>> o'donnell: today on "face the nation", the supreme court upholds the president's signature health care law. the white house says the reforms are working, but critics say the fight's just begun. >> it's time for us to move forward. to implement and, where necessary, improve on this law. >> if we want to get rid of obamacare, we're going to have to replace president obama. >> o'donnell: we'll get reaction from the top republican in the land, house speaker john boehner. >> this has to be ripped out by its roots. this is government taking over the entire health insurance industry. the american people do not want to go down this path. >> o'donnell: and he says the house will push for repeal yet again. >> we will not flinch from our resolve to make sure this law is repealed in its entirety.

>> o'donnell: for reaction from both sides, we'll hear from democrat chuck schumer and republican budget hawk tom coburn. what does it mean for the states? we'll get the governors' perspective from democrat martin o'malley of maryland and republican scott walker of wisconsin. and how will the decision play out on the campaign trail? we'll ask our political round table. john harris of politico, major garrett of "national journal" and our own jan crawford and john dicker son. the supreme court's ruling and what it means for you. because this is "face the nation." captioning sponsored by cbs from cbs news in washington, "face the nation" with bob schieffer. substituting for bob schieffer, cbs news chief white house correspondent norah o'donnell. >> o'donnell: good morning again. the big news came this week when the supreme court decided to

uphold president's signature achievement, the affordable care act, including its most controversial element, the individual mandate which requires people to buy health insurance or pay a penalty. we peer joined now by the speaker of the house, john boehner. mr. speaker, thank you for joining us. >> good morning. >> pelley: were you surprised by the supreme court's decision? >> i was. the idea that the federal government can mandate that the american people purchase a product is shocking to me. but they made their decision. i respect their ability to make that decision. but all it really does is strengthen my resolve and resolve of republicans here in washington to repeal this awful law. which is increasing the cost of health insurance for the american people and making it harder for small businesses to hire new workers. >> o'donnell: the house has already voted some 30 times to repeal or defund this law. what's one more time going to do? >> and we're going to go one

more time! >> o'donnell: what's the point? >> we want to show people we resolved to get rid of it. >>. >> o'donnell: you don't think after 30 times they think you're resolved? >> this law will bankrupt our nation and put the government in charge of everyone's health care. this is the wrong direction. and while the court upheld it as constitutional, they certainly didn't say that it was a good law. this law is making it much more difficult for workers to get jobs. it's raising the cost of health insurance for the american people. republicans believe in a common sense step-by-step approach that will lower health care costs and allow the american people to choose the health insurance they want not the health insurance the government wants them to have. >> o'donnell: is there anything good in the law? >> well, there's always going to be parts of it that are good. but when you look at the 2,700 pages that no one read and remember noplsz said "we have to

pass this before we know what's in it" republicans are not going to go down that path. >> o'donnell: i asked ask you if there's anything good in it because i wanted to ask you about specific provisions in the bill. are you willing to roll back the provisions that would provide free mammograms under medicare? >> listen, there are a lot of provisions that can be replaced. remember, i said, we want to take a common-sense, step-by-step approach to replacing obamacare. >> o'donnell: let's talk about what's specificically in this bill because there are a lot of protections for individuals. if you're under 26 years old and out of a job you can stay on your parents' insurance. do you support that? >> i do. and the health insurance industry has made that a practice within their industry. they made that statement a couple weeks ago. >> o'donnell: what about additional preventative care for children. you don't have to pay a co-pay on immunizations? >> as i said, republicans believe in a common-sense, step-by-step approach to replacing this law. all of this provision, popular provisions, many of them very sound provisions can, in fact,

be done in a common-sense way but not in 2,700 pages that no one read. >> o'donnell: what about pre-existing conditions? what about the millions of americans that have pre-existing conditions and are discriminated against? >> we believe the way it is done within obamacare is pushing the cost of health insurance for all americans much too high. we believe that the state high-risk pools are a much more effective way to making sure that those with pre-existing conditions have access to affordable health insurance. >> o'donnell: "access to affordable health insurance." but you're not saying you would be for a law that would prevent discrimination for those individuals? >> we believe there's a better way to make sure they have affordable access to quality health insurance. >> o'donnell: so when you repeal this, what are you going to replace it with? >> i just started pointing out. we're going take a common-sense, step-by-step approach that puts in place the kind of policies that will make our health insurance system more what i'll call patient-centered and lower

