it means more freedom, peter suderman thank you. >> thank you. kennedy: coming up, wilbur ross has been confirmed as our newcomers secretary. will he help president create all those jobs he promised. or a new head of another useless government bar boo barr bureauc i ask jonathan hoenig. or is a 423 enough? good question. you ask a lot of good questions... i think we should move you into our new fund. ok. sure. but are you asking enough about how your wealth is managed? wealth management, at charles schwab. kennedy: wihoenig. -- wilbur ross is our secretary of commerce. do we need a department of commerce? let's ask jonathan hoenig. do we need a department of commerce? >> our most successful years came before the department of commerce, it was put place in 1904, specifically to punish business. a perfect example how a successful businessman is a terrible lebl leblg late legislr in this case, he is against free trade, he talks about managing it, fair trade, this what john edwards and bernie sanders talking about. kennedy: was he more of a free trad

peter suderman joins me. welcome back. peter, my first question is, what went wrong? >> just about everything is one answer. so the republicans basically spent 7 years campaigning against obamacare and promising to replace the law. but they never built any consensus around the replacement. and they didn't spend very much time trying to build consensus around the law once they had it in place. then you had problem president trump didn't understand the details on this and he never made a case for the law on its policy merits. if you think about what president trump and what speaker ryan were saying about this. they were saying you have to vote for it because you will lose your seat if you don't. they never made the case that you needed to vote for it because it was a good policy. they couldn't convince anybody that this bill would be good policy. kennedy: the emotional path from obamacare is littered with the bodies of democrats who voted for something bad simply because their party said get in line. i argued it was not necessarily the details, but the structural aspect

thank you very much, peter suderman. let me bring in the snowbound party panel. but they made it. michael malice is here. he got through waist-high snow earlier this afternoon. andy levy co-host of "red eye" on the fox news channel. so the battle over healthcare helped fuel the current partisan bickering dominating d.c. if you need more proof the nation is drifting further to the left and right. membership in the nation's largest socialist organization. the democratic socialists of america has reportedly tripled. and we are told they only have 19 dues-paying members. it doesn't sounds like a lot. but it's the most they have had since 1982 when they were formed. what do you think the big incentive is to join the democratic socialists who are neither democratic nor socialist? >> this comes from the defeat of bernie sanders. and so many young democrats were very unhappy with hillary clinton. and then of course the pendulum swing after donald trump was elected. people feeling like they wanted to do something to stay sane. which is a little bit of an exaggeration. you see a lot of youn

[laughter] and peter suderman is also here.elcome you guys and talk about the other big story of the day. and federal judge neil gorsuch. by most accounts he's pretty qualified for the job. that is putting a lot of democrats in a sticky position. on one hand they want to give the appearance that they are putting up a fight. on the other hand they vowed it out to take down any democratic lawmaker that votes yes on neil gorsuch. will he seals sail through the process or will he battled the nomination. i will turn to you first because democrats do not seem to be as vocally opposed to neil gorsuch as they would be for other nominees simply because of the timing and the fact that there will probably be another vacancy on the court. >> this guy is someone who is really difficult to oppose reasonably. he is a genial guy that is levelheaded, he has a long history of supporting even by democrats, he was up approved in 2006. they didn't even bother to count the votes because he was such an obvious shoo-in. you cannot stick your neck out

[laughter] and peter suderman is also here.elcome you guys and talk about the other big story of the day. and federal judge neil gorsuch. by most accounts he's pretty qualified for the job. that is putting a lot of democrats in a sticky position. on one hand they want to give the appearance that they are putting up a fight. on the other hand they vowed it out to take down any democratic lawmaker that votes yes on neil gorsuch. will he seals sail through the process or will he battled the nomination. i will turn to you first because democrats do not seem to be as vocally opposed to neil gorsuch as they would be for other nominees simply because of the timing and the fact that there will probably be another vacancy on the court. >> this guy is someone who is really difficult to oppose reasonably. he is a genial guy that is levelheaded, he has a long history of supporting even by democrats, he was up approved in 2006. they didn't even bother to count the votes because he was such an obvious shoo-in. you cannot stick your neck out