video for your media project free media r t dot com. blogs are going to washington d.c. and here's what's coming up tonight on the big picture everyone's talking about paul ryan's latest budget but is it the only path to prosperity to talk about that and more inside politics and you don't usually hear atheism and easter service in the same sentence britain's sunday as several is trying to change that talk to senators and jones to learn more about what some are calling the church of the u.s. i'm also the united states could learn to a thing or two from mexico and it has to do with how you're watching this show right now explain in tonight's deleted.

you need to know this there is a true progressive alternative to paul ryan's budget was concert representative stole headlines monday when he announced his latest edward scissorhands plan for financing the federal government ryan's path to prosperity proposal for fiscal year two thousand and fourteen includes massive tax breaks for the wealthiest americans and cuts to vital social welfare programs like snap supplemental nutrition assistance program and also a limits obama's obamacare is medicaid expansion and exchange provisions all making no specific offer to cut the tax loopholes the pad the wallets of the super rich you know the year of the middle class killing budget out the republicans in the house but ryan and the ones on the right aren't the only ones working on a plan members of the congressional progressive caucus plan to present their own budget tomorrow march thirteenth in. february caucus chair's keith ellison

a roll of offered an alternative to arbitrary sequester cuts they called it the balance in at balancing act that cut tax breaks for the wealthy while paring down on reasonable defense spending the plan then proposed reinvesting those savings in transportation and education c p c the congressional progressive caucus releases a budget every year in fiscal year two thousand and fourteen proposal will likely reflect those core principles of previous plans including trimming the pentagon expanding revenue sources and ending unpopular corporate welfare while building on the ideas of the balancing act the government needs to expand its role in rebuilding the economy not reduce the progressive caucus is budget is a serious and thoughtful plan that makes common sense cuts and forces the super rich to pay their fair share of previous years are any indication paul ryan's path to poverty will dominate the washington debate and drown out sensible alternatives are the mainstream media thinks that placing the needs of working americans before

the needs of big businesses is a pretty serious why don't progress proposals get the attention they deserve we'll talk about this in more internets politics panel joining me our case steger managing editor of the raw story cameron stewart research associate at government studies at the heritage foundation and chris solomon we're out of order here chris solving conservative commentator and activist to begin with every year progressives propose a budget and it's never taken seriously the congressional progressive progressive caucus we had. jan schakowsky on this program last year and she laid it all out we had the charts and graphics look like it made perfect sense. why and in fact when you do the polling on this most americans agree absolutely with the progressive caucus is proposals why doesn't this stuff yet picked up by the media and and wouldn't paul ryan's budget this is austerity this is what they're doing to greece and spain right now is this going to plunge us into greater poverty ok well i'm going. i think it's really surprising after the american public voted on the ryan

plan essentially in the in the presidential election last year they saw the women and you know people of color wholeheartedly rejected these policies of cutting out a lot of white men a lot of boys men and it's really surprising that paul ryan basically learned nothing from from that and continues to support balancing the budget on the backs of folks who need these programs the most chris what a ball room or. well i think it's interesting that the white house isn't doesn't have any plan to balance the budget. the couple look i think about it and i just imagine i'm glad to see that that some democrats have put forward a plan because the senate democrats have gone over fourteen hundred days without without a budget the white house does have their two months late on their budget but they do have a responsibility to do a budget they haven't done it and they're saying that no one so they're putting out

a budget should come from the house of representatives as. well know the appropriations bills have to come from the house of representatives the spending largely without spending bill well and taxes you know how do you have spending bills without a budget which is what we've done for the last three years they are irresponsible the bottom line is this i don't think the president wants the american people to know where he wants to cut and where he wants to spend and if you are the tax cuts go our tax increases on the wealthy what did we just do december thirty first he got what he wanted but it's never enough is that it's never never enough and time i would say you said the progressives don't get enough light shone on their on their budgets and we did have a progressive budget last year the president submitted his budget late as usual budget was very progressive and got zero votes it was democratically controlled senate what is or was it is a ceasefire that was not a tax increase yet and i think you can take a good indication of where the president has proposed his budget in the past to indicate where he might fall in this year and i think it seems like paul ryan is