cost. the only proposal out there last year that would lower the cost of health insurance came from republicans. why? because we've got policies that really will help bring down the cost of health insurance. it's clear to obamacare is increasing the cost of health insurance for all americans and making it virtually impossible for small employers to hire new workers. >> o'donnell: how does it make it hard for small employers to hire more workers? >> because they're being required to either provide health insurance or pay a fine. well, i'm sorry, a tax. it's now a tax since the court said it was a tax. >> o'donnell: chief justice john roberts said it was a tax. >> even though the president tried to admit for over a year that it wasn't a tax and nobody believed it and now we know it. but it's getting in the way of employers hiring new workers. because of the increased costs of government-run health insurance and if they don't that have to provide a tax. the. >> o'donnell: the white house

says for employers if you have 25 or fewer you get a tax benefit. if you have 50 or fewer employers you don't have to provide them with insurance. so how is that hurting small businesses? >> well, when you talk about small businesses, under the federal government's deaf sigs of small businesses, that's 500 and under. you're talking about a lot of businesses. the majority in businesses in america would fall within that category and what's going to happen is most americans get their health insurance through their employer. now a lot of employers are just going to pay the tax and dump their employees into these health exchanges where they're not going to be able to keep the health insurance that they have. remember, the president said if you like your health insurance you can keep it. that's not true. >> o'donnell: when i talked about the specific provisions you said you want a common-sense approach. why not be specific about exactly what kind of protections you want to provide individuals? you won't be specific. why not say you would prevent discrimination for pre-existing

conditions? >> we've outlined a number of provisions last year allowing employers to... the american people to buy insurance across state lines. why wouldn't we allow small businesses to group together for the purposes of buying health insurance? why wouldn't we be able... one of the big cost drivers in health care is medical malpractice reform that results in almost one out of four tests being ordered by a doctor as unnecessary only to protect themselves from being sued? these are kinds of common-sense steps that we can take. >> o'donnell: why not, then, if you like some of the provisions in the affordable care act, why not work with it than repeal the whole thing? even mitt romney said... >> no, this has to be ripped out by its roots. this is government taking over the entire health insurance industry. the american people do not want to go down this path. they do not want the government telling them what kind of insurance policy they have to buy and how much they're going to pay for it and if you don't like it, we're going to tax you. it has to be ripped out and we

need to start over. one step at a time. >> o'donnell: so to heck with all these provisions like additional preventative care. >> all of them. all of them. we should replace... when we replace this we can have a common sense debate about which of these provisions ought to stay and which ought to go. >> o'donnell: so all those people who have pre-existing conditions you say we're going to get rid of this and at some point we'll deal with it? >> listen, i've already outlined we believe there's a better way to provide access to high quality health insurance in a different way than we have in obamacare. we believe ours will work just as well at much less cost to the american people. >> o'donnell: it's clear you oppose the individual mandate yet your republican nominee mitt romney came up with an individual mandate and proposed a tax penalty in massachusetts. does she a credibility problem? >> governor romney, just like the rest of us republicans in washington, are going to work to repeal obamacare and our resolve is stronger than ever with the

approval of the supreme court. >> o'donnell: but he was for it. doesn't he have a credibility problem? >> this was an issue niece massachusetts. that's one state. that's why we have 50 different states, they're laboratories of democracy. governor romney understands that obamacare will bankrupt our country and ruin the best health care delivery system in the world. >> o'donnell: facts are that the penalty in massachusetts under mitt romney for not buying health insurance was $1,200. the penalty under the president's health care law at its highest rate would be about $700. the massachusetts tax penalty was more restrictive and more punitive than the president's. >> governor romney believes, as i do, this that this law has to be repealed. >> o'donnell: it doesn't matter what he did before? >> this is far more than anything... any state had ever comprehended or even tried to do. this law is making health

insurance more expensive, harder for employers to hire new workers and taking away from the american people their choice of the health insurance they want and the doctor they choose. >> o'donnell: do you think this is going to be an issue in this campaign? >> it certainly will be. >> o'donnell: why? >> because that's what elections are for. you know, the president and i would have disagreements last summer when we were trying to solve our debt crisis, we'd get to a dead end and the president would look to me and say "john, that's what elections are for." well, now we know that this... when it comes to obamacare that's what elections are for. >> o'donnell: but the truth is you say mitt romney would work to repeal this. he says on day one. but don't you need a republican senate with a supermajority in order to get rid of it? >> we will not flinch from our resolve to make sure this law is repealed in its entirety. >> o'donnell: let's turn now to another issue in this campaign which is, of course, government spending. you have attacked obamacare as something this government can't

afford. are you willing to go forwardtor the american people and say "you're not going to able to enjoy the same kind of services enough the past. we've got to cut those services as part of shrinking the government"? >> we clearly have a problem. this president's driven the debt up $5 trillion in less than four years. we've got a $16 trillion national debt now. we have a $1.3 trillion budget deficit this year. you can't continue to spend money that you don't have. and i do believe that it's time to deal with this. i tried everything i could last year to work with the president to begin to process of getting our debt under control. >> o'donnell: can you look people in the eye and say "you are not going to enjoy the same services you had before"? >> we've got to make changes to all of our programs, because if we don't they will not exist. >> o'donnell: so people won't have the same kind of services. >> we've got to make adjustments

