care for you care for me care for every family care for you care for me care for every family care foryou care for me care for every family care for you care for me care for every family care for new -- care for you care for me care for every family soon and very soon we are going to change the world soon and very soon we are going to change the world soon and very soon we are going to change the world that soon and very soon we are going to change the world host: good morning, you're looking at live pictures from capitol hill where moments ago the u.s. supreme court began hearing the initial oral arguments in telling this to the nation's health care law. that begins six hours of hearings over the next three days at the nation's highest court on health care. as you can see, people have come to the nation's capital from all across the country to express their views on a lot. if many are here on the u.s. capitol grounds co. this is the main site setup for protesters. it's across the street from the supreme court. organizations in favor and opposed to the bill have announced plans for eve

provide that care. and when i quit my job we lost our health insurance. we were incredibly fortunate that ethan qualified for medicaid. without it he most likely would have lost his leg and possibly his life. not having employer-based health insurance proved to be quite expensive. we had no income. and now we had to care for a sick child while balancing a mortgage, monthly bills and expensive insurance premiums because of my own personal health issues. thankfully his tumor healed around the time he turned one and we spent the next year catching him up to normal development. my husband and i managed to keep our heads above water for two and a half years. we lived frugly as much as possible and taking out student loans in the end we still had to sell our home and move in with family. ethan's third year was fantastic. he graduated from all of his therapies and started preschool. he was not just walking now, but run, jumping and hopping. with no pain whatsoever. in his fourth year the affordable care act wa

in the health care economy.re not insured. we see that in certain types of cosmetic dental surgery. in cosmetic surgery generally. we see it in medicine for pets. and what we see in all of those markets are markets. >> take lasik eye surgery, for example. since the procedure was introduced, prices have dropped considerably, despite all of the expensive equipment and well-trained specialists. lasik doctors actually compete for your business, with ads that tell you about their safety record and prices. >> ask a very simple question of your viewers. how many of them know the safest hospital in their neighborhood? why not? why is there nobody with a billboard saying, don't go to downtown, go to uptown, downtown will kill you? we've been through 45 years of turning over our power to insurers, to medicare, and medicaid. look at the result. >> goldhill's solution -- insurance should only cover catastrophic events, serious illnesses, while routine care like doctors' appointments should be paid for from a health savings

so i say this health care bill is what we need. this is not obama care, this is america care.eople need to stop saying that because a lot of presidents have did a lot of things and we have not attacked their name to it and we shouldn't do it now. we should all stand together. this is not a white or black issue, this is america issue. and america should lead by example. and thank you for letting me have the time. >> thanks for making the call. let's return to the supreme court exterior where there are comments being made by a group that are anti-health care law reverends. >> all right. i will make some comments on what we watched and heard in the courtroom today during the entirety of the arguments. all right. i'll wait. i am reverend rob shank, rob, schenck, president of the national clergy council here in washington, d.c. we represent church leaders from catholic, evangelical, orthodox, and mainline protestant traditions. we were in the courtroom today to listen to the first day of arguments. it was a very spirited exchange to say the least. there were some very humorous mome

which was romney care. this is the most important issue in this it's one that ensap sul lates all of the issues at stake in this very critical election, our country's history. and there's only one candi the supporting the republican nomination that can make this the central issue that will be the winning issue for us to win the presidency back and that's rick santorum. and unfortele that case is mitt romney and that's why as i said, we're here today and he's not. [ inaudible question ]

care. when the government takeover health care bill was passed, the liberal-control congress took away this right and instead created the pro bowlers association, yabe. this -- created the ipab. they are responsible for making cuts to medicare, which will lead to waiting, denial of care. republicans will vote on a bill that will eliminate ipab and strengthen a doctor-patient relationship. our country cannot spend $1.4 trillion on an unconstitutional government mandate which the nfib reveals it will destroy 1.6 million jobs. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: and the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, i rise today in support of repeal ipab. however, i speak in opposition to tying this repeal to house resolution 5. this is disingenuous at best. it relingishes

