"at this hour with kate bolduan" starts right now. >> hello, everyone. i'm kate bolduan. your money and their job security that's what's on the line this morning as republicans on capitol hill kick off a critical day on their most critical issue. tax reform. senate republicans are about to unveil their version of the tax plan, a tax plan that promises to be different from the house's version. still reeling from their failure to repeal obamacare and this week's democratic sweep of elections some republicans say it is now or never. >> well -- >> to be worried? >> if we don't produce. the an tet dote to our problems are our base is pretty unenthusiastic. legislatively we haven't cut taxes or reformed health care. >> house speaker paul ryan will be facing reporters later this hour and you can be sure he's

going to be facing tough and important questions on this very issue. the cost of the tax bill, who really benefits and can he guarantee the middle class will not take a hit? on that the white house is warning would be a deal bracket. >> at the end of the day if we really believe this is a middle-class tax increase he's not going to sign it. >> so there you have that. a lot is going on on this. to the capitol to get the latest. congressional correspondent phil mattingly there to set the stage. let's start on the house side right now. are they any closer to an agreement on what exactly the final product is going to be that will keep republicans together on this? >> yeah. after a very riveting four days in the house ways and means mark up on tax policy, kate, i can say look we're still waiting for the final changes to come on the house side of things. on the top line everybody knows the basic dynamics and key points of what this plan will include. lot of problem areas they're trying to resolve during the committee process before they move this forward. whether it's the state and local

tax deduction, mortgage deduction, how the guardrails will operate, in the weeds stuff they will figure out before they move forward. one other element we saw yesterday is right now the house republican plan costs more than it's supposed to if it wants to move through the senate. right now joint committee on taxation says about $1.57 trillion, cbo $1.7 trillion their target is $1.5 trillion. that's not fatal in the house, that's a senate issue than a house issue, chairman kevin brady told me they plan to have their numbers back to $1.5 trillion before it leaves committee today and that's why we're waiting for the final amendment here. i think more broadly, though, and i think this is the important thing in talking to republican aides in both chambers the ke of we know where the policy is right now, a good sense of what the issues are, does the political im -- imperative after the obamacare failures is that what ends up winning the day over all else? republican leaders think yes. a lot of members think yesp as you know when it comes to tax

reform details matter an enormous amount. >> it's all about the details. if nothing else. this one especially. senate republicans, they're about to push out their version of a tax plan. how is this going to complicate things or let's be poly ana how will it make it all better? >> it's a tax buffet today. we get the basic tenants of this is your dream, a tax buffet. >> the basic tenants of the tax plan and an agreed upon framework the senate plan will have those top line numbers as well, but a lot of key differences importants as you look through them why they're actually there. in the house they had four brackets. the senate i'm told at least as it was this morning between five and seven, and the thresholds for those brackets how much you make to be in each bracket will be different than the house version. on the corporate rate which is, obviously, a huge component, a dramatic cut in the house and senate side, but the senate is phasing theirs in by a year unlike the house which would be immediate. you have state and local tax deduction the house because of

the negotiations with the north ern republicans changed it for property putting a threshold at $10,000. the senate will do away with it entirely. why is the senate different than the house? budget reasons. these are things that are being done to help pay for the cuts on both the corporate and individual side. does that create enormous problems? potentially. we'll have to wait and see. the idea has always been house passes their version, senate passes their version and they reconcile them together. the further away they get from one another on several of these key items the more complicated that becomes. again, a lot of enthusiasm to do something but the enthusiasm to do anything kind of collides sometimes with those details we are talking about. that's why today matters an enormous amount in the house an senate and the future of this bill all together. >> thank you, phil. a tax buffet. that's a perfect way to start your day. joining me now to discuss, cnn global economic analyst rana fa ru hart editor at "the new york times" and chief correspondent

dana bash. got love phil's colorful language all the time. what do you think will happen when the senate rolls out their version, they roll it out and then what? and then they're going to start the same kind of very difficult work that we've seen take place over the past couple weeks in the house, but, you know, phil touched on something that is really critical and that is, you know, although there are several substantive and policy differences between what the senate is going to roll out and what the house is going to roll out, it all -- i think probably one of the biggest is the question of the elimination of the tax deduction for state and local governments and the reason is because that's a lot of revenue. that's a lot of money. and one of the big rubs right now that's going on in the house in and among republicans and certainly will in and among senate republicans, is the deficit and how this tax reform bill is going to eat into and

make the def sit worse. if you take away it's basic math, i'm not that good at math but even i get this, you take away revenue for the government, and you don't replace it in another way, it is going to add to the deficit. so i think that is a major, major difference between the senate and house bill and will probably be ultimately at the end of the day where the biggest conflicting debates in the republican party. >> there you go students, dana bash's math lesson for the day. >> better than you think. >> done a very good job. rana, a policy i want to get to it, but how this is sold and how this is branded is as important. just look at what happened with obamacare, need to look no further. asked about the whole effort by cnbc's john harwood, gary cohn said this in an interview and listen to this.

