nbc's erica gonzalez joins us now with the details. good evening, erica. >> reporter: good evening. we are live outside the moore medical center. and this is the grand scale of things. you have cars flipped over, slammed up against walls, wheels up and then the smaller picture, which are things like this. trees uprooted, makes it look like a lumberyard exploded all across the area. now we have recently learned that the destruction, the casualties, are all a direct result of a confirmed ef-5 tornado. upgraded since yesterday. there are neighborhoods that have been leveled, the casualties, 24 people confirmed dead, 9 of those children. going forward with comparisons to joplin, to the tornado of 1999 right here in oklahoma. there is one thing that remains certain, and that is, this is going to be very, very costly. >> it will be billions. billions of dollars. i believe. because of all the tremendous amount structures and certainly the interruption of business in this area. and it's going to take a long time to get all this cleaned up. >> reporter: now, curfew comes into place in just a few hours, so people will -- are supposed to be hunkered down in their homes, in the most destroyed areas. and then after that, the real work continues. and that is recovery and cleanup. live in moore, oklahoma, eric gonzalez, nbc news. >> erica, for a moment, governor was talking about billions of dollars of aid, a little bit of a flap broke out today. senator tom coburn, whose budget hawk, as you probably know, suggested that if they go over the allotted fema money, there is $11 billion that he wouldn't take it, he wouldn't vote for it. unless -- unless it was offset elsewhere in the budget. a lot of people jumped on that, erica. can you tell us anything? is there a discussion? >> reporter: you know, the biggest thing here is that people need relief, and they need help. when you walk into areas that have literally been flattened, when you go to elementary schools where playgrounds have fences that are thrown across swing sets, you get a real perspective for things and people here are not the least bit concerned with budgets. they want help and hands-on right here on the ground. >> it seems like, erica, this is the totally wrong moment to even have that discussion with all those people in need. >> exactly. i couldn't have said it better myself. >> all right. what's the next step for you? what's your next step? >> reporter: you know, going forward, we will go back into the neighborhoods after curfew sets in to place. only military and police will be allowed in those areas. we're going to try and get another grip of things and see what people are doing, where they are sheltering in place. because they have no place to go. so going forward, it is, you know, where will these people spend the next couple nice, next couple days, how soon will insurance adjusters be here, how soon will fema be on the ground and how soon can they rebuild, because this area, unfortunately, is all too familiar for folks, again, dealing with that 1999 tornado. but when we asked them, how does this compare, they say this is far worse. this is far greater than what happened in '99 and where we are, we are reliving it all over again. >> how many people, erica, are coming in from the outside to help? first responders, they're still going through the rubble, still looking for bodies and so forth. it's a dreadful exercise but necessary. however, in terms of rebuilding moore, for example, rebuilding all the homes, rebuilding the schools and what not, are people coming in from the outside, from oklahoma, from texas, from missouri? >> reporter: they are. and i think those are the tighter-knit communities that really do come together. you've got the national guard that's been here in place, all of the police departments imaginable. i mean, i think the thing that has everybody just really in awe is the fact that somebody has said we need help, and it has not taken anybody but a day, but a few minutes, but a few hours to get here and be on the ground and be with these people, whether it's to give them a hot meal, to take them to a hotel, or to help them get an insurance adjuster to their area. >> all right. we'll leave it there. thank you very much. nbc's erica gonzalez, thanks for helping us. now we're going to switch gears. the senate judiciary committee is expected to pass a sprawling immigration overhaul bill by the end of the week. that sets the stage for a full senate debate in early june. joining me now exclusively, welcome back florida republican senator marco rubio. senator, welcome, as always. before we get to the immigration issue, i just want to ask you, i want to go a little bit far afield. i want to ask you if you believe a special counsel will be necessary to get to the bottom of the irs rat's nest. i know you've talked a lot about the irs. and i want to ask you secondly, sir, do you think the white house had any involvement in targeting the tea party, and other conservative groups? >> so three separate parts to that. the first is we need to get to the bottom of what happened. and i think there's bipartisan support for that. the special counsel is something we should consider and i've been thinking about that myself. there are down sides to special counsel, as well. and that is borne out in history. they have been misused in the past, as recently as indeed bush administration, against the bush administration. that being said, it may be necessary here, particularly if we don't have any confidence in the justice department's ability to get to the bottom of what happened here. as far as your question about the white house's involvement, that's what we want to know. that's exactly the question we want an answer to. i think what's troubling -- i'm not prepared to say the white house is directly involved but i think what's troubling, every single day, the time line continues to move in terms of who knew what at the white house and every at a gets more and more troubling in terms of who knew what and when. that's exactly the kind of questions we need to be answering. an irs official tomorrow, i understand is going to plead the fifth. here's the bottom line. i would say this is really not a republican or democratic issue. this is a fundamental issue about whether the government of the united states should be targeting citizens because of their political affiliations, using perhaps its scariest agency of all, the irs, to do it. and by the way, a reminder the same agency that went after americans because of their political views is going to be on the front lines of implementing and enforcing