next president who appoints the next couple of supreme court justices is not a republican. but but to the to the point of the constitutional amendment that you suggested tell us about the constitutional amendment the better used. well you know i think that many people don't don't necessarily follow the long history of this problem which goes back to buckley versus vallejo when the supreme court made a distinction which is proved to be illusory to put it politely between campaign contributions which they said we could limit constitutionally and campaign

expenditures which said which they said could not be limited so to give an example you can limit sheldon knaidel sins ability to contribute to newt gingrich to five thousand dollars but the supreme court said you can place no limit on what he can spend independently the supreme court arguing that an independent expenditure could not possibly be corrupting and couldn't even give the appearance of corruption well you'd have to live in a theoretical world in which newt gingrich would be unaware that sheldon adelson had singlehandedly kept his presidential campaign alive to fall that rationale it is proved to be really quite fallacious reasoning and unfortunately citizens united instead of revisiting that decision. made it worse made a problem or a spy saying that corporations were essentially people for the first amendment could spend whatever they want and there's really no limit as we saw in the montana decision to that line of thinking it will open up indefinitely vast expenditures of

money a lot of anonymous a lot of which we simply won't know where that where it came from either foreign or domestic so the end run around the supreme court is to amend the constitution to say that money is property not speech and that corporations are creatures of law and not people. well you know i wouldn't even describe it as an end run but this is part of the reason why there is a process to amend the constitution if the supreme court in tirpitz the constitution in such a way that it really renders a great threat to our democracy the health of our democracy then the framers set about a mechanism to change the constitution to make sure the supreme court. interpret it interprets it with a light to the reason rationality which we seem to have a great absence of at the moment i've been very involved over the years with this move to amend the constitution and i secretly was kind of rooting for the supreme

court not to strike down citizens united not even to modify it out of concern that it would take the steam out of the movement i wrote a book on on this back in ninety two on equal protection which is now become kind of a bestseller because back then i mean i was giving speeches to law schools and things you know about everything from from. santa clara county all the way forward and people were like what you know they didn't they didn't understand the concept of corporate person and now everybody gets it so might the supreme court have actually set up their own demise you know actually fueled the the this movement well they may have and you know tom i came at this from the other direction which was i was very loath to amend the constitution and eager to find any other protests that might work but the point you make is a very good one the person who drafted the language that i've introduced is a very well respected constitutional scholar professor larry tribe at harvard and he wrote a bad recently basically how would it be wonderful if

a case called citizens united had the effect of uniting citizens to do away with what has become. a polluted campaign finance process and it's very possible that the supreme court has gone so far in unleashing this just this abundance of spending of flooding into our elections that they may have a really kindled this effort to amend the constitution are you hearing this from your constituents is there is this act a hot issue or is this something that more exists in the stratosphere atmosphere in washington d.c. no i'm definitely hearing from constituents and have really first. time a great level of concern about campaign finance reform but it really reached a peak with the decision in citizens united and then everything we saw after that it is really i think quite astounding just how this has penetrated the consciousness of the country and quite properly so we will we are going to be about

to be treated to one of the most incredible expenditures of money on this presidential campaign in history and the same will be true in the house and senate races and the fact the effect of these super pacs and this vast spending may be even more pronounced in the house and senate races where that vast expenditure won't be offset by spending on the other side where the disparity in funding will be even more substantial and where the ability to sneak up on members of the house or senate by these super pacs and then just blast them is the most pronounced we're about to be in for a a tragic going over in this election process the a wild ride congressman schiff thank you so much for being with us tonight it's a pleasure joining thank you to help the congressman overturn citizens united and get other members on board with restoring we the people democracy over we the corporations domination join the movement go to move to amend or. coming up while

dozens of questions are being tossed around in the buildup to the november elections there's one question that's been ignored in a room. so you wonder is why it's so important and it's nearly take. out of american power continues. things are so bad. might actually be time for revolution. and it turns out the procureur drink at starbucks has a surprising. you know sometimes you see a story and it seems so you think you understand it and then. some other part of it and realize that everything is ok. i'm sorry welcome to the big picture.

here good. luck in the aloneness so we'll get the real headlines with none of them are the problem with the mainstream media today is that they're completely disconnected from the viewers and for what actually matters to those viewers and so that's why young people just don't watch t.v. anymore if they want news they go online and read it but we're trying to take those stories that people actually care about and transfer them back in t.v. .

