the stage is set for him to run for president in 2016. don't forget about the continuing obamacare disaster. today's problem comes from the insurance companies on the federal exchange. they say the administration is forcing them to retroactively cover people wo don't sign up in time, and they may not be able to make it happen. a day after these angry tech ceos complained to president obama's face about nsa snooping, it now look like some changes are already in the works. all those stories and much more coming up in "the kudlow report", beginning right now. good evening, everyone. i'm larry kudlow. this is "the kudlow report." we live here at 7:00 p.m. eastern, 4:00 p.m. pacific. the fed taper and soaring stock market. here is our very own steve liesman. >> good evening, larry. federal reserve essentially tea at least steps. $a billion the treasuries. second, announcing a schedule for tapering. about an even $10 billion monthly -- or every decline, every meeting. third, very dovish guidance on interest rates, and how the fed will react once it hits that 6.5% unemployment rate. >> i expect there will be time past the 6.5% before all the other variables we'll be looking at will line up in a way to give us confess that the labor marge is strong enough. >> some of es expected the taper, larry, but i think the dovish comments might be what excited the market. he said it may not be until december 2015. he was also asked about fed chair nominee janet yellen, and whether she approved of this schedule, and had el said she did. so markets don't have to expect much change in policy if she's approved this week, as expected, by the senate. larry, back to you. >> many thanks, steve liesman, appreciate it. it was a record day on wall street, as the stocks surged. let's do go down to the floor with bob pisani. good afternoon, bob. >> they were expecting two things, a modest -- and they would try to persuade the markets that tapering was not tightening and they better not screw up those expectations. bernanke did not only screw up, he and the fed hit a home run for the markets. practically a pulitzer prize statement. after a brief drop, stocks rallied with the dow closing at the highest for the day, up nearly 300 points. it was an historic closing high for the dow jones industrial average, for the s&p 500, and it was a 13-year high for the nasdaq. now, the yields on the ten-year treasury bond initially vacillated wildly, first rising, then dropping, but ending the day not far from where it was prior to the fed announcement. at the end, it was a very tame reaction. at for volatility, the vix, or fear index, a measure of how much protection traders are seeking, went down and it went down dramatically, about 15%. indicating that bernanke is managing expectations in a way that is not causing the traders to run out and panic. it was an almost perfectly crafted statement that clearly said low rates were going to be around for a very long time, and second, it clearly said that there is no preset course for this taper. so if the economic data worsened the fed could stop the taper program or even reverse it. the fed threaded this needle as well as could be expected. larry, back to you. all right. as always, many thanks, cnbc's bob pisani. let's welcome theial star panel. frederick mish kin, currently economics professor at columbia. david malpass, and seema former president, cnbc market analyst kenny policy cari, and jim iuorio. i go to you first, rick. is this forward guidance as dovish as wall street is making it out? i guess that's what wall street liked today. is it that dovish? >> yes, i think it is. very clearly they want to differentiate between the two tools that are being used right now. in particular, the fed has problems with the asset purchase program, because it creates a balance sheet problem for the fed. so they wanted to basically pivot from using that kind of approach to one which focuses on something that's much more straightforward, which is to actually commit to keep interest rates low. >> in my lifetime, will they ever raise interest rates? >> we better hope so. >> they waived the unemployment targets, very interesting, not that the target is such a great thing, but a 6.5% unemployment targets, he basically trashed that, basically gave the message, you know what, guys? my predecessor janet yellen and i agree, we're not going to raise rates until we feel like it, and that's a long time from now. we have no benchmarks, no targets, no guideposts, no real rules, trust me. trust me. you were on the federal reserve board, so you're probably going to say yes. >> no, but i don't think that's the right characterization. what i love about being on with you is we can yell at each other. part of the fun. the federal reserve is very focused on inflation control, as it should be. the problem is that inflation is too low. so the -- when you think about focusing on unemployment, that may only make sense relative to what you think is the natural rate of unemployment, where inflation is not going to pick up with this