Skip to main content

tv   Cavuto Coast to Coast  FOX Business  October 14, 2020 12:00pm-2:00pm EDT

12:00 pm
programing note the president will join us live tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern. don't miss that i repeat it. 10:00 a.m. eastern. we have got the president live on the show. wonderful stuff. guaranteed interest. my time's up, neil. sir, it is yours. neil: look forward to that, stuart, thank you very much. we are looking what the heck happened to the dow. we were down but we got down a lot more. there are a couple catalysts here, including what is happening on stimulus. maybe more disturbing comments we're hearing out out of the wod health organization which people still dying at the rate of 5000 a day across the globe do not expect a turnaround anytime soon. this is still a danger. cautions about a so-called second wave. we hear that a lot. we'll talk more about what does a second wave mean? obviously hospitalizations in this country. death rates in this country going way, way down, not enough to ease fears building if there is delay in the vaccine or
12:01 pm
treatments it will be one of the jitters. add them to many in the markets here. all in all taking it relative stride. i say relative stride. again the administration front and center today, getting idea, talking to economic club members from around the country what the president thinks is going on to the economy. he is the best bet for the economy. teasing a middle income tax cut as well if he were to get reelected. fallout from the comments. the president's busy campaign schedule with blake burman from the white house. hey, blake. reporter: i feel like there is a news burst leading up to the minutes of this show. that is certainly the case. let me walk you through in and around washington the last half hour. treasury secretary steve mnuchin speaking right now. he echoed a lot of comments, similar comments that mitch mcconnell and nancy pelosi made in the most recent days. the treasury secretary saying as it relates to a possible covid relief package it would be tough to get done before the election.
12:02 pm
something mitch mcconnell has said. like nancy pelosi has also said. the treasury secretary says there are policy issues and money issues going forward. it seems as if they are still aways apart here though both sides are continuing to talk because we learned from nancy pelosi's office within the last hour as well that the speaker and the treasury secretary spoke today. the readout from pelosi's office was this. they said there was language that was clarified on the proposals back and forth between the to. the call was described by pelosi's office as productive. and the deputy chief of staff for nancy pelosi's office says that more proposals will be exchanged. that those two will talk again tomorrow. however the pessimism around this is involved in the readout as well to their office because this is what the deputy chief of staff said, quote, one major area of disagreement continues to be that the white house lacks an understanding of the need for a national strategic testing plan. the speaker believes we must reopen our economy and schools
12:03 pm
safely and soon and scientists agree we must have a strategic testing plan. pair that with what mnuchin has said in the recent minutes. the reason behind some of this, a market selloff. back here at the white house, you're right we heard from president trump as well in the recent minutes as he spoke to economic clubs of new york, chicago, florida, and scheck boyian. the president was asked about the fate of stimulus and this is what president trump said about 20 minutes ago. president trump: i would like to see the democrats is loosen up a little bit. all they want to do is bail out badly-run cities and states. they want bail wrought money. they don't care about the worker or people. they want bailout money. they want trillions of dollars of bailout money to bail out new york, california, all the states frankly need more help than that. reporter: the president was also asked about if there would be any help coming for specific industries the hardest hit or
12:04 pm
among the hardest hit, airlines, cruise industry, airlines and hotels. the president says it is important for certain industries to help out. hopes to be able to help out. as you know this is an incredibly complicated vote matrix when you look at everything, how all of this has sort of boiled down and it is still incredibly uncertain where things go from here that we've learned today that the conversations continue though the treasury secretary again saying that they don't think they can come up with anything here in the upcoming weeks. neil? neil: all right. blake burman, one of the reasons why the dow is stumbling a little bit right now. some comment by nancy pelosi over this. on all networks cnn where she was challenged on the issue they're a lot closer to you and where you democrat the want to be on this, referring to republicans so why can't a deal be made this is from last night. take a look. >> when i say to you is i don't know why you're always an apologist and many of your colleagues, apologists for the
12:05 pm
republican position. >> is that what this is all about? not allow the president to take credit if there is a deal -- >> no, i don't care about that? he is not that important. let me say this, with all due respect, with all due respect and you know we've known each other a long time, you really don't know what you're talking about. i wish you would respect the knowledge that goes into getting the, needing the needs of the american people. but again you've been defending the administration all this time with no knowledge of the difference between our two bills and i thank you for giving me opportunity to say that to you. >> all right. neil: well with all due respect i've known his work, certainly for decades. i think wolf blitzer knows a thing or two he is talking about. leaving that aside, unnecessarily nasty exchange over what's next here. if you think about it, democrats and republicans have come pretty much together on this. you might argue over the sheer size and expense of it, close to
12:06 pm
$1.8 trillion. the last republican offer, but remember, prior to that they were looking at something well under a trillion dollars. so they came up a lot. democrats have come down a little bit but ironically it was republicans who came up a lot more, wolf blitzer's point still stands, can't something be cobbled together right now if you're making the argument people need help right now. let's go right now to douglas holtz-eakin, the former congressional budget office director. and, doug, first to the point your eyes glaze over. having said that, they're very close, they're really close, and now it might fall apart. and it might be nancy pelosi's fault. what do you think? >> first i think it's true we will need to support the economy some more or better way to think
12:07 pm
about it, the risk of doing too much is way, way lower than the risk of doing too little. there should be a way to get to yes on this. to my eye at least the person who has not moved is the speaker, nancy pelosi. she's had a lot of pressure from her own party. moderates in her party to sort of get the yes on this. she has consistently claimed to be negotiating in good faith. you know, doesn't seem to want to be able to get a agreement and deliver what will be a perceived victory to the white house prior to the election. and so this is where we are. it is not just the size of the package, the 1.8 versus 2.6, versus 500 bill it is what is in there. she consistently refused to include that things republicans named as top priorities. business liability protections for example. those have never been in anything she has agreed to so if you're not going to let the other folks top priorities in the package, are you really
12:08 pm
negotiating in good faith? that is the question. neil: that became an issue, you have to know what's in it. she was kind of lecturing, not kind of, wolf blitzer you don't know what you're talking about, you don't know what is in it. that was opportunity for her to say here is what i think is missing from it. she didn't. i'm beginning to wonder if she knows herself. the closer we get to figures in the aggregate are almost matching, then the next cycle is, where are our priorities here? to your point republicans are pushing some liability protection for businesses and the like in case they're sued over an emergence of the virus where they work but, beyond that, they are on the same page on unemployment benefits. they're on the same page on stimulus checks. they're on the same page strengthening the paycheck protection program. they're on the same page for even widespread business relief. they're just not on the same page on some of those other issues which makes the
12:09 pm
$1.8 trillion package what it is. but they have more in common than they do uncommon. so why does this just sit? >> i think, if you just gave an eloquent summary of the policy issues and the way they can in fact be mediated. republicans have gone from zero to $300 a week on unemployment insurance. they're willing to acknowledge the need for additional ui and checks and some of the things. what they won't do turn into what they view as a christmas tree wish-list which is original heroes act. and so given that you can get to compromise on policy, the fact that nothing is happening really suggests this is just politics and this is about the presidential race in particular and you know, in my experience at this time in the cycle she will not do anything without the approval of the biden campaign. they may very well be thinking we can't let the president succeed on any front. those are the marching orders. appear to keep the negotiations
12:10 pm
going. don't make a deal. this is a political moment. neil: yeah, indeed it is with less than three weeks ago to the election, increasingly looking unlikely that a deal is being cobbled together. there are separate talks mitch mcconnell wants to have with a pared down deal of the paycheck protection program. that might come to pass. decides that, very little else. doug, always good chatting with you. thank you very, very much. >> thank you, neil. neil: it is back to the economy, stupid, and this notion comes up every four years we're simply asked are you better off now than you were four years ago? 56% of americans say yes, indeed they are. let's say that joe biden wasn't buying that. take a look. >> reported last week, 56% of americans said that they were better off today, than four years ago under under the obama-biden administration why should people who are better off today should vote for you?