>> we create wage inflation which means the workers get paid more, the workers have more disposable income, the worker spends more and we see the whole trickle down through the economy. and that's good for the economy. >> in the same interview cohn also said the most excited group out there are big ceos about our tax plan. they might very well be excited and it might be good for everybody, but that is not how we're hearing this from capitol hill. >> no. i'm amazed that cohen is still using words like trickle down. most americans don't believe anything has been trickling down for the last 20 years. >> anyone in the policy realm is not talking about it that way anymore. >> no. the last 20 years tax cuts haven't created growth. looking at that proposed 20% corporate tax number, okay, it's true, american corporations do pay a lot more than most other international corporations right now, but in reality, because of all the loopholes, most big companies pay about 19%. the tech firms like apple pay lower than that because of the

loopholes. those will not be closed. that gets to the math point that dana was making, how are you going to make this work and get republicans on board that doesn't blow up the deficit. >> that sound bite from gary cohn is kind of unbelievable. a, because -- >> totally. >> because of what you said with the trickle down, which is, you know, certainly a tenant of conservative and republican philosophy, but not when you're talking about sort of the trump coalition. >> right. >> which is much more populist. but on that note, saying that ceos are going to be so happy about this, i mean, those are not the trump voters that the president promised would get relief in their pocketbooks, would have economic relief. i mean another big, big, big part of the -- of the rub on capitol hill right now is, what is this going to look like for the middle class. and assuring their constituents and assuring the rank and file

who are not sure about voting for this bill, on the house and senate side that middle class will get a tax break. when you have the president's chief economic person talking about how great this is for ceos, that's not exactly ideal messaging. i'm guessing there are lot of house republicans with a lot of heart burn hearing that this morning. >> uh-huh. >> that's right. when it comes to the differences as phil laid out, you know, just because we won't go over them again the state and local taxes, as dana is talking about, more tax brackets than the house bill and the corporate tax that you were mentioning, if all of this is in the bill and there will be more, how different, how far apart do you think the house and senate are to start off? >> i think there are significant differences. that point about deducting a local and state taxes is actually a crucial one because if you look at totally eliminating that, like the senate bill would propose, that's going to hit blue states. that becomes very bipartisan, right. that's going to hit, you know, the wealthy and the upper middle

classes -- and in new york and california. that's an easy way to kind of, you know, get your budget in line, although it's not going to get you there totally. i think the visuals are not great. we haven't talked about the alternative minimum tax which is something that rich typically pay. if you look back to the little information we have on trump's own taxes, 2005, he paid about $38 million, $31 million was the alternative minimum tax. he wants to get rid of that entirely. it's really hard when you have optics like this to sell this as a middle-class program. >> and makes it hard when they're still trying to negotiate it. it's not cooked yet, not baked. thanks, guys. really appreciate it. from here back to capitol hill right now because we want to discuss this more with republican congressman trent franks of arizona joining me now. congressman, thanks for coming in. >> well, thanks for having me on. always appreciate it, kate. >> thank you. >> paul ryan yesterday said, with the house bill, everyone gets a tax cut. he said that in a radio

interview. also yesterday, kevin brady, though, stopped short of that and said many people will see a tax cut. john thune just said this morning. listen to this, congressman. >> can you guarantee that no middle-class family will see their taxes go up? >> nora, i don't think you can guarantee every filer is -- that that's going to be the case. can you guarantee every single filer might have some different experience? i don't think you can guarantee that. >> congressman, at this point are you comfortable being able to guarantee no middle-class family will see their taxes go up? >> you know, i would never try to guarantee anything like that. but i am suggesting to you that the overwhelming majority of the american people will see a demonstrably clearer tax relief that they can pal pably feel. and i also am convinced sometimes we look just to the tax relief as far as the money back in the taxpayer's pocket as

the primary benefit but the big benefit here is going to be how this is going to catalyze a tremendous growth in the economy and that's going to hit everyone in almost a ubiquitous way. i'm considered one of the most conservatives in the entire congress and if i'm excited about this, it means something to the bottom line foundation of the economy. productivity is what it's all about and this is going to incite tremendous surge in productivity in my opinion. >> one of the things out there, though, is what happens to the deficit and one idea being floated to pay for this, pay for the cuts, is adding repeal of the individual mandate of obamacare into the bill. do you support adding that? >> well, i mean i would love to see the individual mandate repealed. i think that that -- but i don't really predict that's going to happen. >> okay. >> i understand the concern about the deficit and i would say this, that seems to be the