fed, and janet would definitely pursue this, you want to push the envelope. we feel the natural rate may be lower than we expected, we see inflation being lower. >> just a second, close his eyes, go around and try to touch and find the right button to push. just sort of go around, i want to see where i am here, and then i'll know when to push the button. >> that's exactly what you have to do. you have to figure out what's going on. >> look, my first job, open market operations, i was a grunt. great stuff. >> but one last point. you do want to make sure you have an inflation goal and stick to it. >> dave, i'm a weird bird. i don't want the fed -- first of all, a minor point, i don't want the fed to reinflate the economy. if we could have zero inflation price stability that would be a great permanent tax cut. but i want to ask you what message you took away today. it's very interesting. "wall street journal," top of the website, fed begins easy money pullback. now, rick and bob pisani and others are going to say, no, the stock market thinks the fed will never tighten in our lifetime, so something is right here, and somebody is wrong. >> right, though it's complicated, i think what we can all agree on is the fed is mass i have beenly powerful. everybody is staring at them. my read of what they did today was finely taper. the market has this giant sigh of relief. we have that problem off our backs. people have been totally uncertain about when and if they would reduce their bond buying. so i don't think -- i don't agree that the fed has much of a crystal ball to know when they'll actually begin raising the fed. >> no, i'm saying they don't have a clue. that's my problem. >> i think we would be much better off if they had some basis point on the fed's fund rate. we would have the interbank markets working, the fed fund markets working. those markets have completely frozen up. >> don't get my wrong. my blind man's bluff here, i'm saying they don't have a clue. >> i'm not here to be fair. i'm here to be opinionated. i want to ask you this, in this spirit of unfairness, five years. we've all kind of been working together. jim iuorio has been with us the whole time, rick has been an adviser, dave has been an adviser to the show, with good advice. has the fed been pro-growth? has the policy worked? maybe wall street is cheering because the policy is coming to an end, but has this zero interest rates balance sheet building policy worked? >> i think absolutely not. the evidence is pretty clear. the growth rate for the country has been miserably blow. real incomes have been declining. medium incomes down, so the policy works for washington, d.c. it works for well-to-do people. they can borrow money against their assets, but the fed basically has subsidizing the risk at the expense of the general growth rate and the unemployment rate, so as a practical matter, if they had stopped buying bonds, the way we saw them tapering today. if they had done that two years ago. we would have had more employment -- >> i could couldn't disagree more. >> you disagree? go ahead. the issue is the alternative. you have to think about what -- what it would have been like if the fed didn't do this. i would say that the situation would have been much more. the problem here is not the fed can't get growth going. we have all these things. >> how did ithow did it make sense for a part of the u.s. government to own $4 million. it could be the right policy. >> but if the maybe the crown would have been -- >> i don't buy that at all. >> guy, guys. >> jim iuorio, i know up to weigh in with everything that david malpass has said, but let me ask you this. what is your reading on the following? long-term ten-year rates hardly moved today. on balance they went of a smidge, but that's all. number two, the price of gold went down, usually a sign of tightening, and -- in other words, i'm trying to figure out whether markets, particular ly r because the fed will stay easy for the rest of my lifetime. what's the answer? >> i think the currency market and gold market realize we're being gamed to a certain extent. he was going to taper today. in maybe when he talked about it, things got a bit out of hand, the only way the markets were going to digest this medicine is if it came with the sugarcoating of wildly -- and i believe that everything was on the up and up, and straightforward in what he was thinks, but if he was worried about balance sheet, he would cease -- so the think the currency markets got it rik. i think the -- the fact is we're in taper, in the world of taper. so i think that's what happened today. >> agreed. >> i want two quick comments on what iuorio said. you're first. i'm still baffled. is it because the markets rallied today because they think the fed is beginning the easy money pullback? that's the "wall street journal" website, or because the fed was totally dovish, as jim iuorio and kenny was suggesting? totally dovish, the forward guidance was dovish, the whole business about -- et cetera, et cetera, which is it? >> i think the