undocumented in a way that's compassionate but also in a way that's responsible. it will allow them to ultimately earn access to our legal immigration system. they will still have to apply. it doesn't award them anything, but it does give them access to our legal immigration system, to a process that will not encourage people to come here illegal willy in the future, and through a process that isn't unfair for the people who have done it the right way. you talk about the political calculus, i have avoided making the political calculus on this issue because for me, and this may sound new to people, what have you,terms of how politics works today, but what we have now isn't good for anybody. what we have in place today, the status quo, is hobble for america. the only people benefiting from the status quo in immigration today are people trafficking human beings across the border and the people hiring illegal labor for cheap purposes, you know, to pay them very little. these are the only people benefiting from the status quo. it's bad for everyone else. >> as you well know and the criticism is fast and furious from conservatives like ted

cruz, your fellow senator, for those who are going through the legal process, they'll feel like chum ps who are outside this country. his words. because those here illegally would get on this legal path to citizenship even if they would pay a pent, even if they would pay a fine and have to go through other checks. why isn't it tantamount to amnesty as your critics say? >> well, first of all a.mnesty s the forgiveness of something. in fact, there will be consequences for having violated the law and reasonable consequences. but the type of consequenceses that ensure that there's no incentive to do it this way again. here is my second point. if you're waiting to come legally to the united states now, no one who has done it the wrong way will get it before you. it will be cheaper, faster, easier and less bureaucratic if you are doing it the right way. in no way having done this the wrong way be a reward in comparison to the people who are waiting to come here legally or the ones who have come here legally in the past. so i can't wait for the details of this to be available because i think people will find we've addressed that concern

specifically and effectively. >> three years ago in a debate you were clear on this. you said to earn a pathway to citizenship you would have to leave this country if you were here illegally, go back home, and then you could come back in. you said an earned pathway was amnesty. yet you've changed your mind here. why? >> well, first of all, what i said throughout my campaign was that i was against a blanket amnesty and this is not blanket amnesty. this is not blanket anything. it's not amnesty because you pay serious consequenceses for having violated the law. third, we need to understand the existing law. the existing law does not prohibit someone from violating the immigration laws from getting a green card. it simply says you have to leave the united states and you have to wait ten years. what we have done is created an alte alternative to that that forces you to wait more than ten years, that forces you to pay an application fee, that, forces you to pay a significant fine, that forces you not to qualify for any federal benefits of any kind, that tells you you have to

work and be gainfully employed so you are not a public charge. even with all of that, you don't gain access to the green card process. you have to apply for it. it's not award ed to you. you don't gain access to any of that until there's a universally verified system in place and an exit system in place. >> there's a change. you said that you would have to leave the country before you could come back, and you've changed on that. >> but that's not necessarily what i've said in the past. what i've said in the past is there is a the pathway to citizenship and that is the legal immigration system. and all this bill does is give people access to the legal immigration system. it allows them to earn an access to the legal immigration system. and so what we are doing is we are creating an altern it tetch to that path that exists now and quite frankly it will be cheaper, easier and faster to leave and wait ten years than to go through this process that we've designed. >> the political problem the party faces, republicans face among minority communities, is so large if you look at the results from the 2012 election.

you've spoken to it as have others and i wonder whether this is enough, the party's repositioning, your leading the way is enough to overcome those difficulties. colin powell was on the program earlier this year. he had some comments about the plight for the republican party and i want to get your response to them. >> i think what the republican party needs to do now is take a very hard look at itself and understand that the country has changed. the country is changing demographically. and if the republican party does not change along with that demographic, they're going to be in trouble. there's also a dark -- a dark vein of intolerance in some parts of the party. what do i mean by that? what i mean by that is they still sort of look down on minorities. >> do you agree with that, and do you think that these efforts on immigration are enough to overcome it? >> well, first of all, i don't agree the republican party characterized by intolerance or looking down on anybody and i

respectfully disagree with someone i think has served our country admirably. obviously there's political ramifications to everything we do in washington, but it's not the rein to do it and it certainly isn't the reason i'm involved in doing this. i'm involved because i think what we have now is terrible for the united states of america. we have a legal immigration system that does not work. it does not reflect the economic needs of this country in the 21st century. it needs to be modernized and our agreement will do that. it will modernize the legal immigration system that is more merit based and jobs based and less based on whether you know someone who already lives here and that's an important development along with the ability for people to access is the workforce in the high-tech field, et cetera. the second thing this does, it puts in place effective enforcement mechanisms unlike anything we've ever had in the history of this country before. my last point on this, i think republicans need to do a better job reaching out to everyone in the united states. politics is always about getting the support of the majority of our people. and i think the best way to do that is is for the republican party to prove, as i think we