care.that's what it boils down to. do you want to pay their bills? i don't think we should have to. i think 9/11 this country should accept that -- i think everyone in this country should accept that responsibility. there are other aspects you don't hear called for with respect to its repeal. you have a child graduating from college looking for a child? i've been in that circumstance. my wife and i raised three children. some of them found a job, took a little while. while they were looking for a job, did you ever say to your son or daughter fresh out of college, how about health insurance? you know what they probably said to you? sorry mom, sorry dad. can't do that now. when i get a job, i'll get back to it. but i feel just fine. i feel just fine. doesn't work that way. and any responsible parent knows it. so we changed the law. here's what we said: if you have family health insurance, it can cover your son or daughter up to the age of 26. that expanded the reach of health insurance covera

demonizing a health care system in order to pass this health care law.. the president obama said would cut out a set of tonsils for a few extra dollars, doctors saved her life with and the first few hours of flight. and incredibly dedicated and skilled team of medical professionals totally reconstructed the upper chamber of the hard. her heart operates backwards now. she is 28 years old and is a nurse herself in that neonatal intensive care unit taking care of those little babies. when they passed patient protection affordable care act i knew the health care system to save my daughter was at risk. i also knew that this health care law was in no way, shape or form was going to reduce the federal deficit. it is not possible. how can you expect to add twenty-five million people to government run health care and reduce deficit at the same time. the reason they were able to put forward that fiction is the proposed a piece of legislation that would have revenue, fees and taxes, for ten years, and providing benefits for the last six years of that time period. t

when you have skin in the game, i don't care what it is, whether it's health care, buying a car, buying groceries, whatever it is, if there's a connection with an extraction from your pocketbook, you're a better consumer. when it's not, when there is no connection, we see what we're seeing in health care today. there's no differential increase in cost for over consumption. and we do know through lots of studies that we have overutilization in large areas in medicare. and the reason that we have over utilization in large areas doesn't have that much to do with patients as it does providers. we would put that in, and the example i use. i've had the good fortune to take care of a ton of amish families. they don't have health insurance. they're the best purchasers of health care i know anywhere in the world. they want to know what something costs before they buy it. they want to know why i have to have it. and if i have to have it, where can i buy it most cheaply? they negotiate deals on pricing, if i pay you in advance, do i get a discount? in other words, they're the ultimate consumer in

cost of care. the issue of severeability. can states before us to act? all these eighteen million people. medicaid and the anti injunction act. if this is a tax which i believe it is how can the court -- can the government start counting a tax before it is introduced in 2014? they won't be able to see the impact of the tax until 2015 when people file tax returns. it is an important issue to the individual mandate and the and constitutionality versus constitutionality. the real problem is if the court rules this mandate is constitutional, this will be the first time the federal government will have the power to tell us not only that we have to buy health insurance in the private market but what will be the limit of that power? will we have to buy the prius car? what will we be told we have to live on broccoli and have meet? and a key to obamacare. many economists believe if this legislation is not repealed and replaced and the president really wants the single payer system. private insurers are goin

care act. i will remind my friend from florida that there is no example that allows for any of us to have it both ways. this matter violates the constitution and clearly not just those that argue the 10th amendment from a conservative or liberal perspective, it is all of us that feel very strongly that this measure ewe suches the -- ewe certains the power of states -- usurps of power of states. i'm fond of saying what a constitution law professor at georgetown said, that people seem to be fair weather federalists and they abandon federalism whenever it is inconvenient to someone's policy preferences. h.r. 5 combines two completely unrelated measures. the first one is the reform of our nation's medical malpractice system. the second one is the repeal of the independent payment advisory board which was established by the affordable care act. please don't get me wrong, i'm fully aware of the challenges inherent to our medical liability system. the excessive cost of malpractice insurance faced by p