market looks at action. the action we saw today was the tap taper. so that's good news for the country. we're going to get the fed off -- the thumbs -- >> each meeting. >> each meeting. >> so if it will be over by october? >> i think it will be over faster, because it will be so well received. think if they do in the next meeting $20 billion, the market is going to go up even more. >> but only if -- only if the macro data -- if the data starts to weaken again -- >> in your experience as a former governor, how dodds this? >> i think the real issue is they got it right this time. there was a problem in september where i would have preferred they taper then, with again very dovish expansioniaries policy. they blinked, because they were very concerned about what was going on in the markets. in this case, a lot of things have come together, particularly one of the elements that was very key was that they had a deal made in congress, so we won't go through the shenanigans. >> no shutdown. >> very important. paul ryan hero. >> what they wanted to do here, they did not want to have the situation where the fed policy created more uncertainty. this is a good outcome. they basically decreased uncertainty, also made it very clear that tapering does not mean a tightening of policy. we have more coming. you want to weigh in real yik? >> yes, it's happy that they started tapering, but i think it's much more the dovish comment. >> he sugar coated it, doing the right thing in a mechanical sense, helping the portfolio problem, which is gargantuan. no one in the world knows what they're going to do with this $4 try wrong balance, but he sugar coated it. we're going to get out of here. everybody please stay. we have much more to do. i want to know -- i'm probably going to iuorio first, was this really a 300-point day. did better nangies's comments really worth that. later in the show congressman paul ryan looks like a winner tonight. he'll join us in a few minutes to talk about restoring pension benefits for disabled vets, saving the gop from itself, and is he running for president in 2016? don't forget, free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity. i think we got some free market capitalism with a less interventionist fed, but i tell you folks, i'm not exactly sure. i'm kudlow. please stay with us. i'm groping around to try to you understand this whole story. americans take care of business. they always have. they always will. that's why you take charge of your future. your retirement. ♪ ameriprise advisors can help you like they've helped millions of others. listening, planning, working one on one. to help you retire your way... with confidence. that's what ameriprise financial does. that's what they can do with you. ameriprise financial. more within reach. that's what they can do with you. stick with innovation. stick with power. stick with technology. get the new flexcare platinum from philips sonicare and save now. philips sonicare. ♪ [ male announcer ] how could a luminous protein in jellyfish, impact life expectancy in the u.s., real estate in hong kong, and the optics industry in germany? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 70% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. welcome back. let's bring back our panel. i want to give you a whack at the ball. we don't have too much time in this segment. i think bernanke did what was predictable, but whatever, the point is, is this really a 300-point day? how do you trade the market from here? >> i think it is. think about it this way. for the last five years, we've argued this, but to some extent ufz to agree that much of the rally was related to the fed's accommodations and depressing rates. >> some of it. >> but what the market always would have rather done is really on genuine economic growth, which we have started to see over the last month if the punchbowl wasn't going to be taken away. he assured the markets that, yeah, the numbers are strong, but i won't be quick to pull the punch away. i think you have to pick your spots in the market. i was looking at financials today, because i think the yield curve is going to steepen. he wants to deep that -- >> he says he wants rates to go lower. >> a quick editorial comment. he said it again today, in the fo-1-c direct i have been, he said we'll continue to do this, because we want long rates to be low. >> i'm going to make an observation. the federal reserve does not control long-term interest rates. the market does. ken policari, was this worth 300 points today? >> i don't think so, jim. i'm opposed with you on this. i don't think it was worth 300 at all. when the news first came out, the market sold right off, right down to the 50-day. then when the clarification started coming out about sugar coating it and keeping rates low, that's when you saw the market find some support and rally right up to where? resistance, 1811, right up to resistance and back up. i think the market is overdone, i think the market will digest, come back in. i think we're stuck in this 1775, 1800 