i'm laura mr. it's the good the bad in the very very few grossly ugly the good. old donor while the or doner while the fate of health care in america rests in the hands of the supreme court one illinois doctor is doing all he can right americans with quality affordable health care. is eighty seven years old and has been practicing medicine in rushville illinois since one nine hundred fifty five he charges five dollars for doctors' visits and has never taken a vacation and keeps his clinic open seven days a week rising medical cause across america causing many to go without proper health

care and skip regular doctor's appointments and time when health care reform is up in the air it's nice to see dr don are doing all he can to help the uninsured citizens of rushville stay healthy let's hope the government and the supreme court saying that. the bad the t.s.a. first came the porno scanners and then the invasive and unnecessary pat downs and now to add their list of security theater blunders the t.s.a. is illegally opening human remains spilling them and laughing about john gross of indianapolis was recently flying with the ashes of his grandfather in his carry on luggage when he got to the t.s.a. checkpoint at the florida airport the t.s.a. agent opened the ashes and spilled them all over the ground and rather than apologize or help gather the ashes the agents just laughed this is even more astounding considering t.s.a. guidelines for bid agents from handling or open human remains they must go through x. rays instead this incident is maybe the best proof yet that airport security in american

. some serious reform and the very very ugly alabama lawmakers a bizarre law from one nine hundred thirty nine allows alabama sheriffs to keep any leftover money that is given to them by the state to feed prison inmates and as a result there is a big incentive for sheriffs to give subpar food prison inmates so they can add their own wallets for example two thousand and nine former sheriff greg bartlett was sent to jail after pocketing more than two hundred thousand dollars of the state money that was supposed to feed jail inmates some of the law has yet to be repealed with numerous attempts to change it dying before they reach the governor's office as we told you last week all across america prisoners are subjected to an extraordinary rate of sexual assaults and rapes so in alabama a population that's already at risk of physical and sexual abuse is now being denied the most basic of human the sense of these needed to survive good food just

so a few people can get a little richer and that it's very very. there are a lot of questions being thrown around this presidential campaign between mitt romney and barack obama questions like how many jobs did romney really these straw is a capital right as a corporate raider over a bain capital or how much should the super rich pay in super rich like him pay in taxes he's paying by the way the loss of fifteen percent or were was president obama really born real some questions are important others completely absurd. but there is one fundamental question that hasn't been asked yet and the

desperately needs to be asked if we're ever going to find our nation's soul again it was a question that the late billionaire sir james goldsmith asked of charlie rose back in one thousand nine hundred ninety four i'm not for the destruction of one society can you explain what is the purpose of an economy and. it was that's it what is the purpose of an economy think about it for a second why don't we have an economy here was goldsmiths answer to his own question the economy is that is the fundamental needs of society yes which office prosperity yes which all stability yes and which all can come. ok let me repeat that the purpose of an economy is to serve the fundamental needs of a society which include prosperity stability and contentment back in the one nine hundred thirty s. during the great depression when prosperity stability and contentment were pretty

hard to come by president franklin roosevelt believed he could restore the true purpose of an economy by establishing a good quality of life for as many people as possible as roosevelt said in one nine hundred thirty six necessitous men are not free men liberty requires the opportunity to make a living a living decent according to the standards of the time a living which gives man not only enough to live by but something to live for roosevelt knew that if someone was hungry and didn't have food or if they were sick and didn't have medical care or if they were broken didn't have a job then in a very real sense they were not free but when our economy provides these basic essential is for freedom. then americans would finally find stability and contentment giving them a chance to also take entrepreneurial risks and eventually find prosperity as well remember goldsmiths definition of an economy to provide prosperity stability and

contentment to society so to do just that in one thousand forty four franklin roosevelt introduced a second bill of rights and. so. right now actually. all right. f.d.r. then goes on to lay out a new set of rights that all americans should be granted including the right to a job the right to earn enough to provide adequate food clothing and recreation to yourself and your family the right of every business person to trade in freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies the right to a decent home a right to adequate medical care a right to adequate protection from the old from old age sickness accidents and