to them. how we do it, it's going to be the subject of a great debate as we get into this election cycle and as we get into the post-election cycle. >> o'donnell: let's turn to "fast and furious." there was a house contempt vote. do you expect that the justice department will bring suit against their own attorney general and when will you file a lawsuit in federal court? >> well, we're going to go down both paths. it's not clear to me that the u.s. district attorney will, in fact,... unless he recuses himself will proceed down that path. that's why we're going to also file in district court a civil suit over the issue executive privilege. >> o'donnell: when will that be? >> i would expect that to be coming in the next several weeks. but it needs to happen. the american people have a right to know what happened here. brian terry's family has a right to know what happened here and the fact is that the only facts that we've received about this entire fast and furious

operation came from whistle-blowers and others associated with it. we got no information that helped in our investigation from the justice department at any point in this investigation. the american people deserve the truth. >> o'donnell: finally, you've said recently that you believe that you've got two-thirds chance that republicans will keep the house of representatives. how does the supreme court ruling change that at all? >> well we'll let the pundits figure out the politics of this. when it comes to the supreme court ruling, i'm more concerned about the cost of health insurance for the american people and what it's doing at a time when the american people are asking "where are the jobs?" the pundits will figure it all out. >> o'donnell: mr. speaker, thank you. >> thank you. >> o'donnell: we'll be back in a minute. last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans... in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times...

in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spot on the gulf... and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. my sknowing what to make and not when could help cut down on thousands of unsold baked goods per month. using analytics, we discovered when it's drizzling outside... people eat more cake. and when the temperature rises, panini sales go up. finding these hidden connections helped our european bakeries increase profitability by up to 20%. let's build a smarter planet. >> o'donnell: joining me now two

top senators: democrat chuck shooupler in new york and oklahoma senator and medical $tom coburn, author of "the debt bomb, a bold plan to stop washington from bankrupting america." senator schumer, you heard speaker boehner say this needs to be ripped out from its roots. what's your reaction? >> well, you know, i think if republicans make as their number-one issue the repeal of health care they're certainly going to lose the election in the house and the senate and the presidency. bottom line is most americans are not for repeal. if you look at all the polls, a little more than a third are for repeal, the rest are either for keeping it or changing it but not repealing it. some of those who are for changing it want to make its tougher. there's good reason for that as you pointed out in your interview with speaker boehner, there are lots of things people like in the bills, like your kids can stay on health care until they're 26, the doughnut hole, prescription drug coverage for seniors.

and there are others that republicans like, subsidies for people who can't afford health care, requiring employers to provide health care. so the bill overall, people do not want repeal that's number one. number two, mitt romney is in a total pickle here. he prescribed this. this was his bill. speaker boehner saying it's a tax increase, they have ads saying it's a tax increase. are they going to say mitt romney had the biggest tax increase in massachusetts? forget about it. but most important, norah, and finally, the number one thing people want us to focus on is jobs, the economy, and increasing middle-class paychecks. the republican party's in a box, the tea party's pulling them over to just talk about repeal. that's number six or seven in the polls. the economy, jobs, middle-class paychecks number one and the week we get back to congress there's going to be a great contrast. they're going vote on a repeal of health care, litigate ago battle that has been going on for four years and we are going to put on the floor a small business jobs tax cut. you get a 10% tax credit for

every new employee you hire or when you increase people's salaries. >> o'donnell: what about that, senator coburn. do you want to throw this whole law out or is that a distraction from the main issue, the economy? >> well, i think it's extremely intertwined with the economy. and i think it's an example of where washington doesn't get it. one of the reasons we don't have significant job creation is the federal government itself. we haven't created the confidence, we haven't created the certainty for those who could invest and create jobs and what we've done is put up roadblocks to that. look, we're approaching the health care problem the wrong way. as a practicing physician for over 25 years, the one thing you want to do is fix the real disease, not the symptoms and the affordable care act fixed a lot of symptoms but not the disease. and the disease is does health care cost too much? and with the affordable care act it's going to cost a whole lot

more. now the estimates with the supreme court ruling is about $1.9 trillion. we don't have that money. $1.9 trillion more over the first four years is fully in place. >> o'donnell: but senator coburn the c.b.o. has scored this as not just deficit-neutral but saving taxpayers $100 billion. >> well, that's true but... that is not true. if you go look at their latest scoring, they scored it as a cost, they also scored it as costing a tremendous number of jobs and the other thing they have not scored since the supreme court ruling which is going to markedly increase the cost of the exchanges. so that's not accurate this bill costs $1.6 trillion minimum. it's going to cost more than that with the changes the supreme court made in terms of the optionality of medicaid for the states. the point is we ought to fix the