trading range out to the end of the year. you guys are setting too high a bar. this is washington, d.c. if they do something that's not a real screwup, we have to cheer. the fed did a decent job today. paul ryan did a decent job over the week, and small changes in the right direction. >> i'm going to put patty murray in that. she's a democrat. >> she got a phone call through to obama. great job, patty murray. >> did he call ryan? >> remember, the night he came out with the deal, he said he liked it. >> he didn't call. >> don't forget the stock market has rallied through a lot of colossal bumbles. >> but you're right, rick, in the directive and the press conference, the fed said headwinds are being removed. i would say a threatened shutdown would have amounted to a fiscal headwind. >> more important issue, the debt limit. >> which is coming. >> the fact that the heat has gone out -- >> we don't know that. i asked ryan about that. you're going to be around. i asked ryan specifically about what they want from a debt ceiling. he didn't really answer the question. we're going to move on. david, ken, jim iuorio, fred, rick, but now it looks like that top-level tech ceo meeting at the white house already getting results. after 9 ceos let president obama know just how angry they are about the n selfa snooping, it looks like the administration is recommending big changes to the surveillance techniques. cnbc's morgan brennan has that story and more headlines to come on "the kudlow report." ♪ [ male announcer ] if we could see energy... what would we see? ♪ the billions of gallons of fuel that get us to work. ♪ we'd see all the electricity flowing through the devices that connect us and teach us. ♪ we'd see that almost 100% of medical plastics are made from oil and natural gas. ♪ and an industry that supports almost 10 million american jobs. life takes energy. and no one applies more technology to produce american energy and refine it more efficiently than exxonmobil. because using energy responsibly has never been more important. energy lives here. ♪ [ male announcer ] they are a glowing example of what it means to be the best. and at this special time of year, they shine even brighter. come to the winter event and get the mercedes-benz you've always wished for, now for an exceptional price. [ santa ] ho, ho, ho, ho! [ male announcer ] lease the 2014 e350 for $579 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. silicon valley's top exec i was let president obama know how angry they were about the snooping and skies scandal. morgan brennan joins you with what looks like a quick response for the white house. is it true? >> thanks, larry. actually the white house has been working on revising the nsa program for a few months, but that meeting with tech leaders like apple's ceo tim cook and sheryl sandburg yesterday probably greased the bheels. a panel recommended that the nsa no longer keep a database, and also called for much more restrained when it comes to tracking foreign leaders, but these recommendations are just that. the obama administration said it will announce what changes it will actually make. also late today, a federal jury found former s.a.c. capital fund manager michael stein berg guilty. he faces a heavy prison term when sentenced this spring. legal experts believe this will increase pressure on matthew martoma, another former manager to finally cooperate with prosecutors and help them go after steven cohen. we know one of the winners of last night's massive $648 megamillions drawing, a stone mountain, georgia woman claimed the prize late today. she is described only as a married mom. her half of the cash option comes to $173 million before taxes. >> wow, many thanks, morgan brennan. just one thing quickly editorializing. i think the nsa's snooping and spying program needs to be changed, no question about that. if i'm not mistaken, and i could be wrong, this cannot be done as an arbitrary executive regulation, because it is part of the p.a.t.r.i.o.t. act, and it's cot filled in law. my guess is if you're going to change this, go back to congress, hold the hearings and hold votes. that's what i think. it may not happen quite so fast. on to the next. the budget deal has passed. paul ryan is a true winner tonight, but with that cut in pension benefits for disabled veterans, is ryan going to be a presidential candidate in 2016? congressman ryan joins us, next up on kudlow. ♪ ♪ i wanna spread a little love this year ♪ ♪ i wanna spread a little love and cheer ♪ [ male announcer ] this december, remember -- you can unwrap craftsmanship, inspiring capability, and some of the best offers of the year on our most versatile luxury utility vehicles at the lexus december to remember sales event. this is the pursuit of perfection. paul ryan is a big winner tonight. the senate late this afternoon passing the ryan/murray compromise budget frame works, sending it to the white house. despite passage, they'll still concerned how the bill will affect veteran, especially disabled veteran. that has some calling