joining to us talk about that, senator jack reed, democrat from rhode island and member of the committeeh care law and cnn's senior legal analyst jeff toobin. we'll start with you, senator reed if we can. you heard jeff toobin describe this as a train wreck. would you say that's how it's gone so far, sir? >> not really. i think what yesterday demonstrated serious, hard questions to be asked, not unusual, typical on the supreme court argument. the real discussions i believe begin once the lawyers leave and the judges in their conference begin to talk about the law. i think they understand its historic importance of this case and i think they also understand the realities of this case. health care is 17% of our gdp. it's 60% of bankruptcies have a major factor of health care cost. so i think they are looking for a way to sustain this legislation, not to strike it down. and i think also, too, they have to be conscious of what they might be doing in the future. there are people from generations who have spoken about medicare as being in position of a tax for health care i don't want or don't

senator pat robert, senator jack reed, senator jerry moran, representative thornburgh, representative mike simpson and representative sanford bishop, our chairman is rocco. ien the purpose of this hearing is to discuss the eisenhower memori memorial. while some may be here to express a design point of view, which may be legitimately different from the commission's viewpoint, i'm here to answer your questions about the memorization process to the best of my ability and demonstrate what proposed memorial is and is not. in my extended statement for the record, you'll see how we've worked with congress and numerous government agencies such as the national park service gsa, ncpc, commission of fine arts, district of columbia and many others. since passage of legislation establishing the commission, the memorial designer has been bound by law to memorialize both 34th president of the united states and supreme commander of allied forces in world war ii. i would like to show you four images on the screen in front of you. central focal points of the memorial represented by the two dominant scu

senator schumer and jack reed a democrat from rhode island for there. here's the press conference. >> i'd like to begin now. now the supreme court today heard arguments on what has been described as the individual mandate. i just want to read a passage from the summary of the senate east health care law that lays out the mandate. quote, requires each citizen or launch permanent resident to be covered under a qualified health plan or equivalent health care program. in other words, each citizen is mandated to have health insurance. now i just to make one clarification. this is indeed from the senate health care law. but it's not from the affordable care act. it's an exempt from the senate republican's health care proposal from 1993. the concept of an individual mandate was first floated by the 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 luger were co-sponsors as was then senator majority leader bob dole. and countless other republ

tomorrow we will talk to jack reed. the first to graduate from best point. house and how that went down. first the two supreme court justices. this is "the daily rundown." first correct answer will get it. happy hump day. we'll be right back. ♪ oh. let's go. from the crack, off the backboard. [ laughs ] dad! [ laughs ] whoo! oh! you're up! oh! oh! so close! now where were we? ok, this one's good for two. score! [ male announcer ] share what you love with who you love. kellogg's frosted flakes. they're gr-r-eat! four walls and a roof is a structure. what's inside is a home. home protector plus, from liberty mutual insurance, where the costs to both repair your house and replace what's inside are covered. and we don't just cut a check for the depreciated value -- we can actually replace your stuff with an exact or near match. and with the liberty mutual home gallery app, you can use a mobile device to easily catalog your belongings in advance, so you're always well prepared. home protector plus, from liberty mutual insurance, so your life can settle right back

that's why senator jack reed, senator carl levin, senator merkley and others have been down here now for days encouraging you, review the bill, go back and talk with your staff, please allow us some time to make some serious changes. now, even if you can't believe me on these issues, i most certainly hope that you can believe bloomberg report. the bloomberg comments that have been made -- bloomberg is a very widely read, very reputable wire service and newspaper now, and of course they have other interests as well. they comment daily on the financial markets of the world. one of the most respected sources, they have basically editorialized against the house bill. why would they do that? let me read you what the bloomberg editorial said last -- a few days ago. they said, "the jobs act simply goes too far. it would gut many of the investor protections established just a decade ago in sarbanes-oxley. a wave of accounting scandals -- think enron and worldcom -- have destroyed the nest egg of millions of americans and upi understanded investor -- and upended inkvestor confidence on wall s

colleagues to listen very carefully to the points that senator landrieu has been making, senator jack reed has been making. that senator durbin has been making. the point is this: let's take and make a powerful tool work. let's not, however, take and destroy a powerful tool by opening it to all kinds of predatory schemes and scams. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: i'd like to just wrap up my comments in about five minutes. i see the senator from delaware on the floor, and he may choose to speak. i thank the senator from oregon for his comments. i think it's telling, mr. president,, very telling actually that this is a tuesday morning at 12:10. normally when there is a bill that is popular on the senate floor, there are lots of people that come down to speak for it. i understand that not one person yet has showed up this morning to speak for the house bill that we're going to be voting on today. i caution the democrats to raise your awareness. that is highly unusual. usually if a bill is w

in a response to senator jack reed, he reiterated if assad goes that the biggest blow that the u.s. and its allies could make against the iranian regime. jenna: interesting to hear it from that form as we talk about syria. we have been doing so. inside the pentagon, are you hearing that the military is planning to intervene in syria? >> well, as you know the pentagon plans for everything but if you listen to general mat tus, the head of centcom as he spoke to the senate armed services committee he said no planning has begun. take a listen. >> i've not been directed to do detailed planning on these. i would prefer to take some of this, senator reed, and in the closed session but it would require regional or surrounding state support. it would be a significant commitment of resources. of course the international aspect cot reduce our commitment. >> reporter: what general mattis kmeens when he talks about resource it is it is a code word for troops t would require a significant number of troops on the ground in syria if the u.s. would set up a no-fly zone and set up safe havens. that i