can, that we are the party of upward mobility. we are not the party of the people who have made it. certainly we don't begrudge people who have made it. we secelebrate what they have done. in america we've always celebrated success. but we are the party for the people trying to make it, who are trying to start a business out of the spare bedroom of their home who are trying to give their kids a better life. and the only way that's possible is through the american free enterprise system the democrats on the left are undermining. >> isn't the hole rather deep? based on our recent poll, favorable/unfavorable ratings among hispanics in this country comparing you to hillary clinton here, look at her at 63%/13%. you are at 23%/12%. isn't that a sign of just how big the hole is even among hispanics in the country between you and top tier of democrats? >> i don't know anything about these polls. and i quite frankly don't spend a lot of time analyzing them. this isn't about improving anyone's poll numbers. this is simple. i'm a senator. i get paid to solve problems.

we have millions of people in this country who are illegal ly here. we don't know who they are, where they are. many of them aren't paying taxes. it's not good for them obviously either. it's not good for our economy. we have a legal immigration system that our business community is telling us is keeping them from creating jobs that can lead to economic growth. >> understood. >> we have immigration laws that aren't being enforced. >> there's something that happens in this debate, the amendment process, additional opposition from conservatives that causes you to step back and say, i can no longer support this compromise agreement. >> well, i've been very clear about my principles of what reform needs to look like, and if this bill were to somehow ab abandon those principles, certainly i wouldn't support that. i don't anticipate that. there are amendments, designed to make a bill better. i think that's important. what we are working on is a starting point. it snos the take it or hev it. we spent a lot of time crafting it. i think it's a very good piece of legislation, a very good law.

there are 92 other senators who have ideas of their own, and i think that from them we are going to get ways to improve this. we are going to get ideas that make it better and i welcome that. there are amendments designed to undermine this, that will be designed to make this thing undoable. and obviously i'll oppose that especially if that's the intent of them. so certainly i'm looking forward to an open process of debate on this. >> i want to get to a couple of other issues including the gun control debate. striking moment this weekend when you had one of the family members of the victims in newtown actually give the weekly address that the president normally gives. wheeler had this to say. i want to play a portion of it and get your response. >> we have to convince the senate to come together and pass common sense gun responsibility reforms that will make our communities safer and prevent more tragedies like the one we never thought would happen to us. >> how do you answer francine wheeler when you are opposed to expanding background checks, when you voted even to oppose

this debate coming forward in the senate? >> well, first of all, let the me say my heart, as everyone else's, goes out to these families. i actually met with these families including her and her husband. it was, i can tell you, the most emotional meeting i've ever had in my service. i admire these families because, quite frankly, their agenda is not a political one. they are trying to turn this horrifying tragedy into a positive in terms of getting changes in public policy, and i applaud them for that. here is my point and has always been my point on gun laws. they are highly ineffective in terms of accomplish the following goal and that is to protect the right of law abiding citizens to possess weapons which the second amendment guarantees, the constitutional right, and they are ineffective at keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals who quite frankly because they're criminals don't care what the law is. so i'm not opposed to all gun laws. i'm just opposed to the ones that don't do those two things, don't protect the right to keep firearms. >> don't you need to be

challenged? >> i don't think these accomplish that. >> there are checks at the federal level. this would expand those checks in order to shore up certain loopholes. how is it that those additional checks would undermine the second amendment? >> well, first of all, we have, for example, concealed weapons permits across the country. i have one. these are people that are preapproved in terms of getting concealed weapons permit. perhaps there's a way to accommodate that across all 50 states where concealed weapons permit is treated as a de facto background check. ultimately the reason we are doing this, in essence we are spending all of our time talking about background checks as if criminals will no longer get guns because they have to undergo a background check, we're lying to people. that isn't true. the fact of the matter is we have a violence problem in america. guns are what people are using, but violence is our problem and no one is having a debate about the violence problem. and i think this is a missed opportunity to have an honest and open conversation in this country about why these horrifying things are happening. not simply what they're using to carry this out but why are people doing this to it begin

with and all the focus is on laws that only law abiding people are going to follow. >> you know the political analysis right now as a pro-suspect issive 2016 nominee, you have to be careful not to stray too far from the republican party on guns particularly when you're stepping out trying to be a leader on immigration. you have to pick your areas where you're going to stand out. >> david, i disagree with that. my position on guns is the same as they've always been. the second is amendment is a constitutional right. i didn't write that. that's in there. anytime you're going to do anything that impacts a constitutional right, the scrutiny should be very, very high. and that's what i'm applying to th this. if someone can produce a law that keeps guns out of the hands of criminals but protects the rights of law abiding citizens to possess them and doesn't infringe on those rights, i would support that. i haven't fully read the toomey/manchin compromise but all the proposals do not reach that. we are miss iing a golden