primary talking point from our friends on the left and if that is true, then this represents the first time in the history of human civilization they've been concerned about the deficit. so -- but i'm concerned about it genuinely. i'm convinced that with a lot of our projections and trajectories here we forget what this is going to do to the economy and how that's going to create productivity and literally as it has in future -- in past circumstances, in the future, i believe it's going to see a bigger tax revenue for the government and i think that's going to go a long ways towards mitigating any deficit issues. >> i think it's important to note you don't necessarily support adding obamacare repeal into this bill. >> no, i do support that. >> oh, you're okay with it being in. you don't think it's going to happen? >> i'm not predicting it will happen but i would love to see the obamacare repeal go in. the senate rules as we talked about many times make it difficult under this byrd rule. this is the one rare opportunity for us to fit something through the senate under their assa nine

rules that could be historic for the american people. i'm glad, too -- >> one thing i know that you care very much about is not in the bill right now in the house version, the adoption tax credit. if it is not added in, are you a no on the house bill? >> well, i just say that would break my heart because, you know, republicans have always been under this i think noble mantra of adoption not abortion and we believe in that deeply and i will tell you every person on the leadership team including kevin brady embraces that. i will make this prediction, that the adoption tax credit will either be completely in the way it was before or make it better. i know these men. they're committed to this and kathleen morris rogers one of the most elegant, poignant persons. she personifies what this is about. i'm not an expert in tax issues. i do mostly children's issues and national security. i'm convinced when we look at this from a fiscal point of view you can't make an argument

against the tax credit for adoption on fiscal basis. we save so much every time a child is adopted. of course -- >> but if it doesn't make it in, can you support the bill? >> well, i'm going to say to you, not to try to dodge your question, but i have so much conviction that this is going to be in. i say this, even without the deduction tax credit, i'm going to break my neck to make sure it stays in, even without it if you look at hu they've constructed this with the child credits and family credits just adopting a child will bring tax relief. there's a built-in advantage for adoption in the existing bill. i can't see -- i can't figure out a way to get to no on this bill. sometimes they say how do i get to yes. i don't know how to get to no on this bill. i say this with the strongest conviction i know people involved and they are deeply committed to this and we're going to fix this and either going to leave the tax credit for adoption as it is or make it better. the main point is, that our commitment will be to these

little guys that just trying to find their way back home. just trying to find a place to live and grow up in a surrounding where they're loved and appreciated. >> one of the kindest dodges of a question i have encountered. >> that's great. >> let me ask you this, let me finally ask you, want to ask you about politics real quick if we haven't talked about politics enough. senator flake is obviously not going to be running for re-election in your state. that leaves an opening for a republican to run for that republican seat to step up. are you going to throw your hat in the ring for senate? >> you know, i'm not going to run for the flake seat. i wish jeff flake nothing but the very best god can give him. that's not a seat that i'm going to run for. but i believe that someone that will be a lot like what i say lot like me believe in the same things i do will step up and i will do everything i can. >> would you support martha mcsally? >> i will support whoever the nominee is but i'm not going to suggest who i would support in a primary yet because i don't know

who the actual candidates will be but whoever wins that primary i will break my neck to see them win on the republican side and i genuinely wish jeff the best going forward in life that god can give him. this is a man that loves god, his country, his family and even though he and i have had profound disagreements politically he is a decent and good human being. >> congressman, thanks for coming on as always. >> thank you. you take care. >> still up for us, congratulating china and blaming america. candidate trump once compared china's trade practices to rape and theft and now in beijing president trump offers nothing but praise. what's going on here? that's next. could michael flynn flip. cnn learning that trump's former national security adviser is concerned he's afraid that the special counsel's russia probe could ensnare his son. how a worried father could factor into the mueller investigation.

accused of obstructing justice to theat the fbinuclear war, and of violating the constitution by taking money from foreign governments and threatening to shut down news organizations that report the truth. if that isn't a case for impeaching and removing a dangerous president, then what has our government become? i'm tom steyer, and like you,

i'm a citizen who knows it's up to us to do something. it's why i'm funding this effort to raise our voices together and demand that elected officials take a stand on impeachment. a republican congress once impeached a president for far less. yet today people in congress and his own administration know that this president is a clear and present danger who's mentally unstable and armed with nuclear weapons. and they do nothing. join us and tell your member of congress that they have a moral responsibility to stop doing what's political and start doing what's right. our country depends on it.

moderator: hi, guys. so this is the all-new chevy equinox. it's gorgeous. it offers heated and ventilated front seats, heated rear seats, a panoramic sunroof, built-in 4g lte wifi, apple car play compatibility, surround vision, safety alert seat... wow. and teen driver technology. all of that, is in this one car? yeah, and to get all of these features, you would have to buy all five of those crossovers. (gasp) man: whoa! moderator: oh, and the lexus nx.

