foolish optimist on keystone thinking. the best of the president thinking he would approve and it you folks have been more skeptical. not only that, kim knows this also, that the keystone pipeline is a huge fund-raiser for the president and for environmental groups. that, i think, will answer your question. environmentalists treat keystone as a kind of religious toto. we are having two separate conversations. she thub talking about what is the safest, most environmentally sound way to move crude because that crude will be moved. all right. when we come back, first it was anthony weiner. now eliot spitzer attempt his own political comeback. is there something in the new york water? do these politicians deserving a second chance. for the opportunities ahead? who can show them how to build on your success, but not rely on it. who can focus on making your legacy last
oil. there is the human risk which is what we saw evidence in canada this week. the reality is that train tracks are designed to go through population centers. pipelines by contrast don t tend to be that. when you have leaks or spills, you are not putting humans at such huge risk as you are as when you are transporting masses amounts of combustible fuel through population centers. where people can die. is this going to have any influence, kim, on president obama s decision, do you think? i think we are beyond knowing what is influencing president obama s decision here. he gave this speech on climate a few weeks back and he seemed to lay out a new standard saying that, you know, keystone added to the climate change, fuzzy standard because of the way you can measure things like that, and interest didn t really give any further indication of which way he s going. he seems to be put thing off as long as he can. i will admit i have been
joining the panel this week, wall street journal lump mist and deputy editor brett stephens. editorial member joe rago and washington columnist, kim strausses. another charming aside from jay carney, about tom harkin who democrat and runs the dash. explain that. tom harkin. tom harkin who runs the senate health care committee, democrat, who wrote the employer mandate coming out and saying i don t think they have the authority to do this. this is probably illegal. he was attacking anybody who said they didn t have the authority to do it. i read the statute. doesn t look like they have the authority. says plainly it should start on december 31. it says it shall. black letter law. the problem with the affordable care act is that every piece of the bill is designed to solve allegedly problem created by another part of the bill. if you delay the employer mandate it has all kinds of
consequences throughout the rest of the let s zero in on this verification. refusal to the enforce the verification. if you apply for it they will not check your income to see if you qualify until somehow later. they may get around to it. what are the implications of that? i think it will lead to a lot of fraud. they are just trying to get people to cram in here and even if they are not eligible for the cities. if you look at something like the earned income tax credit, about 21% to 25% of those payments are made to people who don t actually qualify for them legally if you are looking at the affordable care act that s $250 billion problem. if it is on that scale of if it was the same fraud. kim, so what s the motive here, political motive here for the administration to do this wave these verification rules? they want to get as many people in the system and hooked on these subsidies as they can. they think that s what s going