opportunity to have an important debate about violence in our society. violence in our society is the problem. >> i want to ask you about north korea can as the administration waits for a potential missile launch from kim jong-un. how do you think the admission has handled it? how do you defuse this crisis? >> i don't have much qualms with the way they've handled it, to be quite frank. i think they've taken the right steps to protect the united states and to make very clear that we are going to live up to our security obligations to our allies in the reswron. the truth of the matter is that i think it's a mistake to view north korea can as a government. it is more like a criminal syndicate. and this young man now in charge of government there is even more erratic, as hard as it is to believe, than his predecessors. it's a very dangerous situation. i'm glad to see secretary kerry visited china yesterday. i think it's important that the chinese weigh in on this. i think in the long term it's the goal of everyone to see a unified korea that actually provides for the people of north korea, the kind of life that they need. i think certainly in the short term what we have to ensure is all of our allies in the region clearly understand that we are

going to live up to our security commitment, that we are position ed militarily to defend the united states if, in fact, these guys carry out an irrational act and long term to make them understand that this pattern of irresponsible behavior followed by some sort of reward in the form of food aid that those days are over and that is what's important, that we not reward that behavior with any sort of aid. >> you were critical of the administration after a trip down to cuba by beyonce and jay-z. they were seen vacationing there, walking through the streets. it was sanctioned by the treasury department. isn't the broader issue here, senator, what, if anything, will it take to get more normal relations with cuba and the united states? >> well, that's up to cuba. if cuba wants normal relations, there are certain things they need to do like become a normal country that respects the rights of their citizens. i thought it was hypocritical of beyonce and jay-z to go down to cuba. there is a rapper on a hunger strike and has been persecuted because of his lyrics. jay-z wears a shirt of a man who

was a racist and a killer. he's not in the middle of any public discourse here. it's important to point out when people take stances like that that are absurd, beyond that the fundamental problem is not jay-d and beyonce. the problem is these trips to cuba are being abused. they are not people to people trips, they are tourist trips that provide a currency for a tyrannical regime at that get hard currency. that's why the trips need to be ca carefully cruet nized. >> final question on politics, can a nominee of the republican party in 2016 be a champion for an immigration reform policy that provides a pathway to citizen for for illegal immigrants in this country? >> i think the nominee in our party needs to have answerses to the problems our country faces and immigration is a serious problem. the supposed 11 million people here undocumented is not a theory. no one is talking about bringing

11 million people here illegally. they are here now. they are here for the rest of their lives. if someone believes we can round them up and deport them, they should advocate that. i don't think that's a reasonable goal. if someone thinks we should make life miserable for them so they self-deport, it doesn't work. we can leave things the way they are, status quo, and that is amnesty. or try to address it in a way that's responsible and that's what i'm attempting to do and what i hope i can convince my fellow republicans to be supportive of. >> senator, thank you as always. thanks for not making fun of my voice. >> thank you. >> and coming up here after a personal plea from the familiar had lis of newtown victims this week, new gun control legislation moves forward on capitol hill. but will controversial measures like expanded background checks get through a divided congress? joining me for debate democratic senator kirsten gillibrand of new york and republican senator from utah mike lee. later, my special conversation about the legacy of jackie robinson with his wife of [ male announcer ] this is kevin.

to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap.

♪ are you still sleeping? just wanted to check and make sure that we were on schedule. the first technology of its kind... mom and dad, i have great news. is now providing answers families need. siemens. answers. coming up, senators lee and gillibrand are here along with we know why we're here. to chart a greener path in the air and in our factories. ♪ to find cleaner, more efficient ways to power flight. ♪ and harness our technology for new energy solutions. [ female announcer ] around the globe, the people of boeing are working together,

to build a better tomorrow. that's why we're here. ♪ in that time there've been some good days. and some difficult ones. but, through it all we've persevered, supporting some of the biggest ideas in modern history. so why should our history matter to you? because for more than two centuries, we've been helping ideas move from ambition to achievement. ♪ and the next great idea could be yours. ♪

transit fares! as in the 37 billion transit fares we help collect each year. no? oh, right. you're thinking of the 1.6 million daily customer care interactions xerox handles. or the 900 million health insurance claims we process. so, it's no surprise to you that companies depend on today's xerox for services that simplify how work gets done. which is...pretty much what we've always stood for. with xerox, you're ready for real business.