that's insane. moderator: yep, all six of these, and you still wouldn't get everything that's in this equinox. man 2: chevy's raising the bar. woman: six cars in one. man 3: yeah, i like that.

president trump to china, it's to the you, it's them. -- it's not you, it's them. telling chinese leaders he doesn't blame beijing for taking advantage of american trade practices and praised china for exploiting the trade deficit and blamed his predecessor for letting it happen. >> i don't blame china. after all, who can blame a country for being able to take advantage of another country for the benefit of its citizens. i give china great credit. >> the president with a farewell tweet before heading to his next stop on the asian tour to say this is a far cry from what candidate trump said about china on the campaign trail over and over and over again. remember this. >> we can't continue to allow china to rape our country, that's what they're doing. >> china is taking our jobs, our pun, our base, our manufacturing. >> what they've done to us is the greatest single theft in the history of the world.

the greatest abuser in the history of this country, rampant theft of intellectual property. a currency manipulator. they break the rules in every way imaginable. i have many friends in china, they agree with me 100%. we have lost all of their respect. they think we're run by a bunch of idiots. >> how does such criticism morph into kudos and praise if over to kaitlan collins traveling with the president right now. kaitlan, what is the white house saying about the shift? >> kaitlan, can you hear me? i think may have a technical difficulty in the business. let's discuss this with national security analyst david sanger, he's a national security

correspondent for "the new york times." can you hear me. >> i'm sorry. i heard the first part there from you. >> we're having technical problems. >> now you're back. say it again. >> at least there's someone to talk to me. let's talk first about what i was going to ask kaitlan collins about the pretty shocking and very noteworthy shift in how the president spoke about china and the trade deficit during the campaign and how the president is talking about it today from beijing. >> well, i think it has more to do with where he was speaking than what he was speaking about. because he went on into this trip and particularly into the visit with xi jinping, the newly reempowered president of china, he had to take care of his north korea issues first and you'll remember that a few months ago, the president in a very telling aside said, why would i pressure

china on trade while they're helping me on north korea. now, we can have a debate later on about how much they're really helping on north korea but he has clearly faced the issue that every president before him has faced which is, how do you get the chinese to cooperate on a political goal while you're beating them up on an economic goal. i read his comments today as suggesting that he was going to step back a bit on the trade issues and he did that by saying the chinese are simply acting in their own self-interest. who doesn't act if their own self-interest in trade? we do, they do, everyone else does. blaming this on president obama i thought was particularly strange because if you go back to the history of this, if there is a moment that most of the president trump's allies sort of put on this it was the moment china came into the world trade organization at the end of the

clinton administration, promoted heavily by the bush administration and it was president bush who decided not to press them hard on trade because he needed them on counterterrorism. >> but when it comes down to it, is this what china needs to hear on trade to get them to yes on what the president wants or needs from them on north korea? does this language move them when it dhos what he needs their -- when it comes to what he needs their help on. >> it doesn't make them think they have a large, imminent problem. for president xi the strategy here is, give the trump administration just enough on north korea to show that they're cracking down, without leading to the collapse of the regime, which the chinese desperately want to avoid happen in north korea, and meanwhile, forestall some of the trade issues and you didn't hear very much about the south china sea and china's territorial ambitions and all that. what worries me about the discussion, it was

transactional, as it frequently is with president trump, how do you put together a deal, but not much about the long-term relationship with china even in the economic sphere. so what are we worried about with china? the current trade deficit or is it their extremely aggressive move into electric cars, quantum computing, into areas where they're no longer taking our intellectual property but amassing their own. and that's really where the future focus of this has to be and we didn't hear very much about that at least in public. >> david, hang on with me one second. kaitlan collins is overseas is with us now. let me bring you in on the other question i have about what's coming up next. i mean, it's been a big question mark throughout this whole trip. is the president going to sit down with vladimir putin. what more are you hearing about whether or not this is actually going to happen? >> well, kate, it certainly seems that the white house is

anticipating a meeting between those two on the side of that economic summit in vietnam. now secretary of state rex tillerson came to the hotel that i'm at right now and briefed reporters today, and he was asked about that. now he didn't say that there was a concrete meeting set in place. he said that the officials were still trying to determine it if there was enough substance for the two leaders to warrant a pull aside on the sidelines of that summit but then shortly after he told reporters that, a russian state news agency was saying that meeting is going to happen on friday. so that's what we're waiting to confirm from the white house, that that meeting is happening, but tillerson did say that they did speak and focused opds syria and ukraine and asked if russian meddling in the election would still be on the list he said almost certainly, kate. we can expect that. if that meeting does happen it will be remarkable because as you know, that investigation into russian meddling in the