doubling down on cutting programs that folks really really need is there any possibility that paul ryan's plan to turn medicare into a true program you need to turn it sustainable or it is going on right now according to medical notes or actually it was medicare as a medicare solvent forever is paid for out of the general fund it doesn't have a specific form like so security goes there is no question of medicare's and solvency of this it if you're taking the money from medicare out of the general fund you're leaving no money for all your other pet niceness of education and energy absolutely not true and that's what you know now during absolutely no. but back to my original question paul ryan says the solution to whatever problem you guys think exists with medicare and i will acknowledge that six hundred billion dollars could be recovered out of medicare if we simply let the government negotiate with the drug companies for drug prices but billy tauzin good republican before he went off to a two million dollar your jobs at a pharma they made sure that that got put in there during the bush administration

george bush happily side of the law but setting that aside this plan to turn medicare into a voucher program do you really want to say to grandma ok grandma here's your eight thousand dollars voucher and here's twenty two insurance company forms for you to fill out and be sure to remember every illness you've ever had when you were eight years old because if you get one wrought when you get sick the insurance company's going to throw you out of those three i would argue they're everyone's already drowning in paperwork anyway but now to sign up for medicare they don't give a rat's patootie what you're i know i'm just wondering why the president keeps delaying with his budget and i would argue it's because he doesn't want the american people knowing how we spending money or how the decision to say the executive branch has to propose a budget you bring to the constitution there's plenty of procedural this is a crazy this notation a constitution that are recognized by the government and why does the small senate budget committee and the house budget me why are they able to put out a budget with the resources they have an article massive executive branch is a day on the line no one talks about appropriations bills those are not the same as

the budget tom and it is this correct the president by law supposed to submit its budget he did not delay to know why senate democrats have not i pad version this is what you're going to have not i mean you're just not well i'm not a very all ready president you were never submitted by his including george w. bush it's a tradition to overspend in this country should be continued overseas as well and you kind of hear the. president out in the has has been waiting for congress to pass the budget as well and and congress hasn't held up their end of the bargain i think the finger pointing realize the real. issue that i'm asking which is are the american people going to say ok paul great idea let's give grandma seven thousand eight thousand dollars and let her pick between cigna or at or united health care or blue cross does anybody really think that's going to fly do you really think that's going to fly to help they do as you because there's a reason i think we have my grandma is not going to have to do that because it doesn't apply to people who are currently in medicare so what are you saying when

you're going around where you're going to have to do that and you know have to do it i'll have to do it and that's ok that is really ok because i want the choice and . progressives love choice you may know i don't want to i swear i don't want that choice on health care and they don't want the choice on education and i want the choice when you're eighty years old you can't remember your own kids names just you know ok we'll move along dallas the dallas federal reserve bank president richard fisher is going to give a speech at c pac and he's going to be talking about how we need to you know break the big banks too big to fail too big to jail elizabeth warren's been all over this . meanwhile ron rand paul has been talking about drones and you know this this kind of blows my mind. i guess i'm kind of making your arguments for it let me just let me here's the frame now yesterday you guessed here this morning we had eight democrats come out and sent a pretty nasty letter to the president saying we're concerned that your drug policy

is unconstitutional but rand paul was the guy who first you know took it to get viral as it were a republican and now at c pac i'll be there by the way at sea pac you're going to have you know republican fed gov talking about breaking up the big banks why these are traditionally democratic party issues where how are the republicans leading on this is does make has to be cool first of all i can't believe they're going to let you in the door it's. going to be a hundred year except the last year i had surgery last year i couldn't go but every year for the last six years of been a slow look the democrats here they're not going to go against the president they're rubber stamping they've they've. checked out the rubber stamping everything over as it was knowable i was going to say that we had a letter fine and we've had no hearings on this in the senate we had me with rand paul ron wyden was the only one to come down and even voiced some concern not everyone who came down and assisted in the filibuster supported the the position of rand paul on the issue of drones but they just supported the fact of durbin so it's