and we are back with our roundtable. joining me republican senator from utah, mike lee, and democratic senator from new york, kirsten gillibrand. columnist for "the new york times," david brooks, washington correspondent and anchor for bbc

world news america, katty kay, and nbc news chief white house correspondent, our political director, chuck todd who might have to take over at any time. thank you for being here. senators, let me begin with you and get reaction to senator rubio. on immigration what is the bottom line here? are there going to be poison pills that ultimately kill this legislation or do you see it surviving? >> it's something that might well survive the senate with a few republican votes that appear to be on it. it could get through especially if a few others join it. what we do not know are the details, the fine print of the bill. some have suggested it could be as long as 1,500 pages. i look forward to seeing it. >> what are you concerned about as you hear senator rubio? >> what i'm most concerned about is the fact that i think we need to undertake this in a step-by-step fashion. i agree with 70% or 80% of what they've been talking about. i think we're best served if we start with border security and move on to visa modernization, the entry/exit system.

we can get those things passed. there's broad-based bipartisan consensus. it will be easier to deal with the 11 million. >> is the pathway to citizenship a real deal breaker to you? >> the pathway to citizenship right now before those elements are in place is a deal breaker for me. it's not necessarily something that would be a deal breaker down the road. i think we need it to get the other things in place first. it's a matter of sequencing. >> some of that is very processed. senator gillibrand, it seems what conservatives want is a real down payment literally and figuratively on border security before they're willing to open up the pathway to citizenship piece of it. >> i think this conversation is so important because the bottom line is immigration reform will strengthen our economy, strengthen our security, and really honors our tradition as americans that this country was founded on immigrants. it's the richness and the diversity that strengthens our country. >> what's different now than when president bush pursued this with senator mccain? when he was for the idea of a pathway to citizenship? what has changed fundamentally that can get conservatives to a place they don't appear to be which is to support the pathway to citizenship? >> i think the national debate has changed.

the country has shifted. and we know that if you have comprehensive immigration reform, you are going to strengthen the economy. you are going to have more people pay into the system, pay into social security, paying their taxes. you're going to raise wages so you have more people investing in their local communities and our small businesses. we want to see economic growth. this is an economic engine. again, i mean, we believe that diversity strengthens our nation. it's what our country was founded on. so this comprehensive approach and this balanced approach that does really focus on national security issues as well is something that i think will garner long-term bipartisan support. >> we're talking about immigration and the gun debate this weekend. "saturday night live" had a pretty pointed, with a laugh, criticism at the what is being debated about the background checks. here is a portion of their open last night. >> good evening. my fellow americans, as you know over the past few months i have made gun control legislation a top priority for my administration.

which is why i am so excited to announce that this week the senate voted 68-31 to begin debating the idea of discussing gun control. let me say that again. they've agreed to think about talking about gun control. amazing. >> senator gillibrand, isn't that really the problem? despite all the emotion, despite the public opinion polls, not a lot is about to be accomplished here. >> i disagree. i think moving forward on this debate is so important because we have republicans who say this is important for the country. and we have gun reform legislation that is bipartisan already. we have a background check bill that is not bipartisan. we have an anti-straw purchaser bill that i helped to write that is bipartisan. we have a lot of bipartisan support on mental health investment. i think we have a very good start on beginning to crack down on gun crime. and the bottom line is, the families of newtown, the families all across america who lose children every single day

to gun violence deserve a vote, they deserve an answer. they deserve leadership out of washington. that is what is happening. >> it appears they'll get that, senator lee. do you think what is called manchin/toomey here in washington, which is an expanded background check bill, will it pass the senate? >> it remains to be seen whether it will pass the senate. it wasn't introduced until after we had voted to proceed to the bill. following the tragedy at sandy hook, americans have been rightfully focused on how to prevent such tragedies from occurring in the future. but, unfortunately, the proposals we've seen would seem to limit the rights of law abiding citizens while doing little, if anything, to actually prevent tragedies like this from occurring in the future. so toomey/manchin does have some carveouts. but we know that today's carveouts are tomorrow's loopholes and that's of concern to us. this bill, i believe, would do more to limit the rights of the lay law abiding than to prevent violent crime and that's why i can't support it. >> can i disagree? there is so much in these bills

that have nothing to do with law abiding citizens. that have specifically to do with criminals. my bill in new york state 85% of the weapons used in crimes come from out of state and 90% are illegal. you're talking nine out of ten used in crimes are being trafficked by straw purchasers with the intent on selling them directly to gangs and, david, there's 30 people who die every single day because of gun violence. we have to answer the pleas of their parents and the communities that are suffering. >> i want to get everyone involved here. this is a tough vote from members of your own party, for fellow senators. even you as a congresswoman from upstate new york talked about guns much differently and the power of the gun lobby in 2008 in your campaign website. it had this. congresswoman gillibrand grew up in a family of hunters and strongly supports the rights of all hunters and gun owners.