12:11 pm
>> if they think that, they shouldn't. 54% of the people are better off economically than today than they were under our administration. their memory is not good quite frankly. neil: we'll leave out issue of memories, who is foreguesting what. that is the view more than half of americans think they are better off than they were before donald trump took office. now, is that reflected in the polls? maybe that is what i think joe biden was getting at. so far no, depending on your view of polls whether they're accurate. i want to pursue this with joseph pinion, republican strategist. our own jackie deangelis as well. joe, the first issue is this poll. it looks at people and their sense where they are economically. are you better off and they argued you know, over half that they are better off than they were now. that is not necessarily translated to any tangible benefit thus far for the president in the polls but that alone i find rather interesting. what do you make of that?
12:12 pm
>> i think we have to remember that there is precedent for people feeling if they are happy with the direction of the country is going in and voting for the other person. we have to remember overwhelmingly people were happy a large sliver of people were happy with the work that president obama had done and then turned around and voted for president trump. president trump received somewhere close to 13% of individuals who voted for barack obama in 2008 and 2012. so i think it is to joe biden's detriment to basically double down on almost deplorable 2.0. basically testimony people who have an opinion about where they are today that basically their opinion is of no matter or no consequence. they're better off voting for the other guy. i think that plays directly into president trump's hands. neil: it can cut both ways, right, jackie? you were looking at battleground states yesterday showing how some of them come back from their pandemic lows but they're not where they were at the best
12:13 pm
point of the economy prepandemic. so that question can be a little jarring. technically in the aggregate i'm better off than i was four years ago but i'm not over this pandemic thing. how is this all sorting out? >> well i think that what you're saying there, actually speak as lot to how people feel, neil. because we've been through an incredibly traumatic experience here over the last six months with respect to the pandemic. nobody is forgetting about that, but they're still saying after that experience and still even going through it that they feel better than they did four years ago as a result of the president's policies. i will say this. when it comes to enthusiasm for the president and that being an issue, why folks are going out to vote, 58% of them right now say that that's the main reason they want to vote for president trump for the candidate. and you know, other people are saying well, we're really just getting out there because we don't like one candidate, so we want to try to get this other
12:14 pm
guy in. there is a lot of optimism about getting through the pandemic and where the stock market and the economy can go from here. you know when joe biden stands back and he questions the memory of these folks, you sort of main the pun there, he is 77-year-old candidate who forget as lot of things himself. it is difficult for him to be questioning people's memory, neil. neil: yeah. be like me offering dietary advice. just don't go there. just don't go there. joe, i'm looking at all the mail-in ballots that are breaking records left and right. we're over 10 million right now. that is 10 times we had at this point four years ago when all is said and done, mail-in, absentee ballots, whatever you want to call them combined will be over 100 million. with some already cast their votes and millions more, well before election day the candidates have to move fast to lock that support in, right?
12:15 pm
for the president, if you buy the notion he is down in the polls, times a wasting to move them, right? >> if you're somebody who is undecided at this point you probably haven't mailed your ballot in. i think it remains to be seen if these quote, unquote likely voters and early voters are new voters. i think reality in the midst of a covid-19 pandemic many of these people who are now in that gap between the 30 million votes that we typically get via mail and 100 million votes we expect to get now are people that typically vote on regular basis and maybe vote along party lines f we're talking about that sliver of americans it is important for republicans to continue to beat that drum, to remind people if they have memory issues as joe biden claims about the seven million people that got jobs underneath president trump. about the increase in wages, decrease in unemployment, these are real tangible things that impacted people's lives. that is intellectually dishonest
12:16 pm
and for the democrats that americans were uniquely impacted by covid that somehow people all around the world didn't deal with the same thing. the truth of the matter is if we went back to some of the policies suggested we endorse because he won't tell us the entire covid plan, it is a secret, he would go to more generous lockdowns which would lead to more job loss and actual financial hardships many families are still enduring to this day. neil: you know, jackie, very high voter turnout favors or seems to telegraph big democratic swings. in other words, democrats are more inclined to vote by mail, what have you, now that isn't always the case. could be reflection as well, you touched on the beginning about anger in the moment. if you're angry about the economic conditions and all, there was a lot of that in 1980 who people personally liked jimmy carter said the hello -- hell with it,wer going bad to
12:17 pm
worse and turned out on him in droves. the issue is anger going to decide this contest? is anger what is propelling people, whether they like you know, joe biden or hate the president or like the president, hate joe biden, that that is going to galvanize what could be record turnout numbers? what are you hearing? >> it could be but i will say this. there was a lot of anger in the 2016 presidential election as well. a lot of folks didn't want donald trump to win then. they were really supporters of hillary clinton and yet we see what the results was. there are less enthusiasm here per se for joe biden as the candidate himself than there was necessarily for hillary. so i think that is nuance here. the point that you make about the mail-in ballots is true. typically that would mean that the democrats are seeing more support here but this is the kind of election we've never seen before. as a result of the pandemic, as a result of changing the rules about mail-in voting, as a result of changing the rules
12:18 pm
with respect to in-person voting. i think what you're going to see a lot of democrats do favor as a result of their ideology the mail-in ballots whereas a lot of trump supporters as you see them coming to rallies maskless, saying come, the end of the world i will go into the polling place and i will cast my vote myself. so i think there is still a lot to be seen as we head into november 3rd with that silent majority, with the folks that do support the president and how they turn out. it seems like from the preliminary numbers that we're seeing people are motivated, whether it be by anger or something else it could potentially be the economy, neil. neil: we'll watch it closely. jackie, i want to thank you, joseph always a pleasure, thank you, guys very, very much. by the way neither of them did anything to remove the selling pressure on the dow. with are down 108 points. we were down 160 when we
12:19 pm
started. they have to try harder next dame. amy coney barrett hear national day three. we're keeping a close eye on that. a close eye on two developments that keep coming up but they seem to be very disparate issues but they have something in common. think about it, the affordable care act, and roe v. wade. what do they have in common? what's going to make them the litmus test, right after this? >> academic doesn't go through the judicial process, doesn't hear the case or controversy, have the litigants and the briefs and consultation with colleagues. the opinion -- >> we all understand that but that is not my question.
12:20 pm
look, this isn't my first rodeo and let me tell you something, i wouldn't be here if i thought reverse mortgages took advantage of any american senior, or worse, that it was some way to take your home. it's just a loan designed for older homeowners, and, it's helped over a million americans. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home. it's a loan, like any other. big difference is how you pay it back. find out how reverse mortgages really work with aag's free,
12:21 pm
no-obligation reverse mortgage guide. eliminate monthly mortgage payments, pay bills, medical costs, and more. call now and get your free info kit. other mortgages are paid each month, but with a reverse mortgage, you can pay whatever you can, when it works for you, or, you can wait, and pay it off in one lump sum when you leave your home. discover the option that's best for you. call today and find out more in aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage loan guide. access tax-free cash and stay in the home you love. you've probably been investing in your home for years... making monthly mortgage payments... doing the right thing... and it's become your family's heart and soul... well, that investment can give you tax-free cash just when you need it. learn how homeowners are strategically using a reverse mortgage loan to cover expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve your portfolio, and so much more. look, reverse mortgages aren't for everyone
12:22 pm
but i think i've been 'round long enough to know what's what. i'm proud to be part of aag, i trust 'em, i think you can too. trust aag for the best reverse mortgage solutions. call now so you can... retire better
12:23 pm
♪. neil: all right. some interesting news we're getting out of new york right now. governor cuomo saying that he is going to be withholding funds to those in the red zone, that is a dangerous zone in the new york metropolitan area where you heard about the spikes in cases. that if schools do not close, they don't get a hold of things he will enforce these restrictions. now the zones included, those in the so-called red zone parts of brooklyn, queens and orange and rockland counties, just north of the city. just north of new york city.
12:24 pm
that could also trigger still more widespread closings beyond schools but again the first time the governor has sort of make good on a threat, if you can make good on a following threat if you don't do what you're supposed to do and shut down and start doing things in an orderly way, that's it, i will take away all sorts of things. we'll keep a close eye on it. the news out of new york did not help the dow. another reminder, the virus pandemic, the effects still alive and well. meantime we want to go right to washington. hillary vaughn is following the confirmation hearings. day three right now for judge barrett. hillary, how is she doing thus far? reporter: neil, it has been interesting because we actually heard a new line of questioning today, not related to the affordable care act, not related to potential election cases. coming to senator sheldon whitehouse who raised concerns about loopholes that raise the potential for corruption in the nation's highest court.