and for end of life care. now, mr. speaker, let me reflect on that a minute. i've just shown you the 40 pages of law in the president's health care bill that are the cost-saving mechanism that the president has proposed and that has been passed into law. and the o.m.b. director, office of management and budget director, for the obama administration said this, the core problem is that health care costs are concentrated among expensive treatments for chronic diseases and end of life care. now, mr. speaker, what choices then does that give us? if we agree that ipab is a critical measure for lowering health care costs and if we agree that health care costs are primarily concentrated with expensive treatments for chronic diseases and end of life care, how exactly is this unelected board going to lower those costs? it's an honest question, mr. speaker. if that's what has to happen for medicare to be saved, exactly how is this board going to do that? and every american on medicare, every american approaching medicare

health care. my friends acknowledge it is under congress's power to -- and to impose a minimum coverage provision. their argument is just that it has to occur at the point of sale. >> i don't see the difference. you can get burial insurance, you can get health insurance. moat people need health care. everybody is going to be buried or cremated at some point. >> one big difference is you don't have the cost shifting to other market participants. >> sure you do. if you don't have money, then the state is going to pay for it or a family member. >> that's the difference. it's a significant difference that this -- in this situation one of the economic effects that congress is addressing is that the many billions of dollars of uncompensated costs are transferred directly to other market participants because health care providers charge higher rates to cover uncompensated rates and they're covered in higher premiums which translates to $1,000 per family. >> isn't that a small part of what the mandate is

did not take care of it. number two, i heard an ability to pay over the course of that 10-year period. which raises the question for me, about responsibility, you mentioned earlier that patients can be responsible for the cost. but how much of what troubles our system has to do with individuals not been proactive, not taking care of themselves? >> i think of large part of the system is individuals not being proactive and not taking care of themselves, but a large part also is people who simply do not have access. it cannot afford it. the bills would be too overwhelming. in this woman's case, she had a job, but she had family responsibilities to keep up, a roof over kids head, to keep them fed, and that came first as opposed to paying for doctor bills. tavis: getting to the nitty gritty about physicians themselves, and the hunger, the greed. i do not want to indict the entire field, but agreed to make more money by recommending product x, y, and z nz, and z. tell me about the harm. >> i appreciate your saying

i guess attended a health care conference in regards to obama care. what the american citizens don't realize is that if obama care is not repealed and we start over that their care is going to be rationed. you're going to have many physicians that are going to be closing their door due to the reimbursement factor in this law. you're going to see a lot of elderly people not be able to get the care that they need. and also when it comes to chronic conditions, let's not forget that chronic conditions usually start with an acute condition that winds up being a chronic condition. that they should have treated. i think this is a euthanasia issue. there will be a panel that will be assigned that's going to determine if you get that operation or you don't get that operation. i think it should be repealed. i also feel that this is a violation of our constitutional rights. and i'm also very appalled when i hear senators state that it's because obama introduced it. has nothing to do with president obama. the fact is it is a matter of our lives. we should have th

a lot of us care about what our health care system looks like, feels like. you mentioned one thing right in the beginning has to do is incrementalism versus a broader suite. could you speak more about why incrementalist at this time, why not a broader sweep? how could meet our goals? >> you know, the historical pattern is interesting in that every round health care reform needs to propose an approach to the right. every round from a single-payer propose to some of the single-payer to the clinton system which has regional cooperatives do so would've fundamentally reconfigured the health care system. i think what was realized in this round was two fundamental problems of trying to be completely figure the health care system. the first is most americans are happy with what they have. they get their insurance from a large employer. they wish it was cheaper but they have very few choices. the employer picks up most of the cost of the don't realize the cost and they're pretty happy. in american politics you don't get far by ripping up with makes 200 million people

the care law? >> caller: i do not because it's taking our freedom of choice. >> what would you like the see happen? do you hope that the court overturns theco ress be the onet decision? >> i think congress should be the one make the decision but here lately they can't even maky need to eat or sleep. >> i'll leave it there. >> there are a lot ofissue of f of choice and that is -- this law has not reached the kind of hoped that it would. still about half population does not like the law.acss the board have shown. and a lot of the rea people give is freedom of choice. they feel like their choice -- they want to be able to choose whether they should insurance or not and that this takes away that choice. >> charlene frizzera,tem wh do, they deal with case loads if this law is upheld and more people go on medicaid and need to seek their s e health reform is to change the current health care delivery system. everybody agrees the current system where you get paid more for doing more services doesn't work.