she's been an ardent opponent of legislation that will curb the second amendment. and has a 100% voting record with the national rifle association. you were touting that back in 2008 as a congresswoman from a more conservative area. this is tough for democrats. >> that's why i know this bill will work and this compromise will work. it is making sure that you protect second amendment rights, not undermining second amendment rights by saying criminals have to go through a background check before they can buy that weapon or straw purchasers and traffickers can't. stemming these guns. >> but the nra doesn't believe that. the nra doesn't agree. >> it is not about the nra. this is about families. it's about america. 70% of nra members like the background check bill, like the straw purchase bill. they even foot things like the assault weapons ban. when you talk about people, america, and what americans want, americans want these reforms. we just saw that mother who lost her child. you cannot do nothing in the face of that tragedy. >> david brooks, from immigration to guns to the budget, do you see the parties finding mutual self-interest to get something done?

>> yeah, if you woke up this week you would be under the illusion we're in a functioning democracy. things are working well especially on immigration. i have to salute the gang of eight. the gang so far in the senate haven't worked so well, but they are working well, the administration gave them space. i think marco rubio is a hero. he said earlier today he is not thinking about the politics. i hope he's thinking about the politics. the politics are going to be tough for him if he runs for president with this. it's heroic what he's doing and so it's senators acting in prudent and courageous ways this week. and i think that's true on guns but especially immigration. it's been a good week for those of us who watch this. >> chuck todd, a quick question for the senators or comment? >> i would say i agree. i do think the difference between immigration and guns is immigration the emotion has been taken out of it and that's why you're seeing a whole bunch of people attack it as public policy rather than getting -- the gun issue because it's emotional makes it harder. senator lee, i guess my one question is do you not believe

the metric that they're going to have with the border security? because that supposedly -- that has to -- there's going to be an amount that they have to come up with and say, okay, the border is secure. then the path to citizenship begins. do you just not believe that's going to be the case? >> you know, it's not so much -- >> that's what you target in the bill. >> it's not so much i don't believe the metric. it's that i think it's a matter of political reality and as a matter of practical implementation of these laws. we can pass things right now that would deal with border security and that will implement the entry/exit system and will update and modernize our visa system. we can get that done. there is broad-based bipartisan support for all of those things in both parties of congress. we can get that done. there's a lot less consensus on what to do with the 11 million. what i'm saying is let's get those things done right now. we will deal with the 11 million once those things are done and i think we'll be able to convince a lot more people to support addressing the 11 million that way.

>> katty? >> on the immigration question it seems that it's the border security can be secured there is no reason for the republican party nationally not to jump on board on this. actually aren't we looking in your party at the conflicting polls between house districts, house races, and what is clearly right for the republican party in terms of presidential and even senatorial politics? what november revealed with about the changing demographics of this country is something that is clear from a party policy point of view but which, when you talk to individual members of the house, is still going to be the sticking point. i would love to agree with david that we are at a time of functioning government. america has gotten to the stage it was almost ungovernable recently. i wonder when these things get out of the senate and into the house, are we going to hit that roadblock again where individual congressional districts, whether it's on immigration or whether it's on gun control are still going to gum up the process. >> katty, to your point, if you are just saying that a border security is the most important

issue, we've come a long way on border security. president obama has made a big commitment on that. he has 21,000 boots on the ground to do the work. they have aerial surveillance technology they've never had before. they've done a lot. the number of confiscations that have taken place continue to decrease over time because they're just getting it done. so i think to say you can't do immigration reform before you do border security is not only a red herring but so short-sighted because, again, immigration is such an economic issue. as you said if you take the emotion out of it, it's a huge economic engine. if you want to put the emotion back in, i'm happy with that, too. i like the dream act and i think these young children who are brought here by their parents should be able to live the american dream. >> but again, in 100 house districts where there is an immigration reform, then that gets used. it gets used as the reason to gum up the process. >> if there's one thing we learned from the last comprehensive immigration debate we had in 2007 is that when we play politics with this area of the law, everyone loses.