12:25 pm
senator whitehouse raised the issue that corporations can funnel dark money into groups that then file amicus briefs in key cases. he specifically called out oracle for doing this in their case against google. the white house says that oracle paid two different groups, one $99,000, and another half a million dollars, who then, those groups then filed briefs in the oracle versus google case and none of that was disclosed at the time. whitehouse also asked judge barrett why judges on lower courts are subject to a higher code of ethics related to emoluments and financial disclosures than those on the supreme court. >> do you have a defense why the highest court should have a lower standard, have at it now. >> i didn't know, i know that the justices file financial disclosure reports. i have never looked at one. >> take a look at that when you get up there. this is a matter that i think the court -- >> i never interrupt anybody,
12:26 pm
can i ask one question? >> of course. >> now that you know that, how do you feel about it? >> that -- >> my time while answering the chairman's question. >> i am surprised. i always complied with filling out my financial disclosure reports. i'm sure it may have been for you all a little uncomfortable. reporter: senate democrats tried today many different ways to get judge barrett to comment on controversies swirling around president trump, from the issue of emoluments to the issue of his comments surrounding the election. >> would you agree, first, that nobody is above the law? not the president, not you, not me? is that correct? >> i agree no one is above the law. >> and does a president have an absolute right to himself? >> does the constitution give the president of the united states the authority, listen
12:27 pm
closely, to what she asked you to unilaterally delay a general election under any circumstances? >> senator, i've given that response to every hypothetical that i've been asked in the hearing and as i said yesterday, i do that regardless whether it is easy or hard. reporter: neil, we also saw an attempt from judge barrett today to kind of distance herself from the late justice scalia, that she is her own independent voice and she would be judge barrett on the high court, not a a justice scalia part two. neil. neil: covering the back and forth arguments. you're keeping it all lined up and organized for us. we appreciate that. hillary vaughn on that. meantime the debate right now over businesses trying to get back in business. here's the problem for many of them. when this all started they thought they had insurance to cover all of their woes. turns out they did not.
12:28 pm
and now as grady trimble can tell you it is getting nasty. right, grady? reporter: hey, neil. it is. we're at manny's a pretty iconic deli and coffee shop here in chicago. as you mentioned the battle is brewing between small businesses like this one and their insurance companies. we'll have more coming up. ♪. this is decision tech. find a stock based on your interests or what's trending. get real-time insights in your customized view of the market. it's smarter trading technology for smarter trading decisions. fidelity.
12:29 pm
this was the theater i came to quite often. ♪ the support we've had over the last few months has been amazing. i have a soft spot for local places. it's not just a work environment. everyone here is family. gonna go ahead and support him, get my hair cut, leave a big tip. if we focus on our local communities, we can find a way to get through this together. thank you. ♪ if you are ready to open your heart and your home, check us out.
12:30 pm
get out and about and support our local community. we thought for sure that we were done. and this town said: not today. ♪ and this town said: not today. (vo) i'm a verizon engineer and today, we're turning on 5g across the country. with the coverage of 5g nationwide. and, in more and more cities, the unprecedented performance of ultra wideband. the fastest 5g in the world. it will change your phone
12:31 pm
and how businesses do everything. i'm proud, because we didn't build it the easy way, we built it right. this is the 5g america's been waiting for. only from verizon.
12:32 pm
♪. neil: all right. panera bread is going to become the first national restaurant chain to go climate-friendly. i don't know how it will mark foods to be climate-friendly, but that is its goal. it is saying that whenever the ingredients in salad sandwiches and soups collectively have a footprint of less than 5.38 kilograms of carbon dioxide, or carbon dioxide
12:33 pm
equivalent, the menu will carry a badge claiming that the entree is cool food meal. it is environmentally friendly. now one of the early qualifiers for that is the broccoli cheddar soup and mediterranean bowl. i can attest to the fondness of the broccoli cheddar. i don't know that the mediterranean bowl. but this is a goal to make this a clear distinction that panera, look at menu, besides calories everything else it is climate friendly. the conundrum, if it is climate friendly, it has a whole bunch of calories, you throw caution to the wind and this time i will destroy the earth, come back and get something healthier. i wonder what our guests say to this. retail analyst erin sykes. scott shellady, the cow guy. scott, this is the first chain to do something like this, i imagine it won't be the last. what do you make of this? look at menu, see climate
12:34 pm
friendly and also what you're not, i guess? >> to your point, it is either destroy the climate or destroy yourself, right? they might have more calories, who knows. it is gimmicky. they're going to attract some people over, like that idea. i think it is hard, those measurables and metrics are hard. you have to take their word for it, whatever they say is on the package is on the package. i don't think this is a sea change. i don't think it will change very much. if you go to burger king or mcdonald's, having something labeled like panera wants to label it isn't going to change your mind. neil: erin, i don't know that the carbon monoxide or how they factor into what would be, you know, climate friendly or not but it is clever marketing idea. i'm just wondering, you know, how you see this playing out? will others be compelled to follow, what do you think? >> absolutely. we saw this in retail. and we saw h&m come out with a
12:35 pm
completely sustainable line, i believe made out of pineapple husks. it did get a lot of buzz, but the problem a lot of time with retail sustainability we use more water to create these new types of textiles than we would have otherwise with traditional cotton. we see in construction with leed certified build national architecture. it is part of an ongoing trend worldwide. neil: you know, guys, switching to retail generally right now, you know early indications are that amazon had an opening boffo day for day one. prime day today wraps it up. walmart, best buy, target had similar sales going on yesterday. traffic we're told, very, very heavy. we haven't crunched the numbers, in amazon's case, i think this was the goal, scott, of that they would get $10 billion in sales at a minimum over this 48 hour period. so that does seem to hint of an aggressive consumer, if deals can be had. what do you make of it?
12:36 pm
>> well i think it is an aggressive consumer if deals can be had, with savings rates gone up between 10 and 14%, whoever you speak to. there is over two trillion dollars of savings waiting, spendable income we can do these things with but i also think in this quote, unquote, stay safe environment you have got these retailers who aren't stupid, that will be pulling that demand forward, so we don't have packed black fridays and packed malls the last two weeks of the year. they know that they're going to do way better online earlier rather than try too sell face-to-face when folks are too afraid to go to a restaurant or get on a plane or take a cruise, they're not going shopping. it is in their best interests. they know that. they will pull the demand forward to get those things booked. neil: so erin, is it possible that we are buying the stuff now for the holidays rather than buying it at around closer to the holidays so are we just robbing sales from the future here?
12:37 pm
what do you think? >> well i echo scott's sentiment and yes, welcome to the holiday shopping season. it has started. and it is for a variety of reasons. so basically black friday was going to fall late this year anyway. that makes it a more compact shopping season. you always see retailers try to make things earlier. also because consumer confidence is currently up but we're going into a time of uncertainty with the election. so we want to make sure that we're making the purchases while we know where consumer confidence is. and then also we have a lot of americans who are actually making more via the fed rally assisted unemployment right now than they would without and what, going back to their traditional jobs. we don't know what is going to happen there. basically people have money. they're confident. and it allows us to then move the shopping season up. neil: all right. erin, final word. scott, want to thank you too, my friend. as they were speaking here,
12:38 pm
we're getting a few more details about the panera breakdown. they say this will encompass more than half the items on their stores are climate friendly. apparently putting out a special menu for me denote the items, don't even think about it. that's separate. no, they're not. just thought i would say that. meanwhile we're looking at where we are in the pandemic. this is something that has come out of pandemic. we're watching what we eat, what we do, is it good for the world, good for the environment even good healthily. a lot of businesses are facing a conundrum just coming back to do business, have business, any business. a lot of these guys thought they were covered for everything that hit them. they pay a very expensive insurance premiums and these were some of the things at which they thought were addressed and covered. apparently they're not. now they're protesting. grady trimble with more in chicago. hey, grady. reporter: hey, neil this is a battle between businesses like this one, manny's, a deli in
12:39 pm
chicago and their insurance companies. so what happened, manny says their sales are down 50% compared to a normal year because of the pandemic and government-ordered shutdowns. so they filed a claim which is a business interruption claim but their coverage apparently didn't apply. their insurance companies denied those claims. so now this business and hundreds of others across the country are taking it to court. here's the lawsuit filed on behalf of manny's saying as a direct result of the shutdown orders manny's incurred direct physical loss and damage and was rendered physically non-functional as a restaurant and deli. here is why the deli said he had no choice but to pursue legal action. >> at some point when this kept dragging on, we knew for us to survive we had to go back to our insurance company. we had purchase ad policy that was supposed to reimburse us for times like this and we, we need them to step up to the plate and
12:40 pm
live up to their end of what we purchased. reporter: the insurance groups that represent the insurance industry tell us these coverages only apply when there is physical damage to a restaurant like this one, for example. if a storm came through here, something like that. they also say if they had to pay up to all of these businesses it would bankrupt this industry. the institute of, insurance information institute tells us in a statement, insurers have won more rulings than policyholders with courts, working through 1000 covid-19 business interruption coverage disputes. that industry group says the help needs to come from the federal government. the owner here says, doesn't matter so much where the help comes from. he thought he had insurance coverage for this. but if it comes from the federal government that would be fine too. he just needs the help. neil? neil: yeah, put it mildly. grady, thank you very much. my friend grady trimble in chicago on that.