problem, not the symptoms and you're hearing all this politics about it. what we should have is real access and real care for people without an insurance company or the government between the patient and the physician. and we've not done that with this bill and a lot of the programs that are out there today don't do it and we need to change health care in america but we what we've done is making the problem worse, not better. >> o'donnell: let me ask you about something you said this week to your eagle daily investor about what this plan does. let's play a little bit of that tape. >> what we're trying to do with affordable care act is sovietize the american health care system. and i want to tell you, it didn't work out well for the soviet system. >> o'donnell: what did you mean by that "sovietize"? >> well, that means the bureaucrats and politicians are in charge of your health care. and that's exactly what this has done. there's not going to be individual choice. remember the components of this bill. there's an ipad bill.

there is, in fact, the preventative services task force that is going to mandate what care will be given and what care won't be. there's the innovation council that will approve or disapprove of any new innovation. we have three agencies that are going to totally take away the options of your freedom about your care and what you and your physician decide is best for you. so soviet... what i'm saying is you're going to have a bureaucracy. and i want to tell you, the bureaucracy at c.m.s. isn't working. the bureaucracy in terms of hrsa isn't working. the government bureaucracies today is one of the reasons costs are out of control. they're not a reason that they're lower. they have actually raised the cost of health care. >> o'donnell: all right, senator schumer, you know republicans say this is going to be a tax on individuals now and businesses. >> look, this is a penalty on free riders when you talk about the mandate very simply. what does that mean? it means that when someone who

doesn't have health care shows up at a hospital or doctor's office and needs treatment for an injury or illness, who pays for it? the rest of us. the average family pays $1,017 more in health care costs to pay for those free riders and we say, yes, they ought to pay a penalty and shouldn't be a free rider, it's the right thing to do. and let me just say this, norah. there are very few of them. you heard speaker boehner, mitt romney, 95% of americans will be affected. 1% will be under this penalty because most other americans, obviously.... >> o'donnell: 1% of individuals but what about 1% of small businesses? >> well, as you said small businesses under 50 don't have to provide health care. those with under 25 employers get a subsidy to do it and those larger than are going to find their costs going down and their bureaucracy going down once these exchanges take effect. so it will be a good thing for everybody. their bottom line... health care

was a mess! costs were going up. fewer people were covered. employers were kicking people, millions, off the rolls. this is going to make it a whole lot better. it started to already and it's going to get better in 2014 when the exchanges-- a basically free-market republican idea which the president adopted in an effort to compromise-- go into effect. >> o'donnell: obviously we have a lot more to talk about next. what's next for health care and mitt romney's pledge to replace it on his first day in office. we'll be back in one minute with more of this conversation. 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. don't want you spilling that hot latte on my driver's seat. this is my car. who are you? i'm the second owner. the what? i will own this car after you. look, i'm not telling you how to drive our car. our car? nor where to park her. maybe under a tree with less sap. if you're gonna have a latte in the car, keep a lid on it. it's a cappuccino. still needs a lid. [ male announcer ] the exceptional certified pre-owned program with the highest quality cars. good news for the second owner. take care of my car. ♪ >> o'donnell: we're back with senators shoe burn... shoe schumer and coburn. mitt romney says he's going to repeal this on day one of his presidency. can he do that? >> no, he's making the wildest statements that don't have the

basis in fact. the bottom line is that for states to not do the health care plan they have to put in an alternative plan that meets even better and stronger criteria. most of the states that want to repeal it don't even want to go as far as the health care bill. so he is not. and the author of the provision that allowed people to opt out, senator widen, who's done a great job on this area, has said specifically that mitt romney is totally wrong on this issue. >> o'donnell: senator coburn, now that the supreme court has said this is a tax, does that make it easier if republicans gain control of the senate to dismantle this law? >> well, i don't know if it makes it easier but we've said it was a tax all along and it is a rather huge tax. i want to go back to one thing about the exchanges. what senator schumer didn't inform you of is there's going to be subsidies in the exchanges. where are we going to get the

money for the subsidies for the exchanges? where's that going to come from? talking about growing our deficits. is the fact is, look, we all want to solve the health care problem and we're missing one key point is we're not going to allow any market forces to actually work in this bill because we are controlling them and until we actually have market forces work where we put individual responsibility along with an insurance project on purchasing of health care we're going to have indiscriminate use both by physician and patients. and until we correct that flaw we're never going to control the costs and we're never going to be able to afford... we can't afford... remember, medicare will be bankrupt in five years. i don't care what any politician in the country says. we're not going to be able to borrow the money for medicare. we took $500 billion out of medicare in this bill and we need to be solveing those

problems. >> o'donnell: all right... >> we can create access for seniors that gives them just as good a care by not ruining the economy and borrowing more money from the chinese. >> o'donnell: that's all the time we have. senators schumer and senator coburn... i almost molded those two names together. >> very bipartisan, norah! >> o'donnell: we'll be back in a minute. this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west,

the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state. one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com. >> o'donnell: some of our stations are leaving us now. for most of you, we'll continue our discussion on the health care decision and campaign 2012. stay with us. ,,,,,,,,,,