we stalled out further immigration efforts for effectively six years. what i'm saying is not necessarily that you have to do border security first because it's the most important. these are all important issues. what i'm saying is that as a matter of sequencing, you have to deal with border security, have an entry/exit system, and you've got to update and modernize our visa system so that it works and that way we'll be in a better position to implement and enforce whatever laws we have. >> i only have a couple of minutes. i want to throw the budget out here. because i think it's part of what washington is dealing with. david brooks, the criticism from republicans and president obama he wasn't taking entitlement seriously. now he's talking about reducing the benefits of social security over time and here a key republican who had called upon him to do that this week and his response to the president's budget was the following. >> the budget really lays out a shocking attack on seniors, if you will. >> he is the head of the republican committee to re-elect republicans in the house saying

we asked to you do this but now you've done it. why are you going after seniors? >> that was opportunism on stilts. i think he was more or less alone. i talked to house leadership people and they're still, we should do reform. and so i think what obama can did is the right thing to do. it was too small. essentially we have this widening inequality problem, we've got wage stagnation, 52% of the kids born out of wedlock to moms under 30, born out of wedlock, and discretionary spending, the domestic programs, health education, welfare, that's going down to eisenhower levels under this budget. so we should be more aggressive on entitlements so we could be spending money on young people. he does do that. he takes a tiny step in that direction but not big enough. >> i think you make a good point. the quickest way to pay down the debt and reduce the deficit is to create a growing economy. that's why the investments matter to david. for example, investing in universal pre-k makes a difference. investing in high-tech manufacturing research and development makes a difference. increasing the minimum wage makes a difference. those are all priorities in the president's budget that are

about economic growth. i think he goes a long way to entitlement reform in the medicare/medicaid area where they're harmonizing rebates. that's smart. >> against the social security. >> but i do not agree with the social security cuts. and the reason i don't agree with the social security cuts is because why, why, why are we cutting benefits to seniors and veterans when social security is not a driver of the debt. for me it's the wrong priority. >> i want to get a comment from chuck, about 20 seconds left here. >> watching what happened with greg walden, the white house -- it couldn't have gone any better for them. here they were, this is exactly what republicans thought was going to happen the minute they desperately wanted the president to put chained cpi on the paper. go own it. because they thought one of the side benefits will be the left and he'll have this divisive fight. it gave the president a walk away from the talks card.

>> i have to leave it there. >> and he doesn't want to walk away from the talks. >> i don't think he does. now he has the claim. >> i have to get a break in here. thank you all very much. we're going to take a quick break. when we come back, my voice is going to get remarkably better as you will hear my special conversation i taped on friday about the legacy of baseball legend jackie robinson and what his story of struggle means today. joining me the woman who stood by his side through all of it, his wife of 26 years, rachel robinson, as well as documentary filmmaker ken burns. we'll also hear from harrison ford who stars in the new robinson film "42" playing the man who made robinson's story robinson film "42" playing the ma[ male announcer ] ok, here's the way the system works. let's say you pay your guy around 2% to manage your money. that's not much you think. except it's 2% every year. does that make a difference? search "cost of financial advisors" ouch. over time it really adds up. then go to e-trade and find out how much our advice costs. spoiler alert: it's low. really? yes, really. e-trade offers investment advice and guidance from dedicated, professional financial consultants. it's guidance on your terms, not ours. that's how our system works. e-trade. less for us. more for you.

[ agent smith ] i've found software that intrigues me. it appears it's an agent of good. ge has wired their medical hardware with innovative software to be in many places at the same time. using data to connect patients to software, to nurses to the right people and machines. ♪ helping hospitals treat people even better, while dramatically reducing waiting time. now a waiting room is just a room. [ telephone ringing ] [ static warbles ] [ beeping ] red or blue?

♪ the world needs more energy. where's it going to come from? ♪ that's why right here, in australia, chevron is building one of the biggest natural gas projects in the world. enough power for a city the size of singapore for 50 years. what's it going to do to the planet? natural gas is the cleanest conventional fuel there is. we've got to be smart about this. it's a smart way to go. ♪ and we're pack. 66 years since jackie robinson broke the color barrier in baseball. it was a big moment then, and it is just as important now even for a generation coming of age with president obama. a new movie is out about his life called "42." it's jackie robinson day throughout major league baseball tomorrow. we'll hear from harrison ford

who i spoke with for press pass this week. he plays dodger owner branch ricky in the film. here with me documentary filmmaker ken burns and jackie robinson's wife of 26 years, rachel robinson. mrs. robinson, it is just an honor too much you here. thank you very much. >> oh, thank you for having me. i'm so thrilled about the film that i love talking about it. >> and, ken, always great to see you. let me start with you, mrs. robinson. it construction me that you were recently at the white house and the first lady spoke so enthusiastically about this film. she made the observation about how much has changed since jackie robinson broke the color barrier in baseball. what strikes you about how relevant jackie robinson's story is even today? >> oh, i think it is relevant. i think one needs to know, particularly young people, need to know the history of that era so that they can make comparisons between then and now and we have made a lot of progress in america, but we