2016 election still hangs over this trump white house quite a bit. >> absolutely right. kaitlan, thank you so much. david let me bring you in on this finally. i mean on one level isn't there always something, i don't know how rex tillerson put it, something sufficiently substantive to talk about between two world leaders especially between these two. it's a yes or no. i'm -- i find this curious. >> yeah, well certainly plenty of substantive issues. are the two ready to talk about it. >> there you go. >> the continued russian meddling in ukraine, its military build up in europe, apparent violations detected during the obama administration, continuing in the trump administration, of the intermediate nuclear forces agreement, a major nuclear agreement, would all be you would think right subjects. on the question of meddling in the election, they met, you recall, in july in hamburg and i was at that summit meeting and at the end of it, president

trump said well, he had heard from president putin if russia meddled in the election they would have been so stealthy about it. >> i have to head to capitol hill. house speaker paul ryan speaking with reporters. let's listen in. >> every income level. you know, you know how much i love this stuff. i love helping craft and shape policy, especially tax policy, that's been nearly a lifelong passion of mine, but it's not just because i think it's fascinating. i love doing this stuff because this policy actually really helps improve people's lives. people are sick of the status quo. people are sick of being left behind by a tax code while special interests are given a leg up by carve outs and loopholes. i love this stuff because we've been crafting good legislation that means bigger paychecks for american families, it means fairer tax, more jobs. that's what this is all about.

$1182, $1182. is how much the typical household will see in their paychecks. that's an average household. we're doubling the standard deduction increasing the child tax credit lowering tax rates across the board. that's not all. middle income families middle income family estimates show they will see a pay raise. this would result in 3.1% higher wages for people. that means more take home pay every month in addition to a tax cut. higher pay, lower taxes. yes, there are details that are being ironed out in the committee process. that is exactly how the ledge lay laytive process is supposed to work. i want to commend chairman brady and member es of the ways and means committee for their excellent work. we're doing this the right way, doing this the regular order way. it takes time but we're going to get this over the finish line. we're going to get this over the finish line because we need to get this done for american families, for people who will be

helped by simpler, fairer taxes and today, we're taking one big step closer to fulfilling that goal. questions? >> you're out of breath. i'm kidding. >> the republicans yesterday dismissed many of the results in virginia and new jersey as a blue state, but there are vulnerable republicans in those states. why is it a good idea to eliminate the state and local tax deduction in a bill that could make that a tougher vote for those vulnerable members? >> when you take a look at tax reform you have to take a look at bill in totality and look at the fact that we're doubling the standard by doubling the standard -- oh, lost my postcard. geez. i feel naked without my postcard. doubling the standard deduction, i was going to see if i had an assist over there. no postcard. all right. look, do you guys have a postcard on you? you don't.

so christina, by doubling the standard exemption, right there, 90% of americans will fill out their taxes picture this in your mind the form a size of a postcard. number two, when you actually say for your first $24,000 instead of $12,000 that's tax freeh, if you have children you're going to have a $1600 per child tax credit, lowering rates, when you take the thing in its totality what the analysis showss us, whether from jct, from the tax foundation or even tpc, that average households at every income level see a tax cut. when you look at the fact that this produces faster take home pay, higher, faster wages, growth, faster economic growth and bigger paychecks it's going to be a big thing for everybody no matter what state you come from. >> [ inaudible ] many of them can't vote for the bill because of the provision? >> as you see we also allow a $10,000 property tax deduction. so in conjunction with the discussions having with our members in these states,

hundreds of billions of dollars have been added back to the bill to accommodate those legitimate concerns so people are b ben fitting. chad? >> you haven't been making d you have been making the case to your members that the house control by republicans could be in jeopardy if you don't pass tax reform. that said, you know if you look historically what has happened in the first mid-terms of presidents when they have passed big initiatives, crime bill in 1994, certainly obamacare in 2010 that party has lost. explain why you think it is so essential that this would preserve the majority? you don't get the majorities to sit on. you get ones to pass big policy and burn seats. >> i would take -- i think it's a very interesting analog but i would say the crime bill in '93, obamacare those are unpopular bills. this is not unpopular. we're actually letting people keep more of their own money and cleaning out the loopholes of the tax code and having a fairer tax system. faster economic growth, bigger

cuts. that's not an unpopular thing do. by the way this is something we ran on. we didn't -- we didn't do like some of the democrat majorities of the past and pass a big huge thing on an unsuspecting country. we ran in 2016 on doing the tax reform. the president ran on doing this tax cut and reform. this is about fulfilling our promise to the american people. this is about actually improving people's lives and making a positive difference and i fundamentally believe we -- when we do this, make good on our word make good on our promise and make people's lives better we will be just fine politically. >> i'm sorry. i don't do the yell out thing. abigail roberts from the christian broadcasting network. there are -- a lot of our viewers are concerned about the child adoption tax credit being not included in the house bill. is that something you would like to see in the final bill and have there been efforts to preserve it? >> i would direct you to the ways and means committee and the mark up today and i should -- you should bring that question