>> o'donnell: welcome back to "face the nation." we're going to get the state's perspective on the supreme court's health care decision with republican governor scott walker of wisconsin who's joining us from madison and here in our studio with me democratic government martin o'malley. the law requires that are the states set up an exchange and many states including maryland, others like wisconsin are waiting to see what will court decided. governor walker, let me ask ask you. the ball's in your court, what are you going to do? >> we're going to wait. we said all along there was a legal step, there's a political step and after each of those steps were exhausted we see what the future holds. very clearly the court pointed out the law is upheld constitutionally but it also pointed out very clearly it's a

massive tax increase. that's what we said all along, that is tax increase. at the time we're trying to help the private sector create more jobs in our state and across america a massive tax increase isn't the right answer. my hope is for people whether it's wisconsin or anywhere else around the country who don't like obamacare because of the tax increase, because of the impact in the economy and the budget, now the only chance to repeal that is to put in place a new president, a new senate majority sand then ultimately repeal the law so states like wisconsin an others can push a free market alternative. >> o'donnell: governor o'malley, is it a massive tax increase? >> that's the biggest falsehood being perpetuate bid these unflinching ideologues that this is a massive tax increase. a massive-so-called tax increase they're talking about is the freeloader penalty which would affect at most 1% to 2% of people that could afford health care and instead want to be freeloaders on the rest of us with uncompensated care. we decided early on to be an early implementer of health care reform, of obamacare because we

know that's good for businesses e. we know that will allow businesses to invest money in expanding job creation, expanding middle-class opportunity instead of throwing it away on ever-escalating health care costs. in fact, governor walker also signed an executive order himself in 2011 before his ideological politics got in the way that would have had wisconsin setting up exchanges, too. so, frankly, norah, we think we will have a competitive advantage on other states that are ruled by ideology when we engage in the hard work necessary to bring down health care costs. >> o'donnell: what about that, governor walker? is that a specious argument? that it's a massive tax increase when the c.b.o.-- the non-partisan congressional budget office-- said it will be a penalty on about 1% of americans? >> well, the c.b.o. shows a number of things, not the least of which is medicaid is one of the biggest drivers of any state budget, wisconsin, maryland, or anywhere else and they show on top of the normal increase that we would get all too often without adequate funding from the federal government that you're going to have almost 3% increase in terms of costs to

the states in the eight years when obamacare is fully enacted, from 2014 and on. so for starters, the c.b.o. shows that it's going to be a cost increase to taxpayers at the state level not just at the federal level. but the other part is the practicality is yes it's a tax increase, that's the whole reason why the law was upheld for those who claim victory they have to acknowledge that it wasn't upheld because of the commerce clause but because of the tax increase included in the measure itself. take, for example, wisconsin. wisconsin... governor o'malley is right, we looked at this and the opportunity then we looked at the facts and the facts showed by the same firm my predecessor employed the facts showed us in wisconsin, the majority of people in our state after obamacare is fully implement willed pay higher costs for less benefits than they got before. that's not a practical reaty for the people of wisconsin. that's not a benefit more them. that's certainly not good for the economy. and i think for people here in wisconsin and plenty of other states across the country we want to put the power back in the hands of people at the state

and the local level and not be driven by a federal mandate. >> o'donnell: let me challenge you on that, governor walker. mitt romney put in place an individual mandate in massachusetts. as part of that, he also imposed a tax penalty to encourage people to buy insurance to comply with the law. does that raise questions about mitt romney's credibility on this issue? >> no! i think what she he shows is as a former governor he understands the best place to tackle this is the state level and he understands you learn from the lessons of other states. in the case of wisconsin we learned that massachusetts is a good example, we learned from one what we learned from our actuarial assessment that we did past year that it was not.... >> o'donnell: would you ever put in place an individual man skate in >> no, in our case we think there's two extremes, that the government mandate you have under obamacare ultimately is the only way you control health care costs not today but in the future, the ultimate way that would end up leading towards is rationing of health care.