12:41 pm
we're monitoring what is happening the corner of wall and broad and confusion over stimulus. let me cut to the chase here. they thought they had a deal. they thought they were a closer to a deal. they thought they were in a couple hundred billion dollars. a deal signed oaf an almost done, then nancy pelosi says, no, no, just because we're closure not looking in the deal. it is nothing close. it all fell apart but not before she got into a nasty exchange with wolf blitzer. all of sudden now cnn is seen as being a little bit too open to republican ideas. it is that kind of world after this. (♪ )
12:42 pm
12:43 pm
keeping your oysters growing while keeping your business growing has you swamped. (♪ ) you need to hire i need indeed indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a resume data base so you can start hiring right away. claim your seventy-five-dollar credit when you post your first job at
12:44 pm
12:45 pm
♪. neil: all right. in europe right now they have hit apparently a tipping point right now where their new cases
12:46 pm
are exceeding those in the united states right now. this at the same time of that england is bat inching down the hatches, introducing restrictions. portland tightened restrictions and spain and italy are considering them. a stunning development on the european continent has number of new cases there exceeding those in the united states. it has been going like this for a while. it has been getting added steam of late in this latest period, significant steam at that. meanwhile speaking of the virus and the rush for the vaccine, where do we stand on all this with trials halted and resumed? edward lawrence is following that among some of the major players. reporter: neil, some of this can be kind of difficult to figure all this out. we're looking at two paths therapeutics which is treatments and vaccines. u.s. health regulators paused a late-stage trial for eli lilly. this is on the therapeutic side because of safety concerns. in a statement the company says
12:47 pm
this, quote, lily is supportive by the independent dsmv, to insure the safety of the patients participating in this study. this is at the heart of the argument, that any drug approved will be safe and effective. the therapeutics became a much bigger issue when the nation watched president trump take a new regeneron cocktail and apparently get better quickly. listen. >> 275 patients were with patients an showed decreased viral load and increased immunity. if taken early in the process what we saw the president. he is a case of one but goat better very quickly after getting this. reporter: there is a big push to get the regeneron treatment emergency authorization use to be made available to the general public that gets covid-19. the other track here is vaccines. one on the fast track was made by astrazeneca. there was possible safety issues in the trials were halted around the globe. an independent body allowed the
12:48 pm
phase three trial to continue in the united kingdom but it still paused in the united states. now in a company statement astrazeneca says this, it continues to work with the fda and they will determine the next steps on our restart. we determine the efficacy results and readouts on face two and three trials by the end of the year. it is up to the regulatory bodies to review and make decisions based on data as quickly as possible. pfizer looks like it could have enough data at the end of october to submit for possible approval. there are 38,000 people in the phase three trial worldwide and in addition to that, 31 of those, 31,000 of those received a second booster dose of the vaccine. so neil, that pass is what the fda requires for their approval. this could be the october surprise. back to you, neil. neil: we shall see. edward, thank you very, very much. when we come back joe biden still leading in the polls. in case you think he is rethinking some of the things he
12:49 pm
wants to do becoming president, like raising taxes, charlie gasparino says, think again. he's next. the visionary lexus nx. lease the 2021 nx 300 for $359 a month for 36 months. experience amazing. at your lexus dealer.
12:50 pm
so you're a small. bor a big one. you were thriving, but then... oh. ah. okay. plan, pivot. how do you bounce back? you don't, you bounce forward,
12:51 pm
with serious and reliable internet. powered by the largest gig speed network in america. but is it secure? sure it's secure. and even if the power goes down, your connection doesn't. so how do i do this? you don't do this. we do this, together. bounce forward, with comcast business.
12:52 pm
♪. president trump: if the left gains power the recovery will be terminated and the economy will be destroyed. they have told us their exact
12:53 pm
plans. left-wing politicians have pledge ad 4 trillion-dollar tax hike which will destroy our country. this will raise taxes on 80% of our taxpayers, cut the child tax credit in half, which is $1000 per child. and punish working families. neil: now if you know joe biden saying not so, mr. president. i'm just going after those earning $400,000 or more but in case you think that this is sort of scared him off from those views to hike taxes nevertheless, we have charlie gasparino here to say anything but. you're hearing he is still standing by these tax hikes, right? >> it is interesting, neil, we reported yesterday a lot of wall streeters are giving big bucks to joe biden as opposed to donald trump in the 2020 election. one of their rationales, not just that he will win, that they think they could persuade him
12:54 pm
not to raise taxes that hit him in particular. wall streeters deal with small investors as well, not just the super-rich. those small investors will be hit with higher capital-gains taxes. wall streeters work for corporations as we do. corporations will be hit with higher corporate taxes under the biden plan. even if you believe all of the rhetoric he is not raising it anybody above $400,000 or more, you know, $400,000 in new york city, when you got a family of three is not exactly living high on the hog like, like warren buffett. so he met with wall street executives last week from what i understand. it was a planned meeting. jim shape knows, the hedge fund manager was presiding along with bob wolf is a fox news, fox business contributor and he made it point-blank to them, told them point-blank, if you think that you know, i'm not going to raise your taxes you're crazy. basically said, you guys can afford all my tax increases.
12:55 pm
he also said, biden advisors also told me that any, any inclination from wall street that they can bribe their way into him backing off this plan is pure delusion. you know, here is the thing, neil. it would be one thing if you could tax the rich into oblivion and nothing happens to the middle class but we should point out every single person is a shareholder this country. you have money in 401(k)s. you have money in a pension plan. there are people that don't, that are very poor but for the most part people have money in the markets. his tax plan is aimed at you. he gets passed through to you, if you have a pension fund, even if you're a teacher and he is raising capital-gains taxes, that capital-gains tax comes out of your returns. if you're, if you work for a corporation and he raises the corporate tax, that may hit the shareholders of the corporation which you might not be but guess what? corporations that have less money, they don't pass on
12:56 pm
payroll -- payroll increases to their employees. so that is where it ends up, neil. it always gets passed down. back to you. neil: thank you my friend, very much. charlie gasparino on all of that. we've got the dow a little bit down from its lows of the day, about 123 points. we're getting earnings in. for some banks, very good. for others not so good. we'll pick apart what is happen negotiate financial world right after this. businesses today are looking to tomorrow. adapting. innovating. setting the course. but new ways of working demand a new type of network. one that's more than just fast. you need flexibility- to work from anywhere. and manage from everywhere. advanced technology. with serious security. and reliable coverage, nationwide. forward-thinking enterprises, deserve forward-thinking solutions. and that's what we deliver. so bounce forward, with comcast business.
12:57 pm
it was 1961 when nellie young lost her devoted husband. without him, things were tough. her last option was to sell her home, but... her home meant everything to her. her husband had been a high school football coach and it turned out, one of his former players came up with an answer. a loan, created just for older homeowners. and pretty soon, nellie young had one of the first reverse mortgages. discover if a reverse mortgage loan is right for you. use it to eliminate monthly mortgage payments and increase cashflow, create an emergency fund, preserve retirement savings and more. call now for your free information kit. that first reverse mortgage loan meant nellie could stay in the home she loved so much, with memories that meant even more. a reverse mortgage loan isn't some kind of trick to take your home.