for a fix. this afternoon i had a chance to speak with chairman ryan. i asked him if he agreed with these comments from his counterpart patty murray. >> in a provision included in this dealing that mistakenly included disabled retires and survivors for changes in the pension growth will be addressed in short order following passage of this bill. >> yes, i do. that will be solved with the technical correction that will pass when congress comes back into session. we wanted to make sure that we kept military pension retirement better than their civilian counterparts, civilians who retired before 62 get no cost of living update at all. these military retires will still get a cost of living update. then they get the benefits recalculated when they turn 62, to make sure they got back what they had lost. in effect, build back the base of their pension. we owe so much to these men and women who fight for us, we wanted to make sure that they always have a better pension system than anybody else in government. we maintain that, and we have very modest reforms to help the pentagon with their very big budget problems. the pentagon has budget problems. we stopped the bleeding, we stopped the cuts, gave them mild reforms and two years before this actual provision kicks in place to give congress enough time to adjust it in another way if they want to. >> let me be clear -- you agree that disabled military vets will not affect the 1% call for reduction. >> that's correct. >> and another big event today, i'm sure you're aware of this. the federal reserved released its minutes. they're having a small taper, taking $10 billion off an $85 billion a month bond purchase, and i wanted to get your sense of that. the stock market is rallying big time. what do you think? >> well, i thought she should have started taper a lot time ago. i was not a fan of these later rounds of quantitative easing. i thought it was necessary in the beginning rounds. subsequent rounds i think did more harm than good. in the long run we'll know the answer. high time they started. they basically symbolic, because it's really not that big in the scheme of things. >> periodically as budget chair you've held hearings on the fed. let me ask you with the changing of the guard, does janet yellen have your confidence? >> i think we with ento a more dovish fed chair with janet yellen, ben ended up beinging a dove from my perspective. more of a deflation fighter instead of an inflation hawk. she's clearly in the dove category, a keynesian, so i don't expect much difference. >> you've raised the spending caps from sequestration, i think the number sums to $665 billion. what do you say to people, particularly conservatives, who are saying budget caps, spending caps, sequestration, which was the signature republican achievement is dead. is that true? are the caps dead? is the spending discipline dead? >> no, not at all, actually. the democrats came into these negotiations wanting to get rid of caps all together. we just got them to agree in the next year and a half to 70% of the caps, 70% of the sequester is still in place. the 30% sequester relief we gave, $63 billion of spending is paid for with $65 billion of entitlement changes. permanent saves that results in deficit reduction, so it exceeds the budget control acts requirement. so we actually go farther than the law requires. more to the point, larry, 92% of the sequester is left intact over the lifetime of the sequester with this agreement. what we would like from a fiscal conservative standpoint, we give release, because the defense hawks would not support where this was going to go. we did not have the votes to stick to that 967 number, so we got excess savings to make us have more deficit reduction, and we prevent two government shutdowns from happening, which we think is a good thing for lots of reasons, for the country, for certaintity. we want to focus on obamacare and tax reform, we want to focus on a pro-growth agenda, not two government shutdown scenarios, and we think this is that step in the right direction. >> the feud with the tea party, speaker boehner took a few whacks at the tea party. i've had many of them on "the kudlow report." they saided the full sequester, it's not an unreasonable request. how is your relationship to the tear party? what do you have to say to the tea party, which is kind of up in arms now, because it seems like a lot of republicans are attacking them? >> well, look i have nothing but good things to say about the tea party. we wouldn't be here wow the tear party. when i started the budgets i had eight willing to co-sponsor. because of tea parties, the grass-roots conservatives, i was able to pass it in 2011 with 223 votes. i was able to pass three budgets now because of the the grass-roots fiscal conservatives, which balances the budget and pays off the debt. there's no way i could have passed these kinds of budgets if it weren't for them. that's why i credit them with this great success. now, you can't let the perfect by the end of the good. in divided government, you