there. that's among the things that the ways and means committee is considering. >> do you think the policy for health care belong in the tax reform package? you're talking about repealing the mandate as part of that? >> that's one of the many things our members are talking about. those kind of conversations are ongoing. of course i want to get rid of the individual mandate. >> in this bill. >> any way i can. i think it's doing great damage to people. we're making people buy something they don't want. i don't think this is good policy for our country and it's wrecking our health care system. whether or not it goes into any particular piece of legislation those are the conversations we're going to have along with many other issues with our members on an ongoing basis. >> mr. speaker, the senate is releasing the bill today and what we've heard it might be drastically different from what you guys have put out over here, phase in or phase out of the tax rate, fully repeal s.a.l.t. even thoi though you talked about the

importance of the compromise, is that going to be problematic for resolving and a democratic aide overheard you joking with mitch mcconnell about going to conference? are you going to conference? >> put the political hack aside, we are going to conference and that's the point i've been making. we're going to flens. that wasn't a joke. that was -- the person i don't know who -- which hack did that, but, you know, if you were there we're going to conference. why are we going to conference? we're doing this the right way. the senate bill will be different because that's the legislative process. but what's encouraging in all of this is, just as we discussed at the front end of this process, we have a framework that we established with the white house and the senate and these bills are being written with inside that framework. the house will pass its bill, the senate will pass its bill and we will reconcile the differences. that's how this process will continue. >> thanks. i wanted to ask you a follow-up on the politics of this.

you talked about how this will affect individuals and families, earning from 50 to 150,000 a year that's important, but i think where democrats think they can make some headway is with these upscale suburbs that have long been a part of the republican coalition that are going to look at this and own very expensive homes, make more money than a lot of what you've been talking about -- >> kind of ironic isn't it. >> right. but in their view, voters think they're not starving but they stop working all their money goes away and the democrats will be able it make headway saying the republicans are passing a tax plan not helping you. maybe your taxes are going up a little, maybe not going down, you're rearranging the desk chairs and you still need your accountant. this a problem for you for republicans potentially with an important part of your coalition that helped you win in 2016 if the tax plan does help a lot of people but doesn't help people voting for republican a long

time? >> we're not doing this for political benefitp we're doing this to improve people's lives. we're doing this to get this country back on track. we're doing this to get economic growth. look, we haven't had a 3% economy in about a decade. do you know what happens to a country that grows so slowly? wages are flat. living standards get flat. economic anxiety and insecurity goes up. that's what's happening in this country today. and you wonder why we have a lot of anxiety and polarization in america. when people are worried about whether they can put food on the table or pay the energy bill next week, next month, that's a real problem in america. the purpose of this legislation is focused on not giving the highest income earners the biggest tax breaks. the purpose on the legislation is giving middle income tax families a break. and you got to remember half the country is living paycheck to paycheck. i just saw a survey that says a third of americans feel that

their $400 away from a financial crisis in their family. that's who needs relief in this country. and by the way, when you get our tax rate downs and ours businesses as deeply as we're dropping them in the bill we're proposing that's good for everybody. that's good for jobs, good for wages, good for economic growth. and so this isn't an appropriations bill. this is an economic growth bill. this is a middle income fairness bill. this is a fairness bill which is yeah, if you have an accountant and can navigate the deductions and loopholes, the deductions and loopholes, you can get a god deal. but why do we want to have a tax code so rigged? don't we want a tax code that's simple and easy and fair? that's what we're trying to accomplish. look at all of the analysis, t pc, jtp or tax foundation they tell you that average families in all income groups see a tax cut. >> mr. speaker following up on that, a lot of those analyses

that you cited say that in the out years these families more of these families will see a tax increase. that seems primarily -- >> the [ inaudible ]. >> primarily due to the [ inaudible ]. can you talk about why you've chosen to do those, when so many of the things on the cooperate and business side are permanent, why not make some of those things to keep the middle-class stuff -- >> that's a good question. you see both. you see the expense provision sunset. business provision sunset and individual provision sunset but in our bill the primary provisions the big provisions like the rates and child tax credit those things are made permanent. why? because certainty is important for economic growth and that's why we believe if you sunset the wrong provisions, you will actually could damage to economic growth and forward planning. but what we learned from the economic standpoint of the things that are sunset, are done in a way they won't damage economic growth they will encourage economic growth and also it's just to be conforming