12:58 pm
it's a loan... and it's tax-free cash just when you need it. it's about making your retirement better. call today and find out more in aag's free, no-obligation reverse mortgage loan guide. access tax-free cash and stay in the home you love. of course, you can use it to pay some bills, cover medical costs, update or repair your home. but best of all, it eliminates those monthly mortgage payments so you get more cash in your pocket, every month. learn how you can use a reverse mortgage loan to cover your expenses, pay for healthcare, preserve retirement savings, and so much more. a lots changed since 1961... since then over a million older americans have used a reverse mortgage loan to finance their retirements. it meant so much to nellie, maybe it could mean as much to you... call now and get your free infokit
12:59 pm
1:00 pm
neil: if only more people had listened. chad pergram was the first to say when it came to the stimulus deal, it's the math, but that the two sides were sharply divided within the numbers and the math. he joins us now from capitol hill, where all this now stands. what do you think, chad? reporter: well, they are still pretty far apart. house speaker nancy pelosi and secretary of the treasury steve mnuchin talked again today for about an hour and they indicated that they still remain pretty far apart. what's happened in the past 24 hours here is the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has said he's going to forge ahead with a $500 billion bill next week. it's going to be pretty similar to the bill that was blocked by
1:01 pm
democrats back in september. one republican rejected that. that was rand paul, republican senator from kentucky, and keep in mind that this comes as president trump wanted mcconnell last week, he told mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader, he said don't deal with coronavirus legislation, focus on trying to confirm amy coney barrett. guess what? they are going to try to do a bill next week. here's the senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. >> so it has liability protection in it, help for schoo schools, businesses, replenishing the ppp program, and we're going to put it on the floor next monday and we're going to try one more time to see if our opponents in the senate will overcome their reluctance. reporter: expect democrats to kill this on a procedural vote. republicans need 60 yeas to break the filibuster but expect
1:02 pm
democrats with difficult re-election campaigns to make their arguments. the president tweeted stimulus, go big or go home. the president and mcconnell are not on the same page. house speaker nancy pelosi is facing pressure from democratic california representative ro khanna to do something. pelosi won't budge. she's criticizing democrats who want action. >> yesterday i spoke to andrew yang who says the same thing. it's not everything you want but there's a lot there. >> honest to god, i can't get over it because andrew yang, he's lovely. ro khanna is lovely. they are not negotiating this situation. reporter: pelosi is not moving from her position whatsoever. she had a conference call with the house democratic caucus yesterday. here's what she told them. quote, we cannot have an agreement by just folding. i don't think our leverage has ever been greater. neil, back to you.
1:03 pm
neil: chad pergram, thank you very very. where are we on this? the texas republican congressman with us now. congressman, is this dead, in your eyes? >> well, if it's dead, it's because nancy pelosi has continued with her obstructionist obsession of this president, even when we are in a crisis and we have real consequences to the political games that she's playing. you know that they are games when it's not just republicans who are criticizing her. you've got progressive democrats like my friend ro khanna. you have 17 democrats who broke from heroes 2.0. you didn't get a single republican. the huffington post, andrew yang, they are all saying stop playing politics with people's lives. meanwhile, the president, say what you want, take exception if you will with some of the policies or provisions or the price tag, he is making a
1:04 pm
credible counteroffer and has met her more than halfway because he's a president that is a problem solver. he's a negotiator and a pragmatist and he knows the american people, many of our fellow americans still need help and he's willing to do everything that he can to keep it in play and provide that much needed assistance. neil: you know, it wasn't two weeks ago that he shelved the whole thing and tweeted out let's stop and resume this after the election. someone must have gotten in his ear and said all right, this is important for you to get done, or it could be a negotiating tact tactic that might be lost. having said that, who does this hurt more? forget about the people for whom the aid is intended and might not come. the feeling seems to be that nancy pelosi is wagering it hurts the president more. you agree with that? >> i don't agree with that. i think that nancy pelosi's
1:05 pm
calculation and has been over the last two years as speaker that at all costs, we must prevent the president from getting a win, even if that means the american people lose. but see, neil, i have more faith in the american people, in their judgment, and i think they see what she's doing, the hollow excuses that she's making, the red herrings about testing and tracing, it's all bunk because we have put billions of dollars towards those items and much more, and the president's counteroffer actually includes tens of billions of dollars more. so i think ultimately, the american people and you've got to have trust and faith in we, the people to make the ultimate decision and to see the truth in the matter and here, the truth is she's obstructing, which is no different than what she's done for two years. the president is trying to lead. neil: you know, she made a reference to wolf blitzer on cnn
1:06 pm
that she and the treasury secretary have been doing all the talking and planning and strategizing and you know, took offense to the notion this does not involve the president but it did remind me of the fact i don't believe the two have talked to each other in many, many months. that is unusual. i'm not blaming one versus the other. but if the president were re-elected, they would eventually have to start talking to each other, or do they? how do you feel about all this? >> well, i think what you have to do is continue to work together and engage the process and put forth good faith efforts to negotiate a deal that will move our country forward. i think this president is doing that. neil: doesn't that involve talking to each other? i know they clearly dislike each other. i get that. but they are going to have to eventually talk to each other, or maybe not. >> yeah, no, look i agree, i think part of governing is to have these relationships and
1:07 pm
these personal engagements but at this juncture, i think the president is having the secretary engage with not only pelosi but her team, and other members of congress. so i think this is in play, the ball is still live because this president is willing to negotiate but you're right, long term, we've got to be able to work together. even if she's going to weaponize impeachment over and over and over again, we've got to consider our country's future first and foremost. neil: all right, congressman. who am i to talk. i come from an italian family where relatives weren't talking to each other for decades and forgot the reason why. congressman, thank you very much. good seeing you. continued good health. in the meantime, the back-and-forth over who are you winning over, seniors, an important demographic for the president to win over. early reports are, though, that he could be losing them in key states. connell mcshane has more in cape coral, florida on that.
1:08 pm
connell? connell: you know, we have been here all week and the president and former vice president joe biden have both been in florida in person this week. as we watch them, they have been making the case to the senior citizen vote. it's obvious from the way they are addressing their respective crowds. they know how important that bloc of voters is. joe biden, for example, was in broward county yesterday, a deep blue area. he went so far as to say that he thinks the president views seniors as being expendable. now, as we make our way around here in the ft. myers area, which is where we are today, it's reliably republican county, we did run into some voters who identify with that biden message and when they do, they tell us it's because they are not happy with how the president has led the coronavirus response. >> been a real mess. >> awful. >> real mess. we would have been a lot better off as a country if things had been done much earlier. look at some of the other countries in the world. they're doing a lot better than we are. terrible. the economy's bad. that's the reason it is. connell: remember, president
1:09 pm
trump did win seniors by a wide margin last time around. very important to his re-election. it's not like those voters have abandoned him en masse. in fact, the opposite may be true. he still has a number of them in his camp and when those voters spoke to us, almost to a man or woman they speak to his handling of the pre-covid economy. >> i think he will do well with the economy and i think he leads us in the right direction. >> i just love him. i love everything that he's done. i think he's really done a terrific job as the president. i approve of everything. connell: early in-person voting starts up here on monday. we will watch florida very closely starting then. remember, the vote by mail process has already begun and as expected, the democrats have what appears to be a big advantage on that front. i just looked at the numbers. almost two million votes have come in by mail so far, registered democrats are returning their ballots at almost double the pace of registered republicans in florida.