still have a long way to go before we can say that we have equality of opportunity for everyone. >> it is amazing, ken burns, the first african-american president and first lady. and yet the relevance of this story is perhaps swrund lined by the fact there are so many people who don't know the story even those who are in major league baseball, younger african-american players. >> that's been the tragedy of it. we've overcome a lot of that in recent years. the mlb has reached out. we have to put jackie in the historical context. he's the first since the civil war. you know, this is happening not at a lunch counter, not in a bus in montgomery, alabama, but on 0 the diamonds of our so-called national pastime. he single-handedly transforms american social life that april afternoon in 1947. he is as important in many ways as martin luther king. his example is timeless because this isn't just a good story

about sports and those of us who love baseball love the story of jackie robinson. this isn't just a good american story. this is almost a biblical story of such human importance, about a man who could exhibit the kind of forbearance jackie robinson did and do the things he did for so long against such formidable odds of thousands of racial slights, threats, and abuses that he faced every single day in a game that requires, as george will calls it, an equipoise. you can't hit the ball with a bat if you're worried about your wife being hurt, your baby boy being kidnapped, worried about someone shooting you or putting black cats out on the field, that your own teammates are spiking you or the opposing guys are throwing at your head and he does it all and, to me, he's one of the greatest heroes in all of american history. >> mrs. robinson, to what extent did your husband feel that weight, that responsibility, that sense of significance real time? martin luther king wrote in 1962 of your husband.

he was a sit-inner before the sit-in. he talked how much what jackie robinson did was important to what he, martin luther king jr., was able to do. >> he certainly felt the responsibility that goes with being a pioneer. he needed -- he wanted to not only focus on his role in playing the game but also in being out front with this process of fighting discrimination, fighting racism, and doing it in a dignified and a positive way. >> how difficult was it for him? he was on this program, on "meet the press" back in 1957, and you got a sense of e importance of civil rights and politics to him when he was asked a question on this program. listen to it. >> how do you answer those people who insist the naacp is

moving very, very fast to get the rights of the negro but seems to be doing not enough to impress upon the negro his own responsibility as he gets these rights? >> i think that if we go back and check our record the negro has proven beyond a doubt that we have been more than patient in seeking our rights as american citizens. be patient, i was told as a kid. i keep hearing that today, let's be patient. let's take our time. things will come. it seems to me the civil war has been over 90 years. if that isn't patience, i don't know what is. >> there is a natural sense i take of activism, of his impatience that propelled him forward. how did he reconcile that with the incredible patience that was necessary to endure everything he did back in 1947 and beyond? >> well, he was a passionate advocate for change and social change. however, he also understood that

there were anything he did that was contrary to what was expected might destroy the opportunity, so he was careful and patient in his behavior on the field and off the field. >> ken burns, the other big piece of this film, of course, is branch ricky played by harrison ford. an incredibly important figure as well. and i asked harrison ford as part of our press pass conversation about ricky. li listen to what he said and i'll get your reaction. >> he was led by a very strong religious conviction, a moral conviction, to break the color barrier in baseball. and what he did took enormous savvy and courage because he was resisted by all of the other owners of major league white baseball. many will not remember that at

that time there was white baseball and negro league. and branch ricky was compelled by the opportunities he saw in the talent in the negro leagues to want to bring some of those men onto his team. he wanted to win. he wanted to make money. he was a baseball businessman. and he thought he could improve his team and to right a wrong that he felt he'd lived with. >> and what did he see, ken, in jackie robinson? >> it was interesting, those huge debates about why jackie was picked. they knew he had a fiery temper, would he be able to control it? but he knew that he had by going to ucla been with other white

players in other sports and could handle it, and that he had this intelligence. and part that have passion could also be restrained. he could also understand the moment. and ricky is an important, important figure. he's doing it not just for business, and a lot of people want to play that up, and not just for this moral thing that ate at him since he was a young teacher when he saw young men try to pull his black skin off. he said, mr. ricky, it's my race. denied a room at an indiana hotel. just lived with ricky and it ate away at him. it was his methodist faith was a lot of that. i think he connected, and rachel can correct me, with rachel and jackie on that level as well. this was a great moral question, too. and in some ways what's so remarkable about harrison ford's portrayal of ricky, because it feels he's walked out of the photographs, is that he's the original method actor as in methodist. that is to say his faith is part of his everyday conversation. >> mrs. robinson, what did you think of the movie? >> i am very pleased by the

movie and actually thrilled by it because i waited almost 30 years to see this film made. and one of the concerns i had from the very beginning was that it should be authentic, and it is very authentic as well as powerful and i think that it's also very inspiring. one of the things i hope will come from this is the fact that young people will be inspired, will be educated about the period, will be inspired to think about their own lives in this context and that they will want to be more productive and more linked to the society. and i think beyond their own profession, beyond their own lives, so i'm very thrilled about it and i hope it will have a strong impression particularly on young people. >> it's significant. it's also very tender. and i want to show a clip and

