subsidies. they pay over $2 billion in taxes every year. they have a 91% employment rate. 65,000 of them graduate from high school every year. 10,000 graduate from college every year. right. they ve undergone extensive back ground checks. this was the line in the sand for me. javier javier javier that was it. you know. that i know that. we know what the policy arguments. we know it going in. the president said he would repeal daca. this will cost the u.s. money,
country don t, are ineligible for any kind of welfare. any kind of government subsidies. they pay over $2 billion in taxes every year. they have a 91% employment rate. 65,000 of them graduate from high school every year. 10,000 graduate from college every year. right. they ve undergone extensive back ground checks. this was the line in the sand for me. javier javier javier that was it. you know. that i know that. we know what the policy arguments. we know it going in. the president said he would repeal daca. this will cost the u.s. money, it will produce genuine human misery among these folks and family members. why are they doing it? why couldn t you see they would do this from the jump?
collapsing insurance markets. look at the maine example where they had guaranteed issue, it drove the premiums up by double. then they instituted invisible high-risk pool and the premiums were cut in half according to one study. the bottom line is, we can do this but need the information. the problem in washington, d.c. is we talk policy absent and void of information. that was my problem with the process, is it started with all these policy arguments, void of any information. we finally have some information. one cbo score. i think this is going to give us an awful lot of latitude to get the votes. chris, i wish we were doing this on a bipartisan basis. i think it was a mistake saying we re going to do this partisan. that s where we re add. what we ll do is do our partisan bill, democrats do theirs. we re not going to fix all the problems. then maybe, maybe everyone will sit down and let s long-term fix the health care system, start controlling health care costs. you don t do that wit
president has taken a bat to immigration policy when what has been traditionally taking a fine-toothed comb. leyland: seems like we ve lost karen s audio. do you agree with that, a bat versus a fine-toothed comb? and what they re alluding to is bringing back the comb? i don t think bringing back the comb. i don t think it s brought it back to anything. the executive order, though flawed in some respects, was constitution l and i think there s plenty of policy arguments, the opponents of the president want to raise. but i think it s clear it s within his right who can come in and out of the country. with respect to non-citizens without visas overseas, they don t have any constitutional rights. so to invoke the constitution in that context is crazy. immigration law itselitself,
lines where we stop, insurance companies, from coming in and competing because they wanted president obama and whoever was working on it, they want to leave these lines because that gives insurance companies essentially monopolies. we want competition. that s a familiar republican talking point. part of it. but he doesn t almost sounds like he s regurgitating talking points given in debate prep but not comfortable going through the nuances of the policy. he doesn t. in the primary debates, marco rubio pretty mercifullessly mocked him with lines around the states being the key to his plan and even if you look on his website, there s not a lot of detail in terms what he would want to do. on the other hand, you have had hillary clinton talk much more in detail about this. she obviously has a history in terms of thinking about and planning for health care going back to hillary care. so he just sdrhave it in him to make these sort of policy arguments, and also if you think