1:10 pm
back to you. neil: amazing. more than ten million nationwide. thank you, connell, for that. connell mcshane on all that. catch him at 4:00 p.m. eastern time, a little less than three hours from now. another group that the president wants to win over but has had a devil of a time convincing, women. actually, women of all sorts, but a particular group of women the president was addressing last night. >> suburban women, they should like me more than anybody here tonight, because i ended the regulations that destroyed your neighborhoods. i ended the regulation that brought crime to the suburbs and you're going to live the american dream. so i ask you to do me a favor. suburban women, will you please like me? please. please. i saved their neighborhood, okay? neil: all right. we've got axios reporter hans
1:11 pm
nichols with us. that pitch for women is one that i understand he's going to keep making as he ramps up his campaigning maybe even in iowa tonight for a big event. is it working? >> we don't know. you know, there's that expression in vino veritas. maybe we should add in rallies veritas. you really heard him speak to a concern deep inside their campaign and that is the numbers aren't there. your correspondent mentioned it with senior citizens. they have a challenge there. but it's really the dropoff of support among suburban women that really troubles folks inside the campaign, and not just the campaign. republicans in tight senate races across the country that are wondering whether or not the president is going to drag him down. so it's a challenge. there's more game to play and the president is pretty eager to be out on the road and talk directly to americans. neil? neil: now, for women voters as well, the virus is a very, very
1:12 pm
big issue. i was surprised they worry about it twice as much or it's twice as important as it is for men. in fact, the mask issue and everything else, while men tend to have a more cavalier attitude about it, not women. i'm wondering if -- how that is resonating. >> well, it's part of the overall challenge that trump's having with the coronavirus. if you ask and you look at surveys of what your most important issue is, if it's the pandemic and the president's response to coronavirus, he tends not to do well in those surveys. when you break it down a little bit, sometimes in some surveys with independents you see it's the economy that's the top issue, or for democrats, it's climate. those surveys, the president is on a little bit more favorable territory but you know, there's a recognition and this isn't ground-breaking, but there's a recognition inside the white house, in the president's orbit, his handling of coronavirus is on the ballot. what they want to make it into is more of a handling of the coronavirus and the economy and
1:13 pm
as soon as the conversation shifts a little bit more to the economy, they feel it's a little bit more favorable and they might be able to bring enough of their core supporters out and make up that gap with college educated suburban women, with working class both males and females and drive the numbers up there, and that's what's going to get him over the top. neil: you know, if i could switch gears a little bit, ten million mail-in ballots already filed, it's actually more than 13 million, almost every day it's going up by something like two to three million ballots are already registered. obviously that is going to complicate things on election day. is it your sense, they seem to be two-thirds filed by democrats. that doesn't mean they automatically are voting democrat, i get that, but it would be safe to assume most e are. that makes election day a mess, doesn't it? >> yes and no. in states that will count
1:14 pm
beforehand and have the ballots ready to be processed, it will give them a bit of a head start and there are different rules in different states. florida is maybe a little more ahead and pennsylvania had this question of ballots in two envelopes, so-called naked ballot which i assure you i'm not making a dirty joke. so it goes from state to state. when you are looking at those numbers, though, and democrats and republicans will tell you, they will be honest, you can't really draw too much into these early vote numbers. in part because with democrats and republicans, what they don't know is whether or not you are just pulling the democratic vote forward, the democrats are voting by mail and the republicans are going to come out and turn out in person. it's a big question. you would probably rather be in the democrats' position because you would rather have that ballot banked as opposed to relying on a turnout model or wondering what the weather is going to be like or long voting lines in a time of a pandemic. so yes, the democrats are banking more votes. but it doesn't tell us this
1:15 pm
crucial question that we're not going to know until election night or a couple days after and that is how big and what is the electorate actually look like. how many republicans are going to come out, how many democrats and how many independents. remember, in 2016, just take florida, hillary clinton hit her marks. she got to where she needed to be in the counties she thought she needed to win and she won those counties. donald trump just found a whole lot of votes elsewhere. a big overriding question republicans worry about is that whether or not voters are going to come out of the woodwork like they did for donald trump, but this time they are going to come out for joe biden because there are so many unknowns. so sure, play around with all the web sites 57% of ballots coming in from florida are from democrats, we don't really know until everyone votes because this idea of shifting it forward, democrats are voting early, but we don't know what republicans are going to do. neil: we have a good hunch that more will be voting by this than
1:16 pm
in person. i guess that would be for the country. we do know as well that by election day, most of these attacks on mail-in ballots and counting them, most of these that are coming in will be counted by election day. so is there a possibility that we will know the winner unequivocally election night? >> oh, sure. depends on which states go where, but florida looks good for joe biden and then we should know pretty early. twitter will correct me if and when i'm wrong but some states, i believe pennsylvania, they are going to start counting later. so in pennsylvania, if it comes down to pennsylvania, and that's the decisive state, then we are in for election week and election month. [ speaking simultaneously ] >> right. pennsylvania. but florida is more immediate. if the numbers, i mean, people that are smarter than i am can run all the modeling on this and you can see pretty early in the
1:17 pm
night if the numbers are coming in at a substantial level for one candidate or the other, you could call it pretty closely. now, it's easy to make that call for biden, because it's difficult to see how trump wins if he doesn't win florida and north carolina which could be some of the first two, and their systems are a little bit speedier than say pennsylvania. neil: yeah. the landslide theory, how that goes. it's very confusing. it's numbing for me but you have got it inside and out. thank you very much. good catching up with you. hans nichols of axios. we have been telling you as well how this race is being determined by the virus and some spikes in this country, not nearly what we are seeing in europe where they are shutting countries down again, as a matter of fact, and their spikes are exceeding what we have seen here. first time that's happened. but in new york city, another phenomenon where some red zone
1:18 pm
districts, zip codes that have been problematic and ignoring the urgency of the situation, well, the governor is saying i'm going to force the issue. what does that mean? what is he hinting at? what is he shutting down? ♪ look limu! someone out there needs help customizing
1:19 pm
their car insurance with liberty mutual, so they only pay for what they need. false alarm. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
1:20 pm
1:21 pm
1:22 pm
we are sending notification to local governments saying they must enforce public health law under section 16. enforcing the public health law, especially in the red zone, especially when it comes to closing schools and religious gatherings. if the local government does not effectively enforce the law, we will withhold funds from the local government. neil: all right. seems like a sweeping measure right now but that's governor cuomo saying those in the red zone where they have had a serious spike in cases, that
1:23 pm
they should heed advice, not advice, outright orders, shut down schools, public gatherings of any sort, and this extends to religious institutions as well. kelly jane torrance following all of this right now. new york has suddenly become like a new hotbed of cases here. what the heck is going on? >> it's a good question. we have seen a rise in cases and there's been a slight rise in hospitalizations, but luckily, we are not seeing anything close to the numbers that we saw back in march and april, when we actually had the peak in covid cases. we are seeing especially in some areas of brooklyn and queens more cases, but you know, governor cuomo often talks about following the science but he's not doing that. in, for example, shutting down schools. he shut down schools where there hasn't been a single case of the coronavirus and you know, academic studies, new ones
1:24 pm
published just this week, say that schools are not in fact superspreaders. and that the data show that schools are places where there's really not that much transmission of the coronavirus. so a lot of people are upset with governor cuomo and i really don't blame them. he's shutting down schools when, in fact, there's no reason to do so. certainly we want to watch the cases, encourage people of course to wear masks, wash their hands. we are seeing some large gatherings in some of those areas in brooklyn and queens but of course, we have seen since may large gatherings of black lives matter protesters and governor cuomo hasn't said a word about any public health problems with those. so there's some hypocrisy at play here and i think people have a right to want to know why he's doing this. neil: normally what starts with schools soon extends to businesses, then will extend to restaurants and all the rest and for a lot of these businesses particularly that are sort of
1:25 pm
hanging by the vine as it is, this could be a fatal blow. what do you think? >> you're right. i talk to a lot of restaurant owners and servers. i live alone, i have been living alone of course through the whole pandemic and so when i go out for my outdoor, now i have done some indoor dining, i chat with the people working there and to a number, they are worried that the industry is simply going to die. you know, almost 90% of restaurants here in new york city couldn't make their full rent in august. 90%. it's incredible. and you know, governor cuomo finally, after a lawsuit was filed, allowed indoor dining but only at 25% capacity and nowhere else in the state did it start at 25%. everywhere else, it started at 50%. of course, they still have to pay their full rent, their electricity bill, workers' comp, all of those things. so restaurants are really worried and i don't think politicians are helping. not just with lockdowns, of
1:26 pm
course, but you have mayor bill deblasio saying he wouldn't eat inside a restaurant right now. what is he telling new yorkers, that this is dangerous, that they shouldn't be doing it? it's really discouraging people. i can tell you, i have had some indoor dining experiences and they have been incredibly safe. restaurant staff don't want to catch coronavirus either and they don't want to give it to their customers so they are being very careful, and you know, there has been no evidence that any spikes have been due to indoor dining or outdoor dining or really, anything to do with restaurants. neil: it is sad just to see. they are hanging on a vine here. kelly jane, be safe, be healthy yourself. we are following these ongoing confirmation hearings for the judge and right now, judge barrett is holding up pretty well in the line of questioning. we will talk to a tough procedure in his own right. you know him ten years in the united states congress, trey gowdy. now has a great book out on
1:27 pm
maybe how people comport themselves in situations like this. he's next. after this. >> in your view, is it the responsibility of a federal judge to implement policy positions that they might happen to agree with? >> that's your job, not a judge's.