care system. certainly primary care providers become essential not just physicians, but nurses and nurse practitioners and dental assistants. we are pleased that this budget continues the progress we've made. so far in the administration, we tripled the number of the health service core providers. this budget intends to continue the training of 7,100 new health care providers who will serve in the most under-served areas. i have the privilege of meeting with some of the young people every day who are thrilled with the idea that they can serve the under served communities and have their loans paid off so they don't emerge with so much debt. we are also, as you know, part of the affordable care act is encouraging more providers to deal with medicaid patients. changing medicaid rates to medicare. using our graduate medical resources to focus on slots for primary care. we are very aware of the looming issue if we are going to change from a sick care system to a health care system. the primary care wor

uncompensated care. if you accept that argument, you have to fundamentally alter the text of the constitution and give congress plenary power. it simply doesn't matter whether or not this regulation will promote health care commerce by reducing uncompensated care. all that matters is whether the activity actually being regulated by the act negatively affects commerce or negatively affects commerce regulation so that it's within the commerce power. if you agree with us that this is -- that this exceeds commerce power the law doesn't somehow become redeemed because it has beneficial policy effects in the health care market. in other words, congress does not have the power to promote commerce. congress has the power to regulate commerce, and if the power exceeds permissible regulatory authority then the law is invalid. >> surely the -- >> sorry. >> surely regulation includes the power to promote. ever since the new deal we've said regulation -- there's a market in agricultural products. congress has the pow

-- health care?aying the $800 fine. we could start there. guest: there is no criminal penalty. the only sanction is that you pay a tax. second of all, yes, it is true if i did not buy gasoline, i do not pave the gas tax, but i do pay my income tax and that is to build roads and all kinds of the infrastructure we never years. that is what it means to be an american, living in a collective society. we come together to help each other. we do not insist that we are all standing on our own two feet and have no concerns about the other we have concerns about the other, and we try to deal with it through laws that make sure we can deal with collective problems like securing our problems from enemies, like securing s four -- from disease. host: here is an old story from cnn. this is when the law was signed. and a dog that does not have health insurance -- an adult that does not have health insurance by 2014 will be penalized $95 or 1% of income by 2016, it increases by -- $695. guest: again, that is pegged p

perfect. >> we provide primary care, urgent care, mental health services, recovery services, chronic disease management, and hiv prevention services. and, also, we are a huge training center. we have a direct link to the advance practice programs at the university of california. we are interdisciplinary as well. the only difference is that the nursing elements is running the practice. in our case. >> reporter: currently there are about 250 nurse managemented clinics across the country. glide is the largest on the west coast. but even as this center continues to expand its services, funding for the future remains a constant concern. >> we only have 28% of our population in insurance right now. the rest of the care is floated through a lot of creative funding. >> reporter: though nurse practitioners at glide can diagnose illnesses, prescribe medicine and perform other functions similar to doctors, many insurance plans refuse to recognize them as primary care providers. >> currently, there are many plans that will not look at those providers. this happened in massachusetts, when massach

i support health care. as i listened to santorum speak, there's no outhouse attached to his motorcade. he uses public utilitieutilitiec gas, all these things were part of this great country and they were done through rate payers. you say a lot about tax payers. rate pa rate payers are the ones given the opportunity. i would like to see a plan that would operate like a public utility so everybody could compete and give their share. we did get sold out. i do believe insurance companies were the ones that insisted on the mandatory part of it. someone might check that out. there was a fear this would bankrupt the insurance companies. for those fundamental right wing chrisaysstns that render under seize sure, this is a government pastors -- they have their charges. i see that this built by rate electric bill, your gas bill and water bill, now that is being challenged because something that's beingic right of way. so if -- for me the affordable part would be to have it operate as a public >> thanks, robert. harri

