git is a clear legitimate expene that should be paid. the traffic enforcement has been a policy called. i do not think there is disputes that we need five service. it is a matter of who pays for it, and if it were up to our budget it would be an $9 million and addition of your your -- $9 million ad edition. that is not something we can unilaterally decide to pay. get it is the city's decision triggered >> -- it is a city decision. good >> we keep those in the department for the service, so we get a more clear discussion of how our work orders are gonedone, so when we are payingr motorcycles, i think about is a good idea to have separate for the future. >> we would welcome to the general fund assumption of the responsibility but recognize its house of 100 plus million dollar gap. >> this work issue has come oup. there are opportunities to reduce the work order on two levels. you reduce your work order amount for the departments. on the other side, does the department really have the opportunity to reduce thrown expenses to correspond, and

we start with that assumption, that we're going highway expenned chur expenditu revenue coming into the highway program. next we assume three things in the budget. fiin there have been general fund transfers. amounted to $35 billion intohig. right now, there is, those aren't recorded as a cost. we think they should be recorded a rorded as a cost go second thing we do is -- the budget resolution assumes -- expansion, in oil and gas leas u.s. has huge resources, energy resources. the federal government is the largest landholder in we assume additional proceeds from that -- th activity will g into the highway trust fund. awe how much is that assumption? >> we rely on cbo estimates. recollection is $4 billion over the 10 year period. while for those lands to become available and -- and -- and cbo, we think conservative on their estimates. we use cbo estimates here. there is still going to be a large short fall which is, in the program. as a result we create a mechanism. a reserve fund. the chairman has t aggregates i budget resolution, committee allocations and so forth to ensure the legisl

congress says this to the states, we have got great news for you, we know your expen do it churs on education are a huge financial burden, we're going to impose a special federal tax. and then we're going to give you a grand that is equal to what you spent on education last year. now this is a great offer and we think you'll take it, but if you take it, it's going to have some -- so take it or leave it, if you take it, you have to follow our rules on all of these things, if you leave it, well, then you're going to have to tax your citizens, they're going to have to pay the federal education tax, but on top of that, you're going to have to tax them for all of the money that you're not r now spending on education, plus all the federal funds that you were previously given. would that be the point where a financial inducement turns into coercion? >> i don't think so because the states do have a choice there, especially as a going in proposition. the argument the states are making, this is not a going in proposition, they are in a position where they don't have a choice because after everything th

the survey does not include all public communication expen did expenditures or even those by the executivench. authorities in new york are investigating a tweet by an occupy wall street protester about killing police. the tweet read "we won't make a difference if we don't kill a cop or two." the man who says he wrote it told the new york daily news that no one should take him seriously. police clashed with protesters over the weekend on the six month anniversary the occupy wall street movement. a police state, martial law, dictatorship. these are all the kind of or wellian visions discussed by some on twitter or elsewhere. since president obama did something unexpected friday. chief national correspondent jim angle has details. >> president obama quietly signed executive order friday night that signed for one year a string of executive orders going back to president clinton in 1994. this white house has been known release embarrassing topics such as solyndra on friday nights. the move immediately generated the president was trying to expand his powers. >> the problem is there is an appeara

services, more likely to buy coverage and they are going to have a risk pool of people that are pretty expensensive. so i think the whole thing makes them extremely nervous and rightfully so. let me add one thing. it's not like this is all economic theory or just the ideas of policymakers. we tried plenty of exchanges and insurance marketplaces that are voluntary, that allow small businesses or individuals to come in without a mandate. they all collapse. they are very unstable, precisely because of this adverse selection, and the only exchange that has been sustainable is the one in massachusetts with a mandate. by the way, i would also say if we get rid of the mandate and the exchanges, the insurance bill for people is going to go up. so, the trade-off is you don't like the mandate, you're going to pay more money. >> zeke, i want to touch on something you mentioned before which is the way the justices discuss the case on the third day. and the notion of activist judges on the conservative side. e.j. dionne writing yesterday said three days of supreme court arguments over health care law demo