have to look at the situation as it is, and not as you wish it would be and keep moving the ball in the right direction. i would prefer that these so-called feuds are in the family and not out in the public. >> you report to the "wall street journal" that you want to be the ways and means committee chairman in 2015. why? what's your agenda? >> look -- you know me, larry. there's nothing new here than what i've always said. this has been my career trajectory in the house, people ask me if i want to be speaker. i don't. and this is the next logical step, but what i'm focused on right now to be honest, is helping dave kemp with the ways and means committee. he's our quarterback, our chairman. my dream is the kemp/baucus which reduces taxes becomes law. i want to help dave do that. then after this election, after 2015, this is really no secret, this is not a newsworthy item, that is the natural progression of how i saw things. and there's nothing really new here. >> are you leaving the presidential door open for 2016? you just had a big poll in iowa. you had the best numbers of all the republican candies. a lot of people are saying, you know look how he negotiated this budget. he can get things done. you stopped the shutdown. some people are saying you saved the republican party from itself, because you stopped the shutdown. so is the door open for a 2016 presidential run, i ask you, paul ryan? >> well, i'll answer you, larry, that i'm going to make my mind up on that issue later on. i'm just trying to do my job right now. the people in wisconsin elected me to represent them. my colleagues asked me to chair the budget committee. i'm doing that job the best i can. i'm not going to let future ambition or career moves cloud my judgment today, and what i decided, my wife and i decided let's get through this session and i'll make my mind up down the road. i haven't foreclosed any opportunity, haven't made a decision one way or the other. right now i'm sincerely focused on doing my job. >> we've known each other a long time if i mae, happy holy merry christmas and new year's and thanks for coming on. >> awesome. merry christmas, larry. good to see you. all right. so i say paul is a winner tonight. paul ryan is always a winner, in my opinion. he may be a serious candidate for the white house. we'll see. we'll debate that with our expert panel and financial panel. stay with us. much more to do, happy, holy and merry. i say it to everybody out there. please stay with us. there's a saying around here, you stand behind what you say. around here you don't make excuses. you make commitments. and when you can't live up to them, you own up, and make it right. some people think the kind of accountability that thrives on so many streets in this country has gone missing in the places where it's needed most. but i know you'll still find it when you know where to look. anncr vo: introducing the schwab accountability guarantee. if you're not happy with one of our participating investment advisory services, we'll refund your program fee from the previous quarter. while, it's no guarantee against loss and other fees and expenses may still apply, we stand by our word. welcome back to "the kudlow report." we are live from cnbc headquarters. we just heard from wisconsin congressman paul ryan, fresh off his budget deal victory. joining me our expert political panel, blake zeff, kelly ann conway, president and ceo of the polling company and we stayed with rich mish kin. all right. straight politics, does the budget deal do the republicans any good? does it do ryan any good? can they patch up the difference with the tea party? >> yes to all of the above. i think the most important thing that chairman ryan said in the interview is he had to go with what he can get, that they have a majority in the house, they don't have -- they basically control one-sixth of the federal government. instead of him saying let's wait for three years until we turn the senate republican in 2014, he went ahead and did something with a very liberal democratic senator, patty murray, got it through, and by the way, larry, who can't love paul ryan? he looks like a lacrosse coach and thinks like a calculus profe professor. if you put him in the 2016 contenders -- and i take him at his word that he and john are thinking about this long and hard, but if you put him -- you put paul ryan and a couple other guys like him, and contrast him with hb and joe biden. i would like to know by then, with all these young people fleeing from obama, which party will look youthful? >> blake, i'm going to ask you, to answer the question, but bob woodward, famed journalist, "the washington post," on fox news sunday said the reason this deal got done is because barack obama was not part of t do you agree with that? >> i think it's possible. when barack obama is involved, it's -- >> it automatically goes sour. >> it's toxic with the republicans. >> toxic for obama, for democrat. >> whatever the opposite of catnip is, that's what it is for republicans. but to, you know, be