this is indeed from the senate health care law, but it's not from the affordable care act. it's an excerpt from the senate republican health care from 1993. the concept of individual oad be conservative heritage foundation. it was taken up by conservative republicans as an alternative to the universal health bill proposed by president clinton. senators grassley, hatch and lugar were co-sponsors, as was senate majority leader, then senate majority leader, bob r releblicans have endorsed the mandate in recent years. in 2009 senator grassley did. in 2007 senator demint did. senators graham, alexander and cork h they were co-sponsors of the healthy americans act that included an individual mandate, so what we're seeing now is baffling. republicans have gone from being the main champion of the individual mandate to being a main antagonist, and you have to ask why. the republicans were fathers of the indivi now suddenly they want to give it up for adoption on thep of the u.s. supreme court.on t mandate is the prime example of their willingness to oppose anything this president pr

care act. i think it's a very complex credit. um, we've heard from a lot of practitioners and small businesses that the phaseouts around that and other issues have made it very hard for people to, a, understand if they can hit the sweet spot where you get the credit and, b, um, has sometimes discouraged people from actually taking advantage of the credit. the president's budget actually has a simplification proposal in it which, um, works on the phaseouts, um, and other issues to make it, hopefully, much more attractive to small businesses. and congress taking up and passing that, i think, would be beneficial, and i think -- >> you think that makes a lot of sense with what the administration is proposing? >> yes. >> now, what about in 2014, obviously, with the exchanges there's going to be a lot of credits going for the individuals within the exchange market and that. is the irs making preparations in order to deal with that, and are you on track? >> yeah. so we are making preparations. we are

that care. and when i quit my job we lost our health insurance. we were incredibly fortunate that ethan qualified for medicaid. without it he most likely would have lost his legs and possibly his life. not having employer-based health insurance proves to be quite expensive. we have no income, and now we have a sick child while balancing a mortgage, monthly bills and expensive insurance premiums because of my own personal health issues. thankfully ethan's began to heal around the time he turned one and we spent the next you're catching a him up to a normal level of development. my husband and i managed to hold our heads above water financially for two and a half years. we lived frugally, stretching the savings we had as much as possible and taking out student loans but in the end we still had to sell our home and move moved in with his family. ethan's third year was fantastic. he graduated from all of his therapies and started preschool. he was not just walking now but running, jumping and hoppin

uncompensated care. if i don't buy a car and somebody goes on welfare, i am going to end up paying for that as well. but let me also say there is a real disconnect then between the focus on what makes this different in the statute that congress passed. the ball where concerned about is the cost sharing best of place because of income but said a care in emergency rooms, presumably we have before us a statue that only addressed the emergency care and catastrophic insurance coverage. but it covers everything, soup to nuts, all sorts of things. it gets into the idea there are two kinds of cost shifting going on here. one is the concern about emergency care and somebody some -- somehow somebody who gets sick most is that to other policies. but there is a much bigger cost shifting, and that is when you force healthy people into an insurance market precisely because they are healthy, precisely because they are not likely to go to that of emergency room, precisely because they are not likely to use the insurance

that's the future of obama care.all lose. >> greta: the whole insanity is not one member of congress could read it or did read it before voting on it. i tried reading it. it was absolutely incomprehensible. >> they didn't read the vot it e in the senate they didn't get it for three hours before they voted on it. >> greta: the thing made absolutely no sense, terribly written. >> it contained 100 billion to implement the bill. can you imagine members of congress voted for a bill that spent $105 billion and they didn't even know that that money was in there. bizarre. everybody should be outraged and demand that this get repealed. i don't care what the supreme court does. congress has to repeal this bill. that's the bottom line. >> greta: representive, nice to see you. >> good to see you, greta. >> coming up, the state of the health care law before the supreme court. some parts are already in place. what happens to those parts in the entire law is struck down? that's next. >>> in two minutes, caught red handed. a hot mic