something to you know if you want to close it down that's what he said but the issue here is that they don't the issue is transparency and we're calling for transparency here and some democrats have finally woken up and said hey you know what i don't agree with this but let's form ok i don't know how does the democratic party get get on the back end of what should have been of all is right and i'm not going to beat up on the democrats a little bit because i think you know honestly they could be a little stronger and imposing some of the really questionable policies when it comes to drones and and you know making sure that the banks don't get even bigger but i would say that it's a little strange to me that republicans are suddenly. you know getting themselves on this issue when they oppose the formation of the consumer financial protection bureau they refuse to appoint and can permit director or own which is designed

to protect consumers they don't actually you know this is chris my head is exploding here it was republicans it was under george bush's sturt of the drone program and enthusiastically support it it was republicans who who blew up the list was phil graham's handiwork it all you know now republicans are doing a one eighty why. well i'll say that i'm probably a conservative first and a republican second ok so some of the things that george w. bush did were not conservative things and they deserve to be criticized do you think the big banks should be broken up i don't know i think that what shouldn't happen is that there be anything too big to fail that that cause too big to fail means the taxpayers would have to fail taxpayer i did my relation right so we have big government to prevent companies from getting too big to fail tom might be my concern if i could just jump in you know my concerns is that the obama administration after democrats have lambasted president bush and again he has many

can things he did that were not conservative i threw i'm not going to serve at the finish line spot of the other and more of paul in tonight's politics. victims let's apply here. it's very profitable to invest in colombia we did a very profitable also the it is a very high return on investment. he said but i've been working in this area for thirty years and i've always had to play the armed groups i mean that is the managers who change their name and strategy but just to the same budrus. high ranking suspects you know. where you have to say about that mr president. the president. but. i won't give an interview i'm sorry but no. investigation

is it. says. stop your bullshit and keep quiet or else you'll suffer the consequences to. your bodyguards to watch themselves because the same goes for them. regards from city i've never heard of such a case is ours are so much money in gold so many. for all the gold in colombia. pretty free. free. arrangement free. free. free. free bird video for your media. free media.

welcome back to the big picture politics panel joining me tonight cameron seward k. steiger and chris let's get back to it this committee plans is voting too and by the way just to finish your thought you were saying oh no thank you and i would just say you know obama is doing the same thing that president bush is bush to exact with regard to drones. on the other hand he has stopped using the phrase war on terror and hopefully that's got us out of iraq but in any case senate judiciary committee is voting to expand background checks on private gun sales so are we going to see any implementation is this was a straight party line vote ten to eight ten democrats eight republicans they're going to all voted no on background checks this after after newtown i mean i don't chris i don't get this what why do republicans say no we don't want background

checks before people buy. it kill people and let's see where your archives tito's here let's be clear about this we're not talking about no background checks for gun sales because we have a background check system out of forty percent of the guns just on private sales we don't and so you know what i think the n.r.a. is right about ninety nine percent of the time i think. that if you go to a gun show and you're buying from a non licensed dealer there should be an opportunity for you to run a background check i do support that. but you know the bottom line is that most any licensed dealer has to run a background check. so do your shows your way the democrats would seriously because i haven't seen their their proposal but if we're talking about having an opportunity if i were as a private seller was going to sell my gun to somebody i would love the opportunity to do a background check on your using the word opportunity rone the word mandate i think the democrats are mandating that they're recording your thoughts oh yeah i mean

it's just shows there is a there's a recent poll but even a lot of republican support universal background check the majority of republicans you know the majority of republicans and so it's just really surprising that republicans continue to be more loyal to the n.r.a. and then they are to their constituents and let's be clear here that's not going to stop what happened at sandy hook i mean people are still going to get guns illegally if we had thirteen people shot in the district monday night and i guarantee you that was in the legal fire law arm that was illegal and so you can do this but let's not pretend to the american people that this is going to stop things like that because people don't get that raese and they're going to get a gun is that legal that's a really important point that it is going to ask mark what's his name gabby giffords was marcus i'm sorry kelly three more kelly made which was that seven that little girl who died when his wife was shot that i believe she was the seventh person who was shot and you know that was like the ninth or tenth or eleventh or