we need not go down that road in working with senator jack reed, senator landrieu, senator share reasherrod brown and others. i've participated in an effort to make some changes in that bill that would give small, innovative companies more tools to access the capital that they need. we want to do that. we all want to do that. but we do that in our bill without putting the stability of our economy and the interest of american investors and taxpayers at risk. and i want to just lay out some of the problems with the house bill and how our reed-landrieu-levin amendment would address those problems. the house bill would lower barriers to fraud that are now present in the so-called regulation a stock offerings. these are offerings that are excepexempt from the sec registn requirements. house bill would expose retail investors -- those with no expert trees, no resources to assess the risks of participating in the unregulated market, to massive potential fraud and abuse. bill does not even require that companies making offerings under regulation a provide audited financial statements. the regulatio

senator jack reed, senator landrieu, senator brown and i believe we can create new opportunities for growing companies without creating a wild west mentality in our capital markets. and now to outline just a few of the ways in which we seek to repair the flaws of the house bill and enable real growth and job creation. right now, mr. president, companies that need capital to grow and add jobs are allowed to sell stocks in some cases without oversight by the s.e.c. and under looser legal liability rules. but in return for that reduced oversight, the companies must sell almost exclusively to investors that meet high-income or asset thresholds that help to ensure that they are able to understand and absorb the high risk of these investments. right now companies making these largely unregulated offerings are not generally allowed to offer them to the public. the house bill will allow companies to market these unregulated stock sales known as private of course offerings to e public. they can advertise on billboards or on cold calls to senior living centers with almost no oversight. our sub

i think that jack reed spoke about this, but i'm saying members, whatever you've been told about thisread some of the very credible articles that are being written about the house bill. there are good parts to it. i'm a general supporter of crowd funding, which is what i described, to make it legal for the first time really in history for people to go on the internet and raise money for private entities. it might be -- i think the idea is a very good one with the right safeguards in place, it could be a boon to small businesses and growing businesses that sometimes are shut out of those very fancy board rooms where decisions are made behind closed doors and very secretive meetings. i've been an advocate my whole life for opening this up so that people, ordinary people, middle-class people, can get involved in creating wealth through investing instead of it being a small club of people that come from the same schools and they go to the same social events and they have the same social network. we want to move beyond that. america is a great experiment in how to create a middle class and

the second amendment, sponsored by senator reed of rhode island -- all senators have stature, but jack reed with his background, his military background, his experience in the house and the senate samantha we all look for -- in the senate is a man that we all look for for his leadership and guidance. his amendment will stop businesses from gaming the system and avoiding oversight by hiding thousands or maybe tens of thousands of investors. this will stop when this amendment passes. democrats and republicans agree we need to pass the i.p.o. bill to make it easier for companies to grow and hire new workers. but we must do so in way that prevents fraud and abuse. these two amendments will go toward ccomplishing that. i say to everyone within the sound of my voice, those two amendments are not going to make this bill perfect but it is going make the bill a lot better. while the i.p.o. measure before the senate today is an important piece of legislation, experts agree its impact on job creation is somewhat limited. this legislation is something that's before this body. mr. president, yesterday s

reed joins us from city hall with the latest. >> the hearing focused on a resolution that was recently introduced by council president jack young. he is calling for a moratorium on property seizures based solely on unpaid water bills. >> right now, i am shaking, i am so upset. >> bond has been fighting what she calls an inaccurate water bill for more than a year. -- rondella has been fighting. >> my child does not get the food she needs because she is on a special diet to keep her from having seizures. she cannot take the medication that i have to buy to keep her mobile because she has cerebral palsy. so do not pay your inflated water bill of $532, or do i take care of my child? >> she is one of several residents claiming they had been overbuild. >> they said i used 1960 gallons of water a day for three people. everyone knows right there that is not right. >> the city admitted it has over built thousands of customers. according to the audit, there were no actual meter readings for 4.5 years. city council president jack young has introduced a resolution calling for a two- year moratorium on seizing property based solely on unpai

i also urge my colleagues to support the amendment by senator jack reed of rhode island requiring the s.e.c. to revise the definition of "holder of record." i will tell you that the financial industry has been working overtime to beat this amendment. they have been on the phones calling everybody saying, stop the reed amendment. according to a professor at colombia law school, the shareholder of record concept is archaic and it can be gamed. state securities regulators also share that same concern. the american securities administrators association said in a recent letter, it makes little sense to exclude any investor from the count of beneficial holders. the reed amendment would require the s.e.c. to update the definition of "holder of record" to revise an outdated definition that could actually hide the true number of shareholders that a company might have. i believe the bipartisanmarkly merkley-bennet and reed amendments may improve this bill but it still doesn't make it a good bill. this bill should have at least had a hearing. we should have at least brought in some expert witnes

i'm working with several of my colleagues -- senator jack reed, senator carl levin, ansar mark bennet, mary landrieu and others, to put a provision forward, a substitute which makes the changes to allow capital formation but does not take down the basic protective regimen that we have established in the law for those who are in this industry. we make a serious mistake and we ignore history if we turn our backs on 80 years of this government stepping up to make sure that the marketplace in america was safe for investors, to make sure that the person selling you a stock was actually a well-qualified person, extraordinary so they -- registered so they knew they would be held accountable, to make certain that companies you buy stock in actually exist and to make certain those who are the least vulnerable in america don't lose everything because this congress decided to look the other way because somebody wants to take a profit out of an idea. this is an important measure. every day, the republican leader has come to the floor and said call it immediately, let's go, let's get it done. we n