take care. [cheers and applause] >> next up is alex cortez from let freedom ring. >> anyone here seen an etcha sketch in the last couple of days? what are we going to do to obamacare? we're going to erase it. they say there's no young people in the tea party. i'm here to observe that's not true. the health care law is supposed to be such a marvelous thing for you. we can stay on our parents' health care until we're 26. that's really a youth ideal world. we really want to be dependent on our parents forever. i'm sure your children would love to be dependent on you until they're 50. of course not. we want to be independent. that means we need jobs. jobs. and this president wrks what has he done? he's kept his eye off the ball and passes a law that takes away your freedom instead. we don't want to be at home to eat our mom's meat love every night. we want to be independent. three out of ten young adults are forced to live at home right now because they have no other future. we need to get rid of ba

on the health care committee. so it's been a long time, trying get to this point where we have a plan to deal with the long-term health care problems of our country. and amongst those includes the national alzheimer's project act to deal with this very important issue that costs the federal government, medicare and medicaid last year spent $130 billion on alzheimer's patients in america. unbelievable amount of money, that is with only 5 million americans having it, by the time the baby boomers have retired the cost is going up to just $600 billion a year just on alzheimer's patients if we do not find a cure for it. it's a budgetary crisis that is looming. we thank you for issuing your draft, national plan, pursuant to the national alzheimer's project act which i'm the principal house author of, along with congressman smith. and i think it's great, one thing that i wanted to talk about here today is that at nih, there's $3 billion spent on aids and less than that on alzheimer's and so we have to find the cure. i co

you'll get health care. so as a practical matter, whether it is a right or privilege, the person who gets sick goes to a doctor, a hospital and gets it. the taxpayer picks up the tab. one of the challenges we have right now is that in your premium, about $1,000 of it is to pay for uncompensated care. so we've got this as a practical matter system where everybody gets it. and in this country, we're paying twice as much for health care as most of the industrialized nation and we still have 45, 50 million people uninsured. it's not working. >> i have to leave it there. >> stay with us. much more on the supreme court. and some other stuff coming up ahead. >> change the health care reform bill that we passed after a century of time that says if you get sick in america, you will not go bankrupt. oooh, what's her secret? [ male announcer ] dawn hand renewal with olay beauty. improves the look and feel of hands in just five uses. [ sponge ] soft, smooth... fabulous! [ male announcer ] dawn does more... [ sponge ] so

care. it's for private insurance. it's for anybody who has health coverage, the costs of health care are going up rapidly. and the approach of medicare has always been to look for ways to hold down the costs. there was a time that ophthalmologists would charge a fee for removing the cataract, and then ask for another fee for inserting the lens. well, that made sense when that surgery was brand new, but they didn't want to give up the two fees that they were receiving because it would be a reduction in their reimbursement. medicare said, no, that really doesn't make sense. medicare does a lot of things to hold down costs, and then private insurance picks them up because so much -- so often it makes sense. another 30 seconds. mr. holt: and i yield to him. mr. waxman: the way to hold down costs is to try to reform the way health care is delivered, and medicare tries to do that. if we don't do it that way, the republicans would say that private insurance will be able to control it because that'

why should not everybody have health care? >> and your health care is medicare, deborah? >> caller: it is now. i worked in restaurants for 35 i think it was only dplr 4 or $5 a week. if everybody paid their share, eventually they might need it when they get older, and i think everybody should pay for their own health care. and if they're poor and they can't, they should get subsidy. >> this is carol. carol, hello? >> caller: hello. i'm independent. hello? >> go ahead. this isn't carol. is this al? >>. >> caller: no, this is booker. >> i got it all wrong. go ahead with your comment. >> caller: i was watching the show with the supreme court and the affordable care act, and i'm really interested since my college days as the interstate commerce clause, and i don't see how the court could possibly rule against the mandate given that this is done in the interstate commerce clause. because we think we're going to compete in the real world. we looked at all the trading partners. they all have insurance. so we need to get that in. >> booker, from what you heard, what do you think