obamacare as early as next year. >> which is an incredible fact. all right. appreciate your views. let me go to the immigration question. as you know, today, a petition or release list of 150 prominent conservatives and groups came out against the gang of eight of which you are a prominent member. the immigration reform bill. what do you think? i know you have wooed conservatives, you have done a good job in my humble opinion. i happened to be with you on this issue but many of my conservative brothers and sisters are not. now you've got a list of 150 against you. >> first of all, i'm respectful of their views and share many of their views and concerns can and we work together on any other issue before the united states. i think within the conservative movement in this country, there is a debate happening about what the immigration policy of the united states should be. and the best way to address it. and if you saw in that letter that was released today, they acknowledge there are many portions of it they are in favor. and primarily the complaint seems to be about the size and scope of the bill. and the areas that it covers and they think it does too much in one single piece of legislation. it's a concern i've shared in the past, and quite frankly, continue to share. on the other hand, i think now is the time to act on this issue, and get it solved. because we can't leave it the way it is. the status quo is just as bad. and so we've got to figure that out. and so certainly, i think as we move forward now on to the floor of the senate, in order for this thing to pass, one thing is to have a bill. another thing is to have a law, a law that can pass the house and senate. there will have to be changes made to this bill, and particularly because people are saying the following to us. here's what people are saying. a lot of conservatives. we are prepared to deal with the 11 million here now, because we know they're never going to go back, the vast majority. we're prepared to deal with that but only if we take measures that ensure that we don't have a future wave of illegal immigration. i think that's a very reasonable request, a very reasonable position and one i think we need to be able to accomplish if we want this to become law. >> a lot of people are talking about and one of the key bullets in this petition to you is the idea that we're going to blow up, that the immigrants are going to blow up the entitlement system. and, in fact, the senate judiciary committee today voted to allow illegals who then somehow get legal status to start collecting welfare benefits. i think right away. now, that's a tough one. and that's something that conservatives don't want to swallow. >> well, i think, actually, the provision you're talking about is the earned income tax credit. not the welfare provision, but the earned income tax credit, what they call tax welfare. that's a big problem. i had a bill last year that addressed that problem. and i to think that needs to be addressed in this bill. i don't think we should allow people who have illegally violated the laws on immigration to have access to this program. the argument is they should be able to use the full tax code. i think the merit is, yeah, okay, let's examine the entire tax code and get rid of that provision, especially the way it's being abused. but i would say as far as this immigration issue is concerned, the issue you're talking about is not welfare. it's tax welfare through the earned income tax credit and i do think that needs to be addressed. i think the way it is in the bill now is one of the impediments to it passing. >> what about the flip side of this issue. some of us, including myself, old reagan supply siders, i think immigration is good for economic growth. i think immigration is about growth and opportunity. i can it's part of the soul of america. i haven't heard that kind of language from many of my pals. you know, if more people enter the labor force, senator, if more people enter the labor force, which has gone stag nanlt, we'll grow more. and i don't see how america, which hasn't grown in a long time, should turn that opportunity down. >> well, that's exactly right. i think one of the points to bear reminding, there was a letter today by groups and individuals that were concerned about the immigration bill and opposed it, but just last week, a group of equally impressive conservative groups. & individuals supportive of immigration reform, primarily for the reasons you've just outlined and that is the economic benefits of it. just today an amendment was adopted in the judiciary committee that improves, for example, visas of the high-tech industry, which we know is critical for economic growth. you're absolutely right. virtually every group that's looked at immigration reform, except for one, has said that immigration reform would be a net positive for the economy of the united states and that's what we expect the congressional budget office to say. ultimately, iffit not good for our economy, we shouldn't do it. and i do believe that immigration, legal immigration, done in an orderly fashion, and a controlled fashion, is a positive for the united states of america's economy. >> actually, the fiscal establishment, which is not dynamic, the cbo scored the 2006 immigration bill didn't pass. they said it would create more revenues than spending because of the labor force, because of the economic growth benefits. and doug hall zeke, former director and former acting director, both agree. more people in the labor force, more growth. that includes the brainiacs you talked about. it also includes the lower-wage people. but it also means social mobility. you know, poor people go to school in this country, they can can rise up the ladder of opportunity. >> absolutely right. i mean, that's one of the reasons why i support immigration reform. and i support modernizing our legal immigration system. look, it helps the housing market. you have people that are here in this country illegally now that are not paying taxes that will be paying income tax and revenue to the government. but also be given the opportunity to improve themselves, to go up the economic ladder. to become net contributors to our mischaracterize life in this country as consumers, as buyers. but also in our business life and in our housing market and all these other elements. so, look, again, legal immigration done right for this country with the proper enforcement mechanisms should be a net positive for the united states. >> this is a soluble problem, senator rubio. this is a soluble problem, and thank you for your