i don't think that's a good decision. on the other end, i and plenty of other governors would like to go down the path of a free market solution that engages me and every other consumer of health care in being a more active participant in controlling our health, not just our health care costs. what we do to control diabetes and other issues like that. >> o'donnell: what about that, governor o'malley, that mitt romney instituted an individual mandate, including a tax penalty his state? >> well, i think the reason why he did that was because he saw that the free market solution wasn't working. let's be honest here. the so-called free market solution during the decade of george bush led to us parting with 17% of our g.d.p. to rising health care costs. that's more than we pay in taxes. it led to 113% increase for businesses in their health care costs. so the reason why governor romney did that before he had to twist himself into an ideological interpret stoll satisfy the tea party wing that's running their party is because he saw that it would be better for businesses and, in

fact, you know what? it was. 77% rather than 70% of businesses now cover their employees' health care costs. he saw massachusetts actually bring down unemployment at a faster rate even after the freeloader penalty kicked in at that state level. so these fears that this horrible thing is a massive increase in taxes are false. i will agree with one thing that scott said and that is that we need to do a better job on wellness. that's what obamacare does. it moves us from a disease-based system that's with ever-escalating costs to one where good companies like united health care are hiring more people to do the wellness, to do the prevention and these are the things covered by obamacare makes sense in terms of reducing costs and also increasing our ability to invest in an economy that lasts. >> o'donnell: i want to return to this question about governor romney, governor walker, who proposed this. you have advocated even on this show in the past that mitt

romney should be more bold. should he be pold and come out and say what his alternative is on health care? >> well, he's talked about repealing, giving the powers to the states. i mean massachusetts, maryland, wisconsin, are all very different places. in our case as i mentioned under obamacare a majority of people, the data shows, from an actuarial assessment, not just a number we picked out of thin air, a majority of people in our state will pay more for less benefits. that's not a good deal under the federal mandate, under not just this tax increase but this federal mandate issue out there:. >> o'donnell: i'm confused about... replace it with what? what specifics? would you support a federal law that prevented discrimination for those with pre-existing conditions? >> well, i think some of those issues can be addressed federally and at the state level. the first thing i did as governor was sign into law a repeal on health savings accounts, that's... that gave small businesses and farmers one more option. there should be more done for transparency. i agree with governor o'malley

when we talk about the need to have greater wellness. the way to get there is by getting people more engaged and there's been a problem there the past with a very limited free market solution. there's been certainly a problem in the future in twourtd and on when obamacare's fully implemented. in each of those cases the average consumer doesn't know what they're doing. people get out their cell phones or iphones, most americans know more about their cell phone coverage... heck, i know as the father of two teenagers if i don't have unlimited texting i'll be in the poor house yet most americans don't know what's covered under their health insurance and they won't likely in the future under obamacare. we need a system that's more transparent so you are actively involved in those health care decisions. >> o'donnell: governor o'malley, that message from republicans and certainly a lot of the tea party anger after the president's affordable care act was passed led to democrats losing a lot of seats in the house and in governorships. should democrats campaign on this this year or talk about something else?

>> i think we need to do a better job of emphasizing that we cannot build an economy that lasts. and economy expanding jobs if we're ever year throwing away more and more money on ever more expensive health care for fewer and fewer people with worse and worse outcomes. so what we have an opportunity to do now that the supreme court has affirmed obamacare is to show that this will allow us actually to reduce the rising costs of health care. in fact, since passage last year we've seen premium costs, the rate of growth, has actually declined. >> o'donnell: so you're advocating democrats should campaign on it? >> i think we should tie it to the fact we need to create jobs and expand opportunity. and one of the key things that kept us from being economically competitive was that instead of businesses being able to invest and plant upgrades, they had to throw away more and more money

on wising health care costs. that's why in maryland we chose to be an early implementer. that's why we have an exchange up and going and that's why we're going to have an economic competitive advantage over other states that decide to put their head in the sand and pretend this isn't a problem. >> o'donnell: finally governor walker, what you did in wisconsin, reining in public unions you've said should be a model for the nation. why, then, should want governor romney did with an individual in massachusetts, why should that not be a model for the nation? >> well, i think, again, we should learn from it and the case here is simple. ultimately the thing i do agree with governor o'malley on is the fact that, one, we should have this be a key part of the debate come november and two, that it is about jobs, particularly about small businesses growing in each of our states and around the country. i think voters need to look at it logically and say looking to the future wh which is more likely to drive down health care costs and our states and jobs or having something that opens up the door so that all of us as consumers play a much more

