jeremy ben-ami and david harris, thank you both very much.oters were seen as cutting edge to reduce partisanship hat resulted in safe seats for the incumbents to the party in power and reduced the number of truly competitive election districts. >> brown: but the state legislature said, no you've gone too far and that's how we ended up in court? >> yes, absolutely again. the issue before the court is whether voters acting through an initiative are really acting as a legislature within the meaning of that word "legislature" in the constitution. >> brown: all right. we've got that clause because the argument is, as often, right, it's about a word or a clause. >> yes. >> brown: this is the election clause from the constitution. let's put that up. >> okay. >> brown: tell us about what happened here how that played into the argument today. >> former solicitor general paul clement was representing the arizona state legislature and he said that word "legislature" has always been meant to be a representative body from the beginning of the drafting of

i wouldn't pre-judge what he says, though at this point. >> ifill: jeremy ben-ami, is that the tensione all chronicling closely it's almost soap opera proportions. is this really about tensions between president obama and prime minister netanyahu or does it speak to something more fundamental happening within the u.s.-israeli relationship? >> actually, neither one. i don't think it's just a personal issue and i don't think it's really fundamental to the relationship between the countries. what i do think is that you have a right of center world view in the party that netanyahu heads and much of the government israel holds it's in line with the republican world view of how to deal with threats, how to deal with iran and other threats in the region that is different from the world view that president obama and much of the democratic party in this country have and folks on the central left in israel have. so there's actually a very real policy disagreement here that is not just about iran, it can be translated as well into the israeli-palestinian conflict and the broader israeli-arab conf

jeremy ben-ami, president of j. street which describes itself as a pro-israel and pro-peace organization. nathan diament of the union advocacy center. erel margalit, a member of the israeli knesset from the labor party. i don't know where to begin right now so i'm going to start with steve israel because you're the top democrat here. what do you think? is this good for america, good for israel, the speech in the way it was put together by boehner? i don't know who came up with this idea. i have theories about it. what are yours? who came up with the idea of sneaking this invitation past our president? >> boehner. the issue for me is not bibi. the issue is boehner. look, let's be blunt. this was a trap that john boehner tried to spring on democrats in order to create the perception of daylight between democrats and the state of israel. and, chris, you've been in politic, i'm in politics. i know one thing about politics. when you know that your opponent is setting a trap, avoid the trap i'm not going to fall into that

jeremy ben-ami. nathan diament. and erel margulet. >>> coming up president obama versus bibi netanyahu. we'll get to the human politics of netanyahu and the speech tomorrow versus the president. the prime minister is coming to congress tomorrow sounding like churchill. you can bet he's going to quote churchill. the president is calling him a distraction. no worse than that. i think he thinks it's worse. think the president is getting softer on this kind of thing politically and re torically. i don't think he looks this guy. who's winning this thing? >>> plus here's one thing we learned about jeb bush and chris christie from this weekend's cpac conference. the dog doesn't like the dog food. bush and christie don't stand a chance with this crowd. scott walker, he may be the republican to watch right noup. he's the sleeper. >>> how will john boehner get out of the straitjacket he's in right now? he can't fund the department of homeland security thanks to the red hots. >>> let me finish with a big question. will the red

that doesn't mean that jeremy ben-a ben-ami who has been attacking the prime minister of israel --.eone who seems to be supporting the, a deal that could undermine the very security of israel and telling the prime minister he can't speak. jeremy what is your issue with a simple speech by the prime minister? why are you taking out ad after ad in the "new york times," undermining the democratically elected leader of israel? why are you impugning his motives? why are you saying he's doing this only for political purposes? are you a prophet? do you know? >> on the 28th of march, that's the deadline for the deal. what's he supposed to do? when is he supposed to give the speech? >> this is a filibustering and unhelpful rhetoric that comes when you try to have a serious discussion. the question is whether or not this approach of negotiating is the best way to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon. i don't think any of us have a different goal in mind. the president of the united states the national security adviser, the prime minister of israel our number one goal across both sides is