get your reaction to it. >> promise me you'll write? >> when have i ever not written? >> i want you to know i'm there for you even if it's work. >> you're in my heart. >> you're getting close now and the closer you get, the worse it will be. don't let them get to you. >> i won't. god built me to last. >> you and your late husband as portrayed in this film. yours was a beautiful love story against a very difficult backdrop, wasn't it? >> yes, it was. we had waited five years to get married. we were engaged for five years. and when mr. ricky called jack and made this offer to him, the

excitement we felt was as much about being able to get married as well as his having a job opportunity. but he's it shall i want to emphasize the notion of commitment because i think commitment is something that comes through in this film, that we were committed to each other regardless of what happened in the outer world, and drew on our own love and the depth of our love and our determination to protect it and our family. and, also, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact we did have a family right away. and having a child and being connected and loving him was an important part of the motivation that jack felt for being very careful about how he conducted himself. >> and, ken burns, your film

about jackie robinson is in the works coming out in 2015. there's a lot more to learn about all of this. >> always. he's endlessly important and fascinating character. the relationship that you were just talking about between him and rachel is central to it. without rachel, there's no jackie robinson in a way, because she was that rock and that backstop for him. and my only complaint with the movie, which i think is otherwise great, the woman who was incredibly attractive who plays rachel isn't quite as beautiful as rachel is herself. and we -- that's my only knit pick on that. and we're looking forward to filling out this covers a relatively short period in his life and we plan to delve into what brought him to baseball and what he did afterwards because at the very end of his life, in his last public appearance at the 1972 world series where he's being honored at the 25th anniversary year of his arrival in integrating major league baseball and, therefore, integrating the united states, he is saying, i'm very pleased

and proud but i'll be more pleased and proud when i see more black faces down on the third-base line and more -- so to the very end he died ten days later, to the very end doing what frederick douglass was doing, agitate, agitate, agitate. remind us we have a goal ahead of us and let's aim for that always. and i loved that about jackie. i love the fact that rachel has not hesitated in any of these years since jackie's been gone, and it's way, way more years than she was with him, i am so sorry to say, in keeping up that fight, in keeping up that awareness for equality and pushing for the scholarships that the foundation does. and this is a huge part of moving forward in the face of what is inevitable trouble ls. we will still struggle with race today. >> and, indeed, your film "the central park five" is on pbs. >> the story just continues. central park five" is on pbs. >> t♪ you know my heart burns for you... ♪

i'm up next, but now i'm singing the heartburn blues. hold on, prilosec isn't for fast relief. cue up alka-seltzer. it stops heartburn fast. ♪ oh what a relief it is!

cue up alka-seltzer. it stops heartburn fast. welcnew york state, where cutting taxes for families and businesses is our business. we've reduced taxes and lowered costs to save businesses more than two billion dollars to grow jobs, cut middle class income taxes to the lowest rate in sixty years, and we're creating tax free zones for business startups. the new new york is working creating tens of thousands of new businesses,

and we're just getting started. to grow or start your business visit thenewny.com are proven to be effective pain relievers. tylenol works by blocking pain signals to your brain. bayer advanced aspirin blocks pain at the site. try the power of bayer advanced aspirin. thanks to all of you in dealing with my voice today. more of my special press pass conversation with harrison ford who stars in "42" at meetthepress.nbc.com. on tuesday savannah guthrie will have a wide-ranging exclusive interview with president obama at the white house. that is tuesday on "today." house. that [ male announcer ]ay." you are a business pro. omnipotent of opportunity.

you know how to mix business... with business. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle. and go. you can even take a full-size or above. and still pay the mid-size price. i could get used to this. [ male announcer ] yes, you could business pro. yes, you could. go national. go like a pro. yes, you could. are you still sleeping? just wanted to check and make sure that we were on schedule.

the first technology of its kind... mom and dad, i have great news. is now providing answers families need. siemens. answers. my password is 1,2,3,4,5. i just use my hamster's name. brian. actually, we're kidding. when it comes to creating passwords, make them complex, but easy to remember. you won't make password your password. the more you know.

tonight, you've won the lottery. should be easy street, right? easy to lose that money. meet some recent winners who admit they're overwhelmed. >> you're afraid of having all this money. >> now state line's getting them help. donald trump teaching money 101. >> going to be interesting. going to have a lot of fun. >> should they gamble on real estate? should she start a business? ivanka takes this one. >> should they give to charity. advice that might helpit