with the rules. senate budget rules that we have to be mindful of and we want to make sure when he pass a bill out of the house that bill ads here to the senate rules so that we can use the reconciliation tool we need to use to pass tax reform. those sunsets things that are done to make sure the bill conforms to the rules. we don't personally like in the house, but we need to follow if we want to make sure that's privileged. >> there is this expectation that congress will act later to extend those. >> i believe that as well. >> doesn't that imply then that the deficit impact will be greater? >> as you know we are concerned that the dynamic scoring would not be allowed on the senate again because of the rules. but we are convinced based upon lots of research, lots of economic modeling, that you will see faster economic growth result from this bill. you will see higher wages, more jobs, bigger paychecks, bigger gdp, and if you see a bigger economy that means you get more revenue. we're confident there's two

things you need to do to get our fiscal house in order. grow the economy, get people working and paying taxes and deal with spending, especially entitlement spending. more work to do. the house has passed bills over and over. but that doesn't peen you stop working to grow the economy. this is our signature issue the most important thing we can possibly do to get a bigger economic pie for all americans for growing this economy which is really important for our fiscal future. >> mr. speaker, about a dozen house republicans just a few hours ago called for daca to have some sort of -- have a fix by the end of the year. do you think it's important that daca have a fix by the end of the year and would you be willing to consider -- >> i think it should be considered separately on its own merits. number one. number two we have until i believe march is the deadline we have with the president. i don't think there's need to have artificial deadlines within the one we have. having said that, our members

are having lots of conversations. a working group on this issue and that working group is going to spread out and start talking to the broader conference. i met with some members of the senate who are also forming their own working group. so active discussions are under way with our members about how the daca solution should occur but i don't think we should put artificial deadlines in front of the one we have and it should be considered separately. thank you, everybody. appreciate it. >> all right. house speaker paul ryan speaking with reporters there. a big focus on the tax efforts in the house and the senate. the house speaker noting with an optimistic tone saying we are going to get this over the finish line. also, though, i think very note worthy, asked if obamacare, repeal of the individual mandate in obamacare could be added to the house bill, he said i'll take a repeal of it and get rid of the individual mandate any way we can it's one of the many things we're talking about. it's definitely part of the conversation right now. up next, the senate, that they

are going to unveil their tax plan all everyone is waiting to see just what comes out there and also this is coming up for us, the special counsel's russia probe zeroing in on former trump national security adviser michael flynn and his son. both may be in legal jeopardy right now. is robert mueller playing flynn against flynn? that's next. looking for balance in your digestive system? try align probiotic. for a non-stop, sweet treat goodness, hold on to your tiara kind of day. get 24/7 digestive support, with align. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand. also in kids chewables. to find smarter solutions. to offer more precise and less invasive treatment options than before. like advanced genomic testing and immunotherapy.

see how we're fighting to outsmart cancer at cancercenter.com/outsmart did yon the national debt?ssman get elected by talking tough will they stay true to their words? or did they promise you one thing... only to do another? right now, congress is talking about tax cuts that will add trillions to our national debt and hurt our economy. it's time to tell congress... don't borrow more money from china. and leave more debt to our kids. keep your word. tax cuts shouldn't add to the national debt. on a perfect car, then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates. maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with accident forgiveness,

liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

can a father's worry play into the special counsel russia investigation? that is a question right now as sources tell cnn michael flynn is concerned about the legal exposure his son might face now in the probe and that concern could determine how flynn responds to it all. what is going on here? we have our crime justice report earth joining us know. what are you hearing? >> certainly that is a concern

for michael flynn sr. we're told by witnesses who have been interviewed by the special counsel investigatioors that th have been asking questions about police s his son, michael flynn jr., his overseas trips and some of the income that has been earned from that. flynn jr. serves as his father's chief of staff. he was actively involved in some of her father's consulting and lobbying work and there is that famous trip to moscow in 2015 when flynn dined with vladimir putin, it was a black tie gala for russia today television. came under scrutiny, ooilts been the focus of questions from investigators. and the investigation by the mueller team is also looking at some undisclosed lobbying during the campaign that flynn sr. did on behalf of the turkish government. so all of this certainly has flynn sr. concerned we're told because there is that chance that they may be trying to get

to flynn jr. as a way to get to michael flynn sr. >> fascinating. great to see you. thank you so much. let's discuss in, mike baker is here, former ceo pop difference, and paul callen our analyst. what do you make of the reporting that he is concerned about the exposure that his son may have and that may play into how he responds? >> i think a lot of american citizens would be surprised to find out that this is routine in federal investigations where -- >> father against the son? >> father against the son, a wife against a husband. a lot of times you'll have a case where the wife signed off on the tax returns and they will go and they will say if you don't plead guilty, if you don't cooperate, we're going after your wife and your kid because he was involved. they may be try being to turn flynn signor oig osr. and say supply us with the information, your son will get indicted.