twelfth or thirteenth bullet or something like that and i had he not been able to have a high capacity clip because he had to reload and in fact that's when they dragged him down to the ground there woods there would be a few more people alive and there might not have been ten to twenty dead kids and in sandy hook so what about cameron what about limiting these high capacity sure and. but i want to make the overarching point that this again and emphasize that this again is about we're talking about expanding background checks when private sales transfers private from private citizens non-licensed dealers right the problem with that is there's no way to know that these people are going through some sort of background check system unless what unless the government knows where all the guns are what do we do what is their father's noble what does that require universal read your hearts are we do it with cars that we don't we stores universe or do we started doing it with cars in the one nine hundred twenty times when stars were going to the cars to shoot to kill the horrors are not

a fundamental constitutional you are article one section eight. provide for roads ok well if the if the government knows. i was in new orleans are they'll be able to take them away and what that's a violation of the second that's exactly what the second amendment and that's exactly the second amendment was designed to protect do you honestly think they bad it's very slow going take i would do it if they could do i do it so well sure it's all utilities obama wants to take away your gun he doesn't have to have a registration kick in your door because if you do they are government unless our government gets to bassett if our government gets to that point we are so far gone and. i think the real point is that people do get hurt by act in an. unlicensed guns and i think these are really reasonable and moderate wealth is a limiting this is not you know i want universal registration everybody have liability insurance i think it's insane the twenty kids died in newtown if they've

been killed by a drunk driver or a crazed driver who intended to kill them geico right now would be paying out a million bucks to each family because there would be liability insurance because they were killed by guns they get nothing squat you should be registration there should be insurance and there should be proof of competence the driver's like i was like to have you to propose some sort of background check system in any anyone for that matter ports a background. check system a universal background check system that does not implicate violations of the second amendment that's going to open the door though secure as as i said it's a slippery slope you can either propose an amendment to strike the second amendment from the constitution or you could move to cuba or another one where you actually read the second amendment realize they're just talking about state but that. this supreme court said ok what the supreme court said the supreme court has been all over the map on this. you have granted you interpretation is less than three years old by five right wing crackpots on the supreme court that will probably get overturned as soon as one of them you know decides to retire or whatever god forbid

jet in any case jeb bush flip flopped on a path to citizenship last week but he raises actually an important issue should we give citizenship to undocumented workers and frankly i think that there's another larger issue here which is why have we you know since since reagan stopped in forcing the laws against hiring people illegally we've had this explosion in illegal employers and thus you know people who want to work illegally been coming over should we be putting employers in jail but you know that's that's kind of a peripheral issue but i throw them both out there you know isn't it isn't it time to go after some of basically the rich white guys who have been driving this entire process for so since one thousand nine hundred since eighty eighty six and and but what's the best way to get a path to citizenship. as far as the eye would take issue with your rich white no i would take issue with your rich white guys assessment of meeting in force and i think we need a much broader enforcement of the eve ariff i was for instance in employers hiring

illegal immigrants i would argue it will make no difference at all if you don't send employers to jail well ok then fine if i just i would say that's what it takes if you make the law that i i'm with you on this we've talked about this before on this show i'm with you in increasing i don't know if it's a seriously jail time but i'm with you in increasing the penalty. for hiring illegal immigrants and building up the enforcement of that in improving the enforcement because it's widely uninformed or all that said what are we going to do with love million people who are already there our country i mean i think you have to provide some kind of path to citizenship the reason that we have basically an unenforceable system is because you have so few legal path to citizenship as it is that you have people having no choice but to break the law so i think there needs to be some real reform i am kind of encouraged by some of the things that jeb bush and the republicans are proposing but i do it's job i mean tuesday's proposal or