and obama care.he affordable care act is more ambitious in two ways. first of all, in massachusetts the federal government paid for our reform. so we didn't have to raise taxes. the federal government doesn't have that luxury. not like space aliens will pay for our reform, we've got to pay for it. the second place is the massachusetts law did not try to control health care costs. whereas the affordable care act takes on cost control in a serious way. >> how come throughout all of the effort to get this law through we heard that it wasn't going to cost the country anything, it was already paid for, and now we learn it's more than $1 trillion. the federal government plans to pay for some of the benefits by taxing those parts of the medical sector that stand to gain from an infusion of new customers. medical devices, pharmaceutical, insurance companies. nearly half of small business owners who aren't hiring say that's the reason they say they are concerned about the expense of health care. what's your r

all of that feeds the health care. the nhs is the largest employer with well over one million people on the payroll. you think it would be inefficient. >> it seems they do things more efficiently and it doesn't work in health care. >> a former overseas bureau chief with the "washington post," two of the world's health care systems for his recent book, the healing of america. >> the least efficient payers in the world are the american private insurance companies. they have administrative costs of 20 to 30%, that's a 30% tax on every dollar you spend on health care. britain is socialized medicine and administrative cost is 5%. canada is private dollars and public payers. 6%. it turns out in health care, governments are doing this more efficiently than our private sector. >> one reason is private insurers spend more money on nonmedical costs like ads and reviewing claims to help them stay profitable. another way governments can be more efficient, when they are footing the bill is having a more coordinated approach to heal

this republican budget walks away from health care savings in the affordable care act. that protect seniors and reduces our deficit. their budget weakens medicare and reverses the potential transformation of health care service delivery and reduced costs for seniors. this republican budget walks away from coverage of prevention, primary care and prescription drug coverage and cost to our current and future seniors. this budget walks away from seniors and nursing homes. 48 million elderly every day count on medicare for medications, doctor visits, and hospital care. denying this guarantee by privatizing medicare is not responsible budgeting and is a betrayal of our seniors and democrats in this administration will not let this happen. with that, i yield to my good friend and the ranking member reported >> thank you for offering this amendment. as this committee knows very well, the increase in costs for beneficiaries in the private market have been going up at least as fast in most years faster than the increase of costs in the medicare program. we also know by looking a

is not romney care. argument about the states. to think that you're not going to be a part of this conversation. that's just bad staff work. you know you'll be part of this conversation. try to get something in the conversation that at least makes your argument. >> it strikes me as this. you have the obama folks decided, hey, we'll embrace obamacare. fine. you want to call that it? we'll call it that. the romney folks haven't found that moment of embracing health care. >> it's two different strategies. santorum was amazing. i was over at the supreme court with him. >> it was a rally. >> i was standing right next to him. he sees this is his opening. >> maybe his last opening. he may not be winning a lot of states. but obama care tying to it romney, that's his spate. romney, it's all about the economy. >> i want to switch gears a little bit. the president oversees, i'm hoping we can play this one more time. about what was caught by white house pool cameras in this conversation he was having with russian pr

because the future of obama care is denial of care.it sounds good because it says everyone, poof, will have automatic health insurance coverage. you may be able to say you have health insurance coverage, but that's a far cry from saying you actually have access to care. and that's the future of obama care, denial of access. >> with divided government will heading in to a presidential election, if this law gets overturned, you don't see anything happening between now and november. >> sure we could. we could put further a bill that will actually drive down health care. we could easily have that before the congress and president obama can sign it. >> i'm skeptical, shall i say. >> we'll offer it. the house republicans would offer new health legislation. >> you have made, the tea party has made, repeal obama care, again, your term, a rallying cry for some time. it was critical when you were running for president. but you've had different approaches as to how it should be done. this is yourself earlier today at the rally. >> we leave that t