it's a common tactic. >> does it work? >> you bet your life it works. if you think your wife or son may wind up in prison because of something that you did, you will pretty much do anything to protect them. >> i want to pick your brain on a different element of this russia investigation. george papadopoulous, a name we have heard so often, there is now news that he met -- first off, this is somebody that the campaign has called a nobody, white house says he's basically not part of them at all, not part of anything that he did. he was a foreign policy adviser, one guy calling him a coffee boy. but now we've learned that he met with a british foreign official in september of 2016. would the british be meeting with a nobody or coffee boy two months before the election? >> well, the foreign officer there in the uk will do what any other foreign office will do at that point where we have a national election. they will be looking just like you remember the russian ambassador sergey kislyak, he was doing what he is supposed do, he is trying to figure out who is next in charge and line

up those relationships. so does it make sense that the british would be doing that? of course it does. but the question is how was bop positioning himself. now, he was a volunteer for the campaign. but he could have been out there overegging the pudding, talking about his importance within the campaign. i have no idea. so that is going to have to come out. what was he saying to the foreign office, what was he saying to other people, what was he saying to russians about his importance within this. i suspect that he was puffing himself up. >> that's what you suspect. fascinating. and another element i want to ask you about, cia director mime mike pompeo meeting with a known conspiracy they'rist who basically questions all the intelligence that the cia has backed in terms of that russia is behind the russian meddling. this guy actually thinks that it was an inside job from the dn drchlt. what is your reaction as a former cia -- as a member of the team? >> it was weird for him to have the meeting. i suspect pompeo had the meeting

because he was being pushed into having the meeting by the president and he's the cia director and the president was probably saying no, no, seriously, meet with this person. and i think trump was being fairly insistent about this. i think this would have been fine if i had been the director and i was feeling that sort of pressure to actually hold a meeting with this individual who was putting out this kind of strange theory frankly, i would have at the end of the day had one of my lieutenants do it and give very clear direction. pompeo to his credit came up before and after the meeting and said we stand by the assessment from january of this year and said of course the russians were meddling in the election, there is no question they were playing both sides. both sides of this equation got played by the russians in classic sort of kgb, fsb now faction. >> but that is why the meeting in and of itself, why so many people are scratching their heads. thanks, guys. now to another mystery if you will surrounding the assault

on kentucky senator rand paul. the mystery is deepening. rand paul was allegedly attacked by a neighbor, his six broken ribs now, water in his lungs and other neighbors say that the men were arguing if you can believe it over lawn maintenance. but two retrooeweets from the s seeming to cast doubt on that story. and this morning the man accused in the attack pleaded not guilty in court. let's get over there, figure this out. drew xwricgrifrn is griffin is story. what happened in court. >> reporter: well, in court it was very simple. rene would you chboucher, the 1 neighbor and lawn sharer went into court, pled not guilty to fourth degree assault, a misdemeanor, and left. it happened within a matter of minutes. they set a pretrial motion for later. what we did not hear much about at all, in fact nothing, was the motive in this attack and why it took place. we can tell you that senator

rand paul has now hired a personal injury attorney. this is according to rene boucher's own attorney, who a apparently will seek claim damages under the homeowner's warranty on that house, but the motive, those retweets this morning were very odd and conflicting with what we've learned on the ground. matt baker is the attorney for the man accused, rene produce che boucher. i talked to him and he reiterate that had this was absolutelyduc boucher. i talked to him and he reiterate that had this was absolutely not about politics, but here you have rand paul saying it may have been about politics. so we just don't know. >> definitely gaining moreintri sure. we have not seen rand paul since then. we'll see when we will hear from him next. coming up for us, it is the biggest day yet in the republican effort to pass major tax reform. senate republicans are set to unveil their own plan to reform

ad overhaul the tax code on capitol hill anymore now. what is their version, how far apart are they from the house, how much will it cost and will it give republicans a much needed win on the board? with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. ensure. always be you. hey, it's me, your dry skin. i'm craving something we're missing. the ceramides in cerave. they help restore my natural barrier, so i can lock in moisture and keep us protected. we've got to have each other's backs and fronts. cerave. what your skin craves.

what's going on? oh hey! ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪ i just want to find a used car without getting ripped off. you could start your search at the all-new carfax.com that might help. show me the carfax. now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new carfax.com.

gives you better taste and better nutrition in so many varieties. classic. cage free. and organic. only eggland's best. welcome to ichbs ponside po. i'm john king. president trump is in china and it's not your fault if can't believe your ears. he had called china a trade cheap. not anymore. >> the united states, the feeling we have for c