1:28 pm
when i was in high school, this was the theater i came to quite often. ♪ the support we've had over the last few months has been amazing. i have a soft spot for local places. it's not just a work environment. everyone here is family. gonna go ahead and support him, get my hair cut, leave a big tip. if we focus on our local communities, we can find a way to get through this together. thank you. ♪ if you are ready to open your heart and your home, check us out. get out and about and support our local community. we thought for sure that we were done. and this town said: not today. ♪
1:29 pm
but when i started seeing things, i didn't know what was happening... so i kept it in. he started believing things that weren't true. i knew something was wrong... but i didn't say a word. during the course of their disease around 50% of people with parkinson's may experience hallucinations or delusions. but now, doctors are prescribing nuplazid. the only fda approved medicine... proven to significantly reduce hallucinations and delusions related to parkinson's. don't take nuplazid if you are allergic to its ingredients. nuplazid can increase the risk of death in elderly people with dementia-related psychosis and is not for treating symptoms unrelated to parkinson's disease. nuplazid can cause changes in heart rhythm and should not be taken if you have certain abnormal heart rhythms or take other drugs that are known to cause changes in heart rhythm. tell your doctor about any changes in medicines you're taking. the most common side effects are swelling of the arms and legs and confusion. we spoke up and it made all the difference.
1:30 pm
ask your parkinson's specialist about nuplazid.
1:31 pm
if confirmed, is your goal repealing the affordable care act? >> absolutely not. i was never asked and if i had been, that would have been a short conversation. >> prior to your nomination, were you aware of president trump's statements committing to nominate judges who will strike down the affordable care act, and i would appreciate a yes or no answer, please. >> i don't recall seeing or hearing those statements but i don't really know what context they were in, so i guess i can't really definitively give you a yes or no answer. neil: all right. then the back-and-forth
1:32 pm
continues. to rich edson, where things stand right now. rich? reporter: good afternoon, neil. democrats are trying to use the obamacare challenge ongoing to the court in november and trying to tie that into this nomination of judge amy coney barrett to the supreme court, saying that it is up to them basically, looking forward, that obamacare might be at risk. so here's the nuts and bolts of the law. what is exactly at risk if the supreme court decides to strike down obamacare in its entirety. you've got about 11 million people who get insurance through the obamacare marketplace like health and the federal government gives more than 9 million of those a subsidy to lower the cost of their insurance. around 12 million more signed up under the law's expansion of medicaid. there are insurance regulations like keeping millions of those younger than 26 on their plan, the parents' plan. the law requires insurance companies also to cover those with pre-existing conditions and to do so without charging
1:33 pm
considerably higher rates. one government estimate says potentially that benefits more than 130 million americans. so eliminating the entire law would upend a large portion of that. >> the money is really key here. without the federal money, there's no way states could continue medicaid coverage and there's no way you could maintain a stable insurance market and cover people with pre-existing conditions without a premium death spiral. reporter: there are also problems with the 10-year-old law that even democrats acknowledge. the insurance americans can buy through the online exchanges even with government help is still too expensive for many. analysts say the law never truly addressed underlying health care costs in a way that would make health care affordable and then there have been conservative critics who talk about president obama's promise that you would be able to keep your health insurance if you like it. many of those cheaper, smaller plans were outlawed by the law's standard. back to you. neil: thank you very very much.
1:34 pm
how is this process going, a third day of deliberations right now with judge barrett. let's ask trey gowdy, the former south carolina congressman, author of a great book, it doesn't hurt to ask. what i forgot to realize when i was going through the book is you know, this guy spent his lifetime as a state and federal prosecutor so he knows a thing or two about asking direct, pointed, no-nonsense questions. i certainly remember that during the benghazi hearings. very good to have you. how do you think democrats are faring in their own prosecution of the judge? >> well, neil, thank you for referencing the book. the number one thing you have to identify is who is your jury, who is your audience. i think democrats realize they are not going to stop her from being on the supreme court, so their audience, their jury would be voters in south carolina, north carolina, iowa, georgia,
1:35 pm
arizona, where there are competitive senate races. i don't think this has anything to do with where amy coney barrett is going to be a month from now. she will be on the supreme court. it has a lot to do with who is going to control the senate come next january and i think that's what the last couple of days have been about. neil: so when you hear these questions, it seems to me at least, congressman, that democrats have resigned themselves to the fact she's probably going to make it to the highest court, but they want to score points on this issue of the affordable care act and whether any decision on her part, even dismantling key provisions in it, will eventually lead to its death. is that their strategy? >> i think it is to scare people. you heard kamala harris during the vice presidential debate say they are coming after your rights and she listed a litany of rights. she said it again yesterday. i feel sorry that judge barrett is handicapped because if she
1:36 pm
were not handicapped she would say look, all nine justices said the aca was unconstitutional under the way obama argued it. all nine said it violated the commerce clause. the only reason it lived is because we ignored you saying it wasn't a tax and five justices said you know what, even though you said it's not a tax, it really is, so it's not like this is some super precedent where all nine people thought it was a great constitutional exercise. i think the democrats, i got a chapter in the book, neil, i'm sure when you grew up, i grew up, my parents said there's no such thing as a dumb question. i think you and i both know there are dumb questions and we heard two of them yesterday. neil: the difference with you, though, congressman, is you admit when you have the dumb question. i like how you started out talking about your early days with a key witness and you just asked silly questions but you learn from that. but i'm watching this event and i'm hearing a lot of dumb questions.
1:37 pm
>> yeah. two stick out in my mind. maybe the two dumbest i have ever heard. and that's saying a lot because i got a lot of friends that ask dumb questions. but when cory booker asked the mother of two black children to denounce white supremacy, i felt a lot sorrier for him than i did her. i felt sorry for her kids having to listen to it and then when the senator from hawaii with no factual predicate, no evidentiary foundation, asked judge barrett if she had ever committed the crime of sexual assault, i didn't know what i was -- is this really the u.s. senate? is this really what we're going to ask? is there any evidentiary reason to ask amy barrett whether you have committed the crime of sexual assault? why ask that question? neil: apparently that's what turned everything around in the kavanaugh hearings. they felt let's just raise it with her and see what comes up. it seemed to me like a pretty crude fishing expedition.