efforts. we appreciate you coming back on "the kudlow report." all best. >> thank you. now, folks, this was supposed to be the day senate democrats and even some republicans, made apple ceo tim cook squirm. but let's just say it did not turn out that way. we have pretty hot debate coming up on who won the battle of the politicians versus the tech superstar. and, of course, neither senator on that committee was looking to embarrass apple. listen to this highlight from senator rand paul. >> frankly, i'm offended by the tone and tenor of this hearing. i'm offended by a $4 trillion government, bullying, berating and badgering one of america's greatest success stories. if anyone should be on trial here, it should be congress. i frankly think the committee should apologize to apple. i think that the congress should be on trial here for creating a bizarre and byzantine tax code. >> senator paul, you're, of course, free to apologize if you wish. >> you can apologize to anyone you want. this subcommittee is not going to apologize to apple. we did not drag them in front of this subcommittee. apple has real operations in real places with apple employees selling real products to real customers. we pay all the taxes we owe every single dollar. we don't stash money on some caribbean island. that was apple ceo tim cook doing a pretty good job testifying in front of the senate today, and here's how senator mccain responded. >> it's completely out outrageo that apple has not only dodged full payment of its taxes but managed to evade paying taxes around the world through its con very lute and had pernicious strategies. >> oh, my goodness, i love him. he's an old friend, but john mccain has the story completely wrong. how about this? shouldn't congress spend some time reforming, flattening and simplifying the tax code instead of beating up on a great american company? all right, i'm joined by frank clementi, campaign manager for americans for tax fairness, and cnbc chief international correspondent, michelle caruso cabre cabrera. michelle, $14 billion behind exxon and paid all their taxes overseas. i don't understand this line of reasoning. i just don't get it. >> i thought senator john mccain was a particular embarrassment, larry. i thought he was trying to out-levin carl levin. i expect carl levin to think that $6 billion in taxes isn't enough, that creating hundreds of thousands of jobs isn't enough. that being a great beacon of the american economy isn't enough. but john mccain, with republicans like him, who needs democrats? i mean, this man ran for president on the republican ticket. he deserves the hash tag whyyoulost. this is unbelievable. >> frank clementi, you may not agree -- i don't know what your position is. but apple has violented no laws, and what cook pointed out, and he's used to running international operations for apple, so he know what he speaks in ireland and elsewhere, they paid every nickle off of foreign income they earned. every nickle. they didn't donnell anything, frank. that's why i don't understand this whole hearing. >> well, larry, they're just not paying much in taxes. the tax rate in ireland is 2%. the tax rate in america is 35%. as the investigation by this committee showed, if those profits, $100 billion in profits are sitting off shore in ireland, if that money was brought back to the united states, they would pay about $40 billion in taxes. >> why should they? in why should they when they don't have to, why should they when they're legally saying to the united states, to the congress, to john mccain and anybody else, you guys are so dumb, they're saying. why should we double tax these profits? why should we triple tax these profits? this is shareholder money. and they could invest the profits, frank. that's the part i don't get. you want to bleed them some more. >> no, the significance of this hearing is, it's actually showing what the problem is. i agree. apple is obeying the law. the problem is, the laws are useless in this case. it allows, it permits them to make these profits offshore and not have to bring them back, not to have them be taxed until they're brought back. so apple can choose to keep them off shore forever. >> michelle, how stupid is that? we could use the money here at home if it were done constructively. why are we double and triple taxing overseas money? >> no, you're absolutely right. and what mr. clementi highlighted, the difference in the tax code is a phenomenon is something wonderful, a wonderful economic phenomenon that has happened the last 30 years all over the world. it's called tax competition. in other words, nations compete on their tax codes. and those that have the lowest taxes, that have the best environment for business, they get more businesses. emerging markets have learned that all over the world and they're starting to use those exact economic rules that for a while made us very successful. and as tim cook pointed out, if we don't get smart, we will lose our competitiveness. people on the other side of this issue love to talk about tax harmonization, as if it's happy, like a bank holiday, for example. ann rand would be rolling over in they are grave. be careful of people who want tax harmonization. that means they want everyone to pay higher taxes. >> frank clementi, instead of ireland raising their taxes, the united states should lower its taxes. >> larry -- >> that's what tim cook is trying to organize, and we should simplify them, and reform them and that's what these goofy senators don't get. >> you know, you talk about reducing the deficit all of the time. how are we going to reduce the deficit if we don't raise revenue. watching corporations get a tax-free pass on helping to reduce the deficit. american businesses, main street businesses, small businesses, individuals, everybody is contributing to reduce the deficit, because they're paying their fair share of taxes. huge multinational companies like apple and other big we understand ones, they're not paying their fair share of taxes. legally not paying their fair share of taxes because that's the way the system is designed now. that's the problem. we've got to change the system. i don't think you want to have a race to the bottom where corporations -- >> let me just read this. >> 2%, which is what it is in ireland. >> exxonmobil paid approximate $31 billion. chevron paid $20 billion. apple paid $14 billion. the next closest, michelle, is wells fargo at $9 billion. hell, even walmart only paid $8 billion. michelle, can we grow our way? if you lower tax rates, you're going to employ and grow, or what? >> well, i can't