straight here, i'm going to agree with kelly ann on what you said before. i think paul ryan did the republican party a great service by avoiding a shutdown. he was able to broker a deal that was pretty decent for republicans. democrats are not thrilled with this deal. they wish unemployment insurance was extended. >> in a sense, it's a very interesting point. i've written about this. he didn't really want to go there, i understand, but the democrats wanted to eliminate sequester, so they had to selling for 75%. the democrats wanted big tax increases for corporate loop holes, and the democrats at the last mint wanted unemployment compensation. schumer -- this is my take. i'm no expert about democrats. i think schumer blessed patty murray, encouraged her every step of the way. why? why did the democrats want this deal? i know why the republicans wanted it. why do you think the democrats wanted it? >> i think it's a better deal for the republicans, so i'm agreeing with you for the premise. the democrats want to show that the government can work, that feeds into their whole philosophy. so when you have dysfunction, that's bad for them in a more macro holistic sense. i think related to that, they don't like the sequester. if they can nip bits of that off, i think they're happy. i think they got outplayed by paul ryan, ultimately. >> they did get outplayed. the real answer is the democrats are in so much deep yogurt, they don't know how to dig themselves out, which is a health care, economic, and political catastrophe, all rolled into one, and the last thing the democrats want is to be blamed for a government shutdown. that's the answer he should have gin, but he didn't. i thought i would help him out. >> i appreciate that help. >> you and i get along so well. we're just like ham and eggs. rich, economically, because we talked a bit about this, with regard to the fed, this deal does a lot of good, opening a lot of space, does it not? tell me why. ivities well, in one sense it does, in another sense, not. it's small potatoes in terms of numbers, but at least the children stole throwing sand at each other. that was really critical. the bottom line is all this focus on short-run spending, that's not the big issue. if you look at what's going on happen in terms of the budgets, the amount of debt, that problem is really not going to start to become a serious one for about seven, eight year. what is key is to focus on the 800-pound gorilla in the room, which is entitlements. there was a bit of tweaking on that, which maybe opened it up. >> actually, they did. right. but at least we saw some adult behavior in congress. i think apart from anything else, that was very important. >> that i think is where the democrats got a plus out of this. >> i think patty murray handled herself well. >> the approval ratings, you know, are just awful. so here at least people sat down and said we can't keep doing that. >> bernanke did say today that fiscal headwinds are diminishing. real quick, what do you think he meant by that? >> the key thing is the uncertainty. that is when you're not going to invest. that's when people will be concerned about spenting more. the big issue is, are we going to be in this -- or are we going to get -- >> i know you want to weigh in on this. >> bhrks, he's pretty toxics. the 3ru68 rating, according to the mainstream media who endorsed him and carried his orders, by and large. >> why? >> because i think in 1014, he's going to have a raft of democrats retiring, they're done defending his agenda -- >> obamacare. that's the answer that blake should have given. i'm sorry, continue. >> the reason so many are upset, they didn't just listen to him say once or twice if you like your plan, keep your plan. they repeated it, they believed it. >> big mistake. >> when "the washington post" broke the story -- >> and everybody had tape recorders. >> they didn't know until everybody broke the story, until "the washington post" broke the story, that the political team overtook the policy team. but the political team won, because they were -- >> i'm up against a hard break, but in all respect, the last word. >> i appreciate that. there is one thing -- i appreciate all the respect [ laughter ] >> one way with paul ryan -- one of the things we have to acknowledge is paul ryan was not the winner. let's be serious. he did allow that military pension problem to slip through. >> he did. >> he was saying before today, he was saying this is an overly generous benefit and quickly changed his tune in that interview. >> he did. >> that was a mistake that never should have brought. he was brought to the woodshed. >> you're not wrong on that and patty murray helped him out. they always put fred in the teleprompter. it's rick. more to do. stick around. i have to look at the disaster of the day. i forgot about that. the insurance companies say they have major trouble complying with the white house request to make sure that people receive medical benefits. even if they missed the sign-up deadline. that's not the only retroactive hoops team that obama wants the insurance companies to do. jump through it? they don't want to jump there it. that story is next up. el completely forget the oba obamacare bomb of the day. impact life expectancy in the u.s., real estate in hong kong, and the optics industry in germany? