administration for this prrmt. experiment. so there's big government behind romney care, not as much as obama care but a heck of a lot more than your campaign has admitted. >> big government, high cost. two of gingrich's favorite slams on the romney reforms. he also likes to hammer the centerpiece of the massachusetts law, which was the individual mandate that requires all residents above a certain income level to buy health insurance or pay a fine. the idea is controversial, but not so long ago many conservatives, including gingrich, supported the idea. here's what he wrote in april of 2006 in a newsletter called "newt notes." this was just after massachusetts enacted its health care law. "the most exciting development wrote, is what is happening in massachusetts. the health bill signed into law this month has tremendous potential to effect major change in the american health care system. help went on to say, we agree entirely with governor romney and massachusetts legislators that our goal should be 100% insurance coverage for all americans. what's more, gingrich applauded the individual mandate in the law. quote, we also believe strongly, he wrote, that personal responsibility is vital to creating a 21st century intelligent health system. individuals who can afford to purchase health insurance and simply choose not to place an unnecessary burden on a system that's on the verge of collapse. these free-riders undermine the entire health system by placing the onus of responsibility on taxpayers. now gingrich did include some caveats about the massachusetts law and suggested some tweaks to the nuts and bolts, but he gave its principles a glowing thumbs up. this wasn't a new position from him, either. here's what he said on "meet the press" back in 1993. >> i am for people, individuals, exactly like automobile insurance, individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance. i'm prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals on a sliding scale a government subsidy so to ensure that everyone as individuals have health insurance. >> that was in 1993. here he is in 2008 still supporting in the bluntest of language individual mandates. >> got to require everybody to either have insurance or to post a bond. but the fastest growing section of the uninsured is people over $75,000 income who are making a calculated gamble that if they get sick, you'll take care of them. and i think that's just immoral. >> immoral, he said. now, the gingrich newsletter that surfaced from 2006 is giving his opponents new ammunition with the iowa caucuses just a few weeks away. a gingrich spokesperson said and i quote, this is old news that has been covered already. newt previously supported a mandate for health insurance and changed his mind after seeing its effects. the real question is why mitt the massachusetts moderate won't admit that health insurance mandates don't work. keeping them honest, though just this past may after entering the republican race, gingrich was still backing the idea of an individual mandate. here's what he said on "meet the press." >> i agree that all of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care. there are ways that do it that make most libertarians happy. i've said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you have health insurance or post a bond or you indicate that you're going to be held accountable. >> but that is the individual mandate, is it not? >> that's a variation. >> that was in may, whatever made him change his mind on the issue wasn't on his radar yet. by october he was singing a much different tune, scrambling to distance himself from the very idea he talked about. >> actually we got the idea of an individual mandate from you. >> that's not true. you got it from the heritage foundation. >> yeah, we got it from you. you got it from the heritage foundation and from you. >> wait a second. you said it's not true. you did not get that from me. you got from it the heritage foundation. >> and you've never supported -- >> i agree with them. i'm just saying to this audience right now plain wasn't true. it's not where you got it from. >> and you supported in the past an individual mandate? >> i absolutely did with the heritage foundation against hillary care. >> you did support an individual mandate? >> okay. >> that's what i'm saying. we got the idea from you and the heritage foundation. >> okay. a little broader. >> how does gingrich explain for supporting individual mandates then doing a 180? in today's statement a spokesman said that gingrich changed his mind. earlier this month in "the situation room" gingrich called it a mistake. >> in retrospect, we were wrong because what happens, once you got to a mandate, you've turned so much power over to the government that the politicians rather than the doctors end up defining health care. and so it was a mistake. >> we invited gingrich to be on the program tonight, he declined, said he didn't have time. in iowa, this is crunch time for the republican presidential contenders. wolf blitzer is there. he talked to newt gingrich earlier today in "the situation room." he