unemployment and a right to a good education roosevelt never succeeded in getting his second bill of rights passed he died of a stroke before we could see that happen but at least his definition of an economy which is something the serves the needs of society and provides the best quality of life for the greatest number of people was accepted for the next several decades by both republicans and democrats who supported labor unions high taxation on the rich and a regulated economy that protects american jobs and keeps american industry in america between nine hundred thirty and nine hundred eighty american knew the answer to that fundamental question what is the purpose of an economy. even republicans do as republican president dwight d. eisenhower wrote to his brother it is quite clear that the federal government cannot avoid or escape responsibilities which the mass of the people firmly believe should be undertaken by it should any political party attempt to abolish social security unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs you

would not hear that party again in our political history there is a tiny splinter group of course the believes you can do these things among them are a few texas oil millionaires their number is negligible and they are stupid but then with ronald reagan came a new answer to the question of why an economy an answer that we're still stuck with today rather than an economy serving the needs of society reagan in this new breed of supply side he can't be caught a mists and free marketeers believe that society you and me exists to serve the needs of the economy or more specifically the society serves the needs of the leaders within the economy corporations and their c.e.o.'s or as they called it in fact so called news chopper creators which brought us the greed is good mentality the one nine hundred eighty s. when c.e.o.'s were encouraged to cut salaries of their workers bust up unions

pollute the skies and gamble on wall street all to maximize well the holy grail then came laws to cement this new definition of the economy massive tax cuts for the so called job creators deregulation of wall street's banks toure's and the so-called free trade agreements so that national corporations could have banned in america and morph into trans national behemoths that new business model and this entirely new definition of the purpose of an economy is still with us today and is one in which profit and making money is the ultimate goal and to hell with the government stability and prosperity of society. to advance this reagan and his foot soldiers redefine the word freedom to f.d.r. freedom meant freedom from want and destitution freedom meant a social safety net but to the reaganites freedom and freedom for banks and hustlers like michael milken and the koch brothers and mitt romney to pursue

profits without worrying about or about whether or not they're destroying people's lives or their communities means the freedom to pollute freedom to outsource freedom to take dangerous risks on wall street freedom to illegally foreclose on millions of americans and the freedom to buy our elections basically the freedom to be pirate equity managers and raid american companies laying off thousands of workers to maximize profits mitt romney is the walking embodiment of this new definition of freedom as well as the lead spokesman for the new answer to the question what is the purpose of an economy and he's running for president he and his donors like sheldon adelson karl rove and the koch brothers believe we have an economy so that he and his buddies can get filthy rich and stay that way that's why corporations share of tax revenues has plummeted since reagan it working people's share of tax revenue that we pay in taxes has increased that's why the top one

percent of seen their income skyrocket two hundred seventy five percent since reagan if the rest of us have seen our incomes barely grow that's why unionization rates have fallen since reagan and along with those rates the middle classes income has also dropped forty nine million americans in poverty forty five million americans on food stamps fifty three million americans without health insurance. in those situations prosperity stipple stability and contentment for the vast majority of us are pretty much nowhere to be found and this is all happening because we have failed to take a step back and look around we fail to ask ourselves that fundamental question what is the purpose of an economy if progressives are going to take back america just like they did with the republican teddy roosevelt the early one thousand nine hundred busted up the big corporations with f.d.r. in the one nine hundred thirty s.

then it's imperative that we do you redefine both the word freedom and the purpose of an economy and that begins with asking the questions what is freedom what is the purpose of an economy everything else from universal health care to the rights of working people to regulations on oil barons and banks there's follows from those questions it's time to go back to earlier definitions of freedom that is the koch brothers have redefined it as the right to pollute and corrupt politicians for italy but as f.d.r. defined it as the right for americans to be free to chase their dreams because their basic needs like health care and education and a job are secure it's time to promote prosperity and stability again by saying the economy is here to serve the needs of society and not to serve the needs of mitt romney and his buddies but start asking the right questions. that's it for the big picture tonight don't forget democracy begins with you get out there get active tag your it occupy something will sit.

down load the official anti application to i phone oh i pod touch from the i.q. exams to. one life on the go. video on demand ati's mine gold costs and cents feeds now in the palm of your.

questions on the dot com. admission free accreditation free in-store chargers free arrangements free. free. to tide free. download free broadcast quality video for your media projects and free media donda r.t. dot com.