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 70% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. with investment information, risks, fees and expenses but with less energy, moodiness, and a low sex drive,y first. i saw my doctor. a blood test showed it was low testosterone, not age. we talked about axiron. the only underarm low t treatment that can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting and increase in psa. ask your doctor about axiron. the on becama administration is asking for retroactive coverage. >> he's the founding editor. and welcome to the show. >> thank you. >> no payment, maybe no enrollment, because the connection between the rebel sites and insurance companies don't work. and not much if any personal security. the companies are have going to have to stay with it? why should they? >> you know, what we are seeing is a reaction to a set of concerns about what happens? january. they're concerned about going to a doctor's office and being told they're not covered. the address mrgs is trying to avoid the repeat of the politics in october and november and early january. they're trying to pass the blame to the insurance, and the insurance company saying it's impossible, and the administration saying we asked you, but you decided not to help the public. i don't think it's going to work -- >> but there a bribe here? i'm going to use it in sort of a literary terms. hhs administration, i think, is willing to pour in as much money as necessary, so the insurance companies will cover all these people who are signing up late and haven't paid. you'll just say he, here i am. will the administration bribe the insurance companies to do this. after january, it will be february, and after february, it will be march. >> the insurers are very heavily invested. i think the administration is betting that they're so heavily invested that they'll take whatever stepser necessary. they announced today that they would allow people -- but only if they enrolled by december 23rd, five days from now. >> that's monday. >> they're giving something, but not everything the administration wanted and not enough to avoid the problem that the administration is trying to avoid. >> quickly, what will this do? what does this mean? >> they believe the only people less popular than the congress and the president are insurance companies. that may be true, but they're addsing complexity to the confusion. the polls show that americans are confused, frustrated and exhausted by this process. they also don't think -- they suffer from information underload. people are also doing other things, it's the end of the year. it's not going to work. >> blake, this thing is not going away, it's just not. >> obamacare in general? >> the whole disaster. >> it's very messy and problematic. i think in the long term. it will -- if people -- remember when mitt romney said after he lost? he said people like to get gifts i think is the it were they use. i don't agree they're gifts. but what's. deep prayer and meditation. you all have been great. thank you very much. i'm larry kudlow. that's it for tonight's show. see you tomorrow evening. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] bob's heart attack didn't come with a warning. today his doctor has him on a bayer aspirin regimen to help reduce the risk of another one. if you've had a heart attack, be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. a confident retirement. those dreams, there's just no way we're going to let them die. ♪ like they helped millions of others. by listening. planning. working one on one. that's what ameriprise financial does. that's what they can do with you. that's how ameriprise puts more within reach. ♪ that's how ameriprise puts more within reach. so you can see like right here i can just... you know, check my policy here, add a car, ah speak to customer service, check on a claim...you know, all with the ah, tap of my geico app. oh, that's so cool. well, i would disagree with you but, ah, that would make me a liar. no dude, you're on the jumbotron! whoa. ah...yeah, pretty much walked into that one. geico anywhere anytime. just a tap away on the geico app. >> this is an "american greed" special presentation... america's criminal corporation. >> money, power, status, and influence. what fuels the mafia is, i think, what fuels almost any business. >> the american mafia has been going strong for more than 80 years. >> it's pure criminal capitalism at its best. >> they specialize in loan-sharking, extortion, embezzlement, and more. >> the ability to kill gives them a special power. >> murder is a negotiating tool of last resort. >> we just don't kill people for nothing. there's rules, and you got to follow the rules. this is why they call it the mafia.