joins me now. gingrich spent today playing a bit of defense on this, didn't he, wolf? >> he did. he realizes that there seems to be a contradiction. he acknowledges it. he says thatis position has changed. when i pointed out to him that even this year he seemed to be expressing some support for a health care mandate, if you will, he offered this exchange with me. listen to this. i think it was in may you seemed to still at that time be supporting some form of mandate. >> notice the phrase here. i think it would be great to find a way to get every american covered. i think that would be better for the country. can you do that without a mandate? and part of what john goodman does is he creates a pool so if you don't want to buy insurance, you're not compelled to. your share of the tax break would go into a charity pool. if something happens to you, the charity pool takes care of you. and there are ways to do it that you don't infringe on constitutional freedom. >> still, anderson, there's no doubt this is a sensitive issue for newt gingrich right now because he sees his position over the years, going back as you point out into the early '90s when he was opposed to hillary clinton's health care plan and at the time he supported mandates, just as the heritage foundation did, there's no doubt his position has changed over the years. most reapply. so it's a sensitive subject, especially out here on the campaign trail in iowa where president obama's health care law is not very popular with these conservative republican caucus goers. >> not what he wants to spend the day talking about so close to the caucuses. he also made some interesting comments today in your interview about another one of his republican rivals. i want to show our viewers what he had to say. take a look. >> you look at ron paul's total record of systemic avoidance of reality and you look at his newsletters and then you look at his ads, his ads are about as accurate as his newsletters. >> if he were to get the republican nomination -- >> he won't. >> let's say he were. could you vote for him? >> no. i think ron paul's views are totally outside the mainstream of virtually every decent american. >> pretty tough stuff saying he would not under any circumstances vote for ron paul if he did in fact get the nomination. his he still -- is gingrich still saying that he is running a positive campaign taking the high road, as he's saying that these are just understandable responses to attacks by ron paul in this case? >> he was very tough on ron paul today. i was surprised as tough as he was. i think he's the first republican candidate to flatly say he would not be able to vote for ron paul if ron paul were to get the republican nomination. ron paul is doing very well here in iowa. he might win the iowa caucus a week from today. so i was surprised by that. he'll say he's just reporting the facts, he's just learning more about ron paul, and he's not going to negative, just being honest about it. that he's being above board. he's getting tougher. he's getting hammered. you are here in iowa even a day or two, you see the ads on television, the negative attacks on newt gingrich never stop from the other campaigners. now he's beginning to feel it and he's responding. he was pretty tough on mitt romney today though not as tough as he was on ron paul. >> wolf, great interview today. let's bring in our panel, democratic strategist hilary rosen and republican strategist and former gingrich spokesman rich galen. how big of an issue were these memos where newt gingrich complimented romney's plan back in massachusetts? >> very big. much bigger than the court filings on his divorce and that kind of business. because it's very difficult for a candidate on the road, one of his opponents, to talk about that. this is right in everybody's wheelhouse on the end of the pond, the conservative end of the pond, that newt is swimming in along with perry and bachmann and santorum and, to some extent, paul. so they -- i expect that they will hammer him -- forget about the ads. they'll take this to every pizza place in iowa. >> but, rich, what's wrong -- let me just push back on that. what's wrong with him saying, look, i thought it was a good idea. we saw how it actually got implemented, and i don't believe in it anymore, i changed my mind. isn't that kind of refreshing as opposed to doing what a lot of candidates seem to do, which is say that it's not actually changing their mind and go through laborious explanations why it's not? >> it would be refreshing were it also being carried by -- or parried by his campaign of his campaign doing nanny nanny boo boo by calling mitt romney names. that's just childish. but i mean, on the one hand his campaign is trying to hammer romney for saying essentially what you just said, that he tried it and he found it didn't work. and on the other side saying, well, because i'm newt gingrich, when i change my mind it's because i'm smart and i figure it out. >> hilary, do you agree it's a big deal for gingrich? >> i think it is a big deal for gingrich for some of the reasons that rich said, but also because he is