active role, having sdmin the game when it comes to health care. i think the later is more the appropriate approach and that will ultimately create lower costs of better environment for creating jobs and better for america in each of our states. >> o'donnell: it appears the fight goes on even though the supreme court has decided. we'll be back in a minute with our political round table. laces? really? slip-on's the way to go. more people do that, security would be like -- there's no charge for the bag. thanks. i know a quiet little place where we can get some work done. there's a three-prong plug. i have club passes. [ male announcer ] get the mileage card with special perks on united, like a free checked bag, united club passes, and priority boarding. thanks. ♪ okay. what's your secret? [ male announcer ] the united mileageplus explorer card. get it and you're in. 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. >> o'donnell: now we turn to our political round table, major garrett of "national journal," john harris of politico, cbs' political correspondent jan crawford and our political director john dickerson. we'll start first jan because you've done some reporting. the big question was why did chief justice john roberts do what he did? you've learned new details. >> that's right, what was striking about this was that it was the conservative chief justice who was providing that

decisive vote, joining the liberal signature achievement and norah that was something no one would have expected in 2005 when president george w. bush put him on the supreme court and that was something that not even the conservative justices expected back in march when the court heard arguments in this case. i am told by two sources with specific knowledge of the court's deliberations that roberts initially sided with the conservatives in this case and was prepared to strike down the heart of this law, the so-called individual mandate, of course, that requires all americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. but roberts, i'm told by my sources, changed his views decideing to instead join with the liberals. he withstood-- i'm told by my sources-- a month-long desperate campaign by the conservative justices to bring him back to the fold and that campaign was led, ironically, by justice anthony kennedy and why that's ironic is because it was justice kennedy that conservatives feared would be the one most likely to defect but their

effort, of course, was unsuccessful, roberts didn't budge, the conservatives wrote that astonishing joint dissent united in opposition and roberts wrote the majority opinion with the four liberals to uphold the president's signature achievement. >> o'donnell: has this there been anything like this on the court before? there that's extraordinary that the chief justice decided to do this and was lobbied unsuccessfully. >> that has happened before and often in high profile controversial cases including justice kennedy who's changed his views in a very high-profile case involving a woman's rights on abortion back in 1992 and justices do change their mind. there is precedent for that. one justice told me that surprisingly enough it happens about once a term. but in the case of this magnitude with so much on the line conservatives believed they had roberts' vote in this case and there's quite a lot of anger within the hallways of the supreme court right now. >> o'donnell: very interesting. let's turn the politics of this and how it will play out. major, you've done reporting, do

the democrats... does this white house want to campaign on this now? they won this victory in the supreme court but are they going to use it on the campaign trail? >> they will in a couple contexts. david plouffe has told democrats that one thing that they learned for all their focus groups in the course of this campaign is that most swing voters are numbed and fatigued by the health care debate. so what they wanted was a resolution from the supreme court and the first question they would ask themselvess the does this affect me, my policy, my family? oh, it doesn't? let's get on with the campaign and let me get back to my life. so that's the obama campaign's approach. leverage it, david axelrod believes it can help the president recapture that change dynamic that was so powerful in 2008 that he was a change agent, he has changed the country and taken big risks and if you're motivated come along for the ride. will it be front and center? absolutely not. front and center will be, of course, we all know, the economy. >> o'donnell: john dickerson, what about that? for the romney team will they use that? >> romney does have an opening.

if you think about this decision we've had these storms here in washington. a neighbor of mine, a tree fell in just missed his car. the neighbor's okay. the this is kind of like the president. 30% of the people didn't like this bill and mitt romney is benefitting from that. he's raised over $5 million after this decision and he's been able to consolidate his conservatives and tea party behind him. that was already happening but it's really happening now and small business people. governor romney says it's a job killer, they hate this health care bill but governor romney does have liabilities because of his massachusetts experience. >> o'donnell: on that very point governor romney in 2009-- i want to put this on the screen-- he talked about the individual mandate and tax penalty he used in massachusetts saying "using tax penalties as we did or tax credits has as others have proposed encourages free riders to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medicat costs on to

otherings." so he was for a tax penalty that in fact was more punitive the tax penalty under the president's affordable care act. >> if you remember in the primaries rick santorum says governor romney won't be able to take the fight to the president on this question of health care because of the liabilitys in his past. so in your interview with john boehner he's saying this tax that allows the individual mandate to happen, that's terrible, a fatal flaw. but then you have mitt romney here in his past with the statements not saying it's a fatal flaw, i saying it's in keeping with personal responsibility. that's a conflict. >> o'donnell: how do you see it, john. i think each one wants to move on to the discussion about the economy and jobs. >> i think they're not the only ones that want to move on. this election is going to be decided by a fairly narrow slice of swing voters, we're a highly polarized country. there's no chance of swinging