one. that's an interesting question yeah i do think that we should that we should provide some kind of path that if the ship especially if folks are living here are working here are willing to make their lives here and pay taxes here i think that makes a lot of sense chris which jeb bush are you with well i think. we really need we need to do something to make the people here who are here pay taxes and i am all for enforcing against employers. who hire illegals they should be punished i don't know if i'm going to go as far as jail time but i am definitely increased you break the law the fines to make me play you in jail for stealing money at a bar some seven eleven movie you know it was all that hey let's make it so it is we're not. in this in this country so you're going to lose your business for hiring illegals then you're going to stop hiring illegals yes you let it but if it's just a cost of doing business and you can factor it in so we need to increase the penalty you're also golding a strong case at the same time for throwing banks to send you. ok all right i think

you know the new york state supreme court and by the way it should be noted everybody thinks the state supreme court in new york is the highest court in new york it's actually the lowest of the three superior courts there's the supreme court there's the appellate court and there's some sort of the court i forget the name of the tube so this is the first step not the final step butt. they knocked down mayor bloomberg ban. you know sugary drinks over sixteen ounces because you know you've seen that's causing obesity you know this kind of stuff doesn't don't we all you know we the people created our government we the people are community this is this is this is america don't we have we have an obligation particularly if we're paying our own health bills to help people be healthy or at least restrain the what the worst impulses of the people who want to sell to people well forgive my french you know i think people in this country have the right to buy a soda and you know what health insurance should have to charge more if you're

overweight that that's per perfectly reasonable for them to do that but you know what the government is not our mommy and daddy despite what chris rock or anybody said and we need to have some freedoms and you know pull out your constitution where does it tell us what kind of food we can buy and what science so do we can treat that is a very good read geiger's by design so it's also in the first and last sons of article one section eight that i used to make it was to promote the general welfare of the and i would never you know. who are you know you're right were you able to tell you they couldn't deliver you a bag of groceries every week and that's all you're allowed to have under your reading of the constitution that would be reserved for really hamilton's letter. manufactures to george washington and seventy nine you could hear him say where he talked about why the phrase general welfare was used and he comes right out and says we use that phrase and he won't because you can't go in and use that phrase to

give. the latitude as possible bloomberg even said we need to encourage people to be healthy that's why i'm banning so he wants to research and then he wants to do you want to encourage or does he want to ban he wants to ban he wants to control the whole range of all the legislative through his he appointed his. own board of how they're. so you my disorders are sort of held right oh i'm so there's a let's go through the city council but secondly where does this stop where does it end tom should we take away your right to vote until you just shake his head as it is that we're doing is going to actually back you up a little bit i read through the ruling today and the ruling was actually fairly narrow it basically says that the department of health although it has fairly broad powers does not have this particular power under new york's legislation of course the city council could give them that power if they so choose but i think the bottom line here is that you know public health officials ban or no ban are just happy that people are talking about this issue that sugary sodas are really bad for

our health and a lot of people are making perfectly rational decisions when they go into the store and sometimes it is cheaper than water or other healthier option interest rates and a lot of that water has outsold soda now as a beverage step. three don't care a birthday cake chris great to have you all mystified thank you. after the break easter is one of the holiest holidays on the catholic calendar with millions of catholics flocking to churches across the globe to attend easter services to compete you celebrate easter two coming up we'll talk with a co-founder of england's atheist church just plan his own kind of the streets he's too soon.

wealthy british style. time to practice. markets. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike stronger for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune in to cause a report on a potentially deadly blizzard taking aim for the northeast it's expected to hit stunning in a few hours from new york to maine we have team coverage of the storm. but what we're watching is the very heavy snow moving into boston proper earlier today it was very sticky you can see it start to become much more powdery down here the

bottom line there's still a lot of snow out here a good place for snowball fight. jason it is kind of pretty incredible day there and even record snowfall throughout what's been like bilbies long three driving lessons to the emergency vehicles exceptions. in screw news last month the marketplace fairness act was introduced in both houses of congress the ag.