and they address education of pain care. the compliment and encouraged investigator initiated research in nih, the oim commended articles for comprehensiveness. other opportunities target specific conditions including recent, ocular pain migrain, and nerve damage from cancer therapy to name a few. the national center for alternative medicine recently funded through centers on chronic low back pain and spear heading a transnih effort to develop criteria for back pain. the national institute of digestive and diabetes research network is another example that embraces the systematic or whole body approach. in conclusion, as a scientist i'm encouraged by opportunities for progress that research conditions, i've experienced treating patients with pain, i support the shift to treating pain as a complex of itself own. to take full advantage of what medical science can provide now and in the future the report called for transformation of how we as a nation approach pain mth and prevention. the committee will begin the work to skput t

care act. one of the issues has been tax credits to small businesses who provide coverage for their workers. it is supposed to go to 50% in 2014. back home and some small-business owners complain about the complexity of that tax credit and having to fill them out. what is your opinion on that, and is at an item where the irs or working with you can try to simplify that process to make it easier for small businesses to qualify for that tax credit? >> yes. one, it is honestly an important credit for small businesses to help them afford paying for health coverage for their workers. that is a key component of affordable care act. i think it is a very complex credit. we have heard from a lot of practitioners and small businesses that the phase out around that and other issues have made it hard for people to understand if they can hit the sweet spot where you get the credit, and sometimes it discourages people from actually taking advantage of the credit. the president's budget actually has a simpler

all he says i'll repeal obama care and in the same breath he defends obama care at the state level. it just doesn't wash and it won't wash in the general election. that's why if you really want obama care repealed there is only one person who can make that happen and that someone who makes obama care the central issue in this race. and that's what i do. anybody else? i -- i think i'm having trouble hearing questions but whether i believe it's constitutional, look, i don't think obviously i don't believe that obama care is constitutional and i didn't advocate for a federal mandate at the federal level. i have been for free arkt health care, not government run health care. >> of course governor romney supporters are going to want everybody out of the way. it would be nice if governor romney and everybody got out of my way. that's not how primaries work. i heard governor sununu say all of the significant people said that rick santorum should get out of the race. well, i guess we'll have to leave it to the insignificant voters of america to step forward and challenge the significant peo

president obama's health care law goes on trial. the wife of the soldier accused of killing afghan civilians says h he's innocent. and the president's private comments are caught on a hot microphone. time to play reporter roulette. rallies and more as the highest court in the land begins to hear arguments over whether the affo affordable health care act can require nearly all americans to have health insurance coverage. you'll hear from the justices in just a moment. but first, a congressional correspondent kate baldwin live outside the supreme court. you were inside the courtroom when this was all going on. what happened today? >> what happened today is a bit of what we're calling a bit of the warm-up act to the main event. the question was should they be taking this up now. the individual man date requiring nearly all americans have health insurance in 2014 or they'll take a penalty. in taking that up, they gave pretty clear signals they did not think there was any barriers taking up the big question of the consequence tunlty of t

we have disease care, and what we ought to be doing is how do we revert that back to health care where we prevent disease or manage disease effectively, so if you have 20 different companies competing for your business, and they know you're going to still be there, then what we want them to do is they want -- we want them to invest based on their own profitability in your prevention of a major disea disease. >> i have several questions, one is for you as a doctor, sir. how do you think treatment changes or differs as a result of medicare and government dictate? >> how do i think it changes? the first thing i think it changes based on medicare is doctors have no concern right now for what anything costs. there's no penalty for a physician ordering tests that aren't necessary. tell me what it is. if i have a patient that comes into my office that's referred to me that saw a doctor four days ago, and they did blood work, and i look and say well i can get the blood work back right now or i can spend an hour with my nurse trying to find online, i got to first of all meet hipaa requirements,