them. there is a middle out there, it's a disaffected middle that is sour on politics and increasingly our with the choice they face in this campaign. i think that group is test desperate for a forward-looking argument. tell me about the future and how you would make it better. the thing about the health care debate is it's almost by definition a backward-looking argument. let's debate what we tried to legislate in 2009 and 2010. that's not the debate that people want. they want it forward looking. >> o'donnell: another big issue on the campaign trail is the attacks that the obama team has made on bain capital and mitt romney's record as a businessman we saw this week it got overshadowed on the focus of health care. joe biden launched this tough attack last week. let's listen. >> look, folks, we need to choose between who can be commander-in-chief, not outsourcer in chief. we need someone who creates jobs in davenport and dubuque and pittsburgh and toledo, not

singapore, south korea and shanghai. (applause) >> o'donnell: you saw romney team go to the "washington post" to ask them to retract this story that started this where they put the forth reporting about how bain had led to some offshoring of jobs. is it having an effect? is the obama campaign focus on this working? >> writ large it is. it's not just bain, it's outsourcing offshoring. we can have a debate about what the difference is between that. the obama campaign believes people will comingle them together. the bottom line is their focus group goal for an opposition party that wants to put someone in a box and they believe they have put romney a box. the overarching theme for the obama campaign is take everything he will assert and take it away bit by bit by bit. not all in one fell swoop but over time. they believe this last month though a lot of people in washington think it's been a terrible month for the president

they look at swing state favorability ratings for the romney campaign moving in a negative direction. they believe they've been more successful than has been properly received or interpreted. >> o'donnell: you covered the romney campaign, jan, how are they going to snond >> the romney campaign believed that this is going to be a brutally negative campaign. they knew they were going to come under enormous assault for everything that mitt romney has done whether in the private sector or as governor because they believe the president has no record to run on itself, nothing to point to his accomplishments. they believe that's going to be their job, to talk about what the president done and how, as they put it, he has failed on the economy and that's going to be their message to continue saying that the president has failed on the economy and in fact he wasn't this great change agent, that he's another career politician and it's business as usual when americans want something different and new. >> pelley: what about the focus

on the career politicians? >> as major said, in the states you see governor romney's unfavorable numbers going up. the romney campaign is going to return fire on this question of favorability from the president. there's something keeping the president aloft. bad economy, people think the country going in a wrong direction, they think the president has been a bad steward on the economy yet in head-to-head polls with mitt romney he does well. and his approval number, while below 50%, danger zone for any president, is not in the really bad place. what's holding him up? what's allow thiplg defy gravity it's the attack on trying to make romney unfavorable. >> o'donnell: do you think we'll be talking about bain capital or health care come october? >> that will be a sour election, frankly, it will be a drag if either one of them is still dominating four or five months from now, again, this idea of a backward inform looking campaign. i don't think that the obama campaign even intends for us to be talking about bain capital then. what they're trying to do is build a narrative, as major said. systematic demolition of mitt

romney's image and so this is just part of a narrative. i think what they're trying to say is the value in bain capital reflects his value of how he'll governor and probably that will be the argument in act. >> o'donnell: that and that will set up the narrative. great round table, thanks to all of you. great reporting. we'll be back in a minute with our "face the nation" flashback. ,,,,,,,,,,,,

>> o'donnell: back in 2007 when presidential candidate barack obama made health care reform one of his key campaign promises, many thought it would never happen. but more than five years later the president's affordable care act has survived a nasty political fight ending with a stamp of approval from the supreme court. well, the history of the battle over health care reform is this week's "face the nation" flashback. >> the time has come for universal health care in america. (cheers and applause) health care reform cannot wait; it must not wait; and it will not wait another years. (cheers and applause)

>> throwing the current system under the bus and replacing it this w this giant government bureaucracy is not what i want, it's not what the american people want. >> now wait a minute! now wait a minute! >> we have now been debating this issue of health insurance reform for months. >> we are putting forth a bill that reflects our best values and addresses our greatest challenges >> kill the bill! kill the bill! >> the core problem is the american people do not want us to pass it. >> we have to start by taking the current bill and putting it on the shelf and starting from a clean sheet of paper. >> the patient protection and affordable care act is passed. >> we are done. (cheers and applause) >> pelley: president obama's health care is headed to the supreme court. >> obamacare has got to go! >> the chief justice has joined

with four of the court's liberals to uphold the mandate. >> yes, we can! yes, we can! >> remust replace obamacare. >> it's time for us to move forward. >> while the legal battle may be over-- as we've heard from today's guests-- the political fight is heating up all over again. this week's "face the nation" flashback. in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spot on the gulf... and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. this is new york state. we built the first railway, the first trade route to the west, the greatest empires. then, some said, we lost our edge. well today, there's a new new york state.

one that's working to attract businesses and create jobs. a place where innovation meets determination... and businesses lead the world. the new new york works for business. find out how it can work for yours at thenewny.com.

>> o'donnell: thank you for watching "face the nation." bob schieffer will be back next sunday. i'm norah o'donnell. have a happy fourth of july. ,,,,,,,,