1:38 pm
but in your book, you talk about how we deal with each other and the approach we take. you know, when were elected to congress, it seemed you had had your fill of it and you had had enough of it. i'm wondering looking at these hearings and seeing everything else, i know you were in the house, you wouldn't be in the senate, i imagine you would be a pretty tough interrogator there as well, is the politics so bad now and just the general stench so bad now that it just turns you off and it's turning americans off looking at it? >> well, certainly it turned me off and i think the level of confidence in our government institutions is probably at its lowest in a courtroom, i was in a system where even though you had the right person for the right crime, if you didn't do it the right way, you lost. we all accepted that. because the way you do things
1:39 pm
matters. in politics, winning is the only thing that matters. and i don't want to be in a job where rules of fair play and treating people decently and using facts, i don't want to be in a job where none of that matters anymore but that's politics. as long as we win, we can besmirch her reputation, ask if she's a white supremacist even though she adopted two black children. there's really no critique from your own team. that's true on both sides. republicans don't like to police republicans and democrats don't police democrats. so i would rather be in a death penalty trial where there's more civility than there is in the typical congressional hearing. neil: you know, you get into the issue, congressman, about the way the general media treats republicans and this president, is not fair and it's not balanced and you're quite right. i was curious taking a lead from your book whether the president brings on some of this himself by his attack lines, berating
1:40 pm
even fellow republicans or those who have anything critical to say of him. dr. fauci's experiencing it. mitt romney is experienced it. some of your colleagues in the house who question him on some matters experienced it. does he bring the wave of attacks that come from people who served with him, serve with him, who to this day keep writing tell-all books about him? >> yeah, i mean, i think the manner in which we communicate is every bit as important as what we believe. i mean, you can be really really right and if people don't like you, or they don't like the manner in which you communicate, insults are not persuasive. living by a different set of rules than the set of rules i want you to live by is not persuasive. hypocrisy is not persuasive. if you are in politics, the job is to grow the tribe. the job is to get more people to support you. it's not lost on me that most of
1:41 pm
the questions amy barrett is getting are not about things she said or wrote. the whole ac alia line is becau the president tweeted something. why not think it? why does everything have to make its way into a tweet? it's fine to think it but he put her in a really tough position by some of the things he said before he picked her and you know, i can only have confidence that he is aware of that and will act accordingly going forward. but i don't know. neil: trey gowdy, think it, don't tweet it. that's very good. we can learn a lot, just the power of listening. taking it all in. trey gowdy, it is a great book. it doesn't hurt to ask. it raises a lot of these things in a bipartisan spirit that we can do better and be better than they are. it's possible.
1:42 pm
my husband and i have never eaten healthier. shingles doesn't care. i logged 10,000 steps today. shingles doesn't care. i get as much fresh air as possible. good for you, but shingles doesn't care. because 1 in 3 people will get shingles, you need protection. but no matter how healthy you feel, your immune system declines as you age, increasing your risk for getting shingles. so what can protect you? shingrix protects. for the first time ever, you can protect yourself from shingles with a vaccine proven to be over 90% effective. shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults
1:43 pm
50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. the most common side effects are pain, redness, and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. talk to your doctor or pharmacist about protecting yourself with shingrix. shingles doesn't care. shingrix protects.
1:44 pm
1:45 pm
1:46 pm
neil: all right. the big allure of apple's new products is they're 5g ready. i always wonder how susan feels about this. apple is the big boy in town, apple gets the attention. i'm wondering given the status of 5g and not available in a lot of places, if it could be at least initially much ado about nothing. brett larson joins us, fox news headlines 24/7 anchor, expert on all things technology. what do you think? 5g is an allure, i get it, but it's not in a lot of places. >> you hit the nail on the head. after apple's announcement yesterday, certainly samsung users have been crowing from the highest peaks they can get on right now saying we have had 5g for two years, what are you talking about? but with apple announcing 5g, that certainly gives consumers more access to the new high speed technology. also gives 5g technology a little seal of approval.
1:47 pm
you're right, just where is that 5g wireless service? take a look. the story of 5g starts back in 2009, when americans switched from analog to digital tv. a move that freed up massive amounts of bandwidth needed for the new high speed network. in the decade since, the big three wireless providers have been building the new network. >> we cover about 250 million people with our 5g service. and that's using primarily low band spectrum layer. we are now adding another big layer of radio access spectrum on top of that low band layer, and that's starting to show up across major metros around the u.s. we will be in thousands of cities and towns as we close out this year. reporter: let's take a step back. there are three layers to 5g. each has different levels of coverage. high band or millimeter wave is fastest but covers a short distance, like your wifi network. the midband travels further and will be faster than 4g.
1:48 pm
the low band offers more coverage with fewer towers and will bring high speed to more places, like many rural communities that still lack access to high speed internet. >> there's so much we can do in a 5g world so the rural communities are not disadvantaged anymore. there's no reason they should be disadvantaged from a technology perspective. reporter: in a statement to fox, at & t said in part since announcing that at & t5g is available nationwide, our teams have been working on densifying our coverage which will improve the performance of our 5g service. verizon wireless told us in part we currently offer 5g mobility in certain areas of 36 cities and offer our 5g home internet service in five cities. -- another option of that bandwidth, that is expected to be used for wireless networks as well as more of our favorite things, the internet of things.
1:49 pm
liz claman is interviewing the verizon ceo today at 3:00 p.m. eastern time on the fox business network. he was onstage with tim cook for the 5g iphone announcement. and look, we will see what happens here. i think, you know, any time apple embraces a technology, it suddenly becomes the technology everybody talks about despite the fact that it may have been around before. the ipod was certainly not the first mp3 player. the iphone arguably not the first smartphone but definitely the one that brought it into more consumers' hands so we shall see what happens with our high speed 5g. neil: all right. thank you very much, my friend. by the way, for those apple phones, people have a chance to start a preorder tomorrow. we will get an early indication what the demand will be like. stay with us. you know, malcolm, audible's got more than audiobooks. of course. podcasts. originals.
1:50 pm
bestsellers. future bestsellers. sleep stories. mal... hey, no! roxy! audiobooks, podcasts, audible originals, all in one place.
1:51 pm
1:52 pm
1:53 pm
neil: all right. you think this pandemic has been hard on you and your company, your business, imagine trying to sell a car in this environment. in a word, tough. in two words, very tough. jeff flock on how this is providing a big old challenge just when they don't need it for car dealerships.
1:54 pm
he joins us out of illinois. hey, jeff. reporter: hello to you. you know, much of america is engaged in picking a president. some of us are engaged in more mundane tasks like picking out a new car. like in the presidential race, lot of people don't think there are very good choices right now, at least when it comes to cars, because inventories are very low thanks to covid. factory shutdowns and supply chain disruptions. take a look at these numbers from toyota and lexus. this time last year, they had 458,000 cars in inventory. big selection. this year, it's closer to 266,000 cars. a lot of that is because the new models just aren't out there. this time of year we start to see the 2021s. last year, it was about 25% of inventory, the new models. this year, it's only about 3% new cars out there. what does that mean to us who have to buy a car? means we're not going to get a deal. average transaction prices right now are about $2,000 more than
1:55 pm
they were this time last year, almost $40,000 a car. that of course is going to mean a lot fewer cars are getting bought. projection, not quite as bad as last quarter, but there will be about 11% fewer cars sold in q3. i tried to leave you with a positive note, though, and that is that today, you can order the new mustang mach i. we have pictures. the fastest mustang, it hasn't been offered for 17 years. $50,000 plus. by the way, everybody i'm reliably informed, republicans and democrats, like the mustang. neil? neil: 50 grand. that is pocket change to you, jeff. i'm sure it's on the way to your driveway right now. thank you very much. jeff flock. you know, it's amazing, another phenomenon that's happened with this whole car thing is that you wait a long time.
1:56 pm
if you have any specific order, you are going to wait. if you are still inclined to do that, be prepared to wait. i know this from experience. just wait. say okay, i'll wait. not. more after this. when i was in high school, this was the theater i came to quite often. ♪ the support we've had over the last few months has been amazing. i have a soft spot for local places. . . gonna go ahead and support him, get my hair cut, leave a big tip. if we focus on our local communities, we can find a way to get through this together. thank you. ♪ if you are ready to open your heart and your home, check us out. get out and about and support our local community.
1:57 pm
we thought for sure that we were done. and this town said: not today. ♪
1:58 pm
1:59 pm
♪. neil: all right. amazon we're in day two of prime day right now. they're expecting a lot of sales. hard to handicap this. the stock had run up aggressively before prime day. big sellers are face masks that
2:00 pm
people have to wear. puffer coats. trench coats and puffer coats. i don't know what puffer coats but they are hot, hot, hot. but our fashionable, always sartorial charles payne probably does. he joins us right now. hey, charles. charles: neil, when a limo picks you up in the front door and drops off at the front of the office you don't need a puffer coat, my friend. neil: got it. sounds like a big coat. charles: all righty. hey, good afternoon, everyone, i'm charles payne. this is "making money." so far a lackluster session. the markets are slipping. there is no sense of panic but also there is no leadership. strong earnings were not enough to lift fangs stocks. i think this is old-fashioned


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on