republican provision, it s not. so if the newest state tax, which would lower the threshold at which the government begins taking huge amounts of people s estates. if that new provision was slipped in and the bill was changed you would have a whole lot more republicans in the senate saying, huh-uh, we are not up for beginning to taxes states, you know, starting at $3.5 million. jenna: they are going to have you working through the holidays, charlie. of course. jenna: charlie hurt, washington bureau chief of the new york post. always good to see you charlie, thank you. thank you. jon: new developments to bring you in the case of three missing brothers. their father in court today. gregg has new information from the breaking news desk. plus honoring the voice, frank sinatra, who else. a puppet, a pauper, a pirate, a poet, a pawn and even a king. a look back at a scrawny kid from new jersey who became a
step that we get further along, closer to the end of the year, closer to the start of next year, democrats have less and less power to do any negotiating. jenna: when you take a step back, though the democrats still have the majority in the house and the senate. if they wanted to change the bill and approve it in the house and send it back to the senate and all the democrats there decide to vote, yea on it could we be in a scenario where the democrats take this away from the president and the republican leadership in the compromise that they created. absolutely. then you would have republicans not going along with the newest state tax provision. don t forget the estate tax provision that is included in the current bill was a provision that was hatched, it s a bi-partisan provision. it was hatched by jon kyl of arizona and marry land reau of louisiana. it s hard to suggest that somehow this is some right-wing
have the individual mandate question about the individual freedom and the liberty that s involved in that particular one where the court, of course, in virginia ruled yesterday that that provision s unconstitutional. jon: general mccollum we think this is going to bring the whole bill down. jon: we had a representative of the white house come on yesterday and say, yeah, we lost in this virginia case, but it s really not a big deal. we could lose the individual mandate and still have health insurance as passed by congress earlier this year. do you agree? well, i don t agree. as attorney general cucinelli of virginia said yesterday in describing this, the individual mandate, the requirement that everybody has to buy health insurance is like the pole at the middle of the tent. if it comes down, the tent comes down. the entire health care legislation s built around it. there is no other funding mechanism for the insurance provisions in this bill. and the federal government by its own
stat its was not going to outlaw the rest of the statute. it s still alive. if the ruling is upheld it would throw a big wrench into the funding of this healthcare bill, which is going to be off the charts if we proceed the way the democrats have designed this bill. jon: senator orrin hatch, republican of utah. thank you for being with us. reporter: thank you. jenna: staying with politics now rahm emanuel quit a dream job at the white house to follow another dream of his, the latest on a crucial hearing that is happening this morning that could determine whether rahm emanuel can even run for mayor of chicago. a big meeting happening right now at the white house on the future on the war in afghanistan. we just mentioned that in review. we have a full report on that coming right up. inner beauty is important.
economies. if we go through all the tax increases that congressional leaders proposed by the way, congress is going to come back right after the election in this lame duck session of congress with a new round of spending in this omnibus appropriations bill and new tax increases. should the question is, mr. giannoulias, should tax cuts be paid for? this is a fundamental policy difference between myself and congressman kirk. he said he s a fiscal hawk. the congressman has told some real whoppers in this campaign but that may be the biggest one of all. he has voted to increase his own pay six times, voted for the bridge to nowhere twice. he voted for a pay increase for himself. the list goes on and on. saying you re a fiscal hawk doesn t necessarily make it true and your voting record proves it s not true. the question for the congressman is the $700 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest americans, we don t have $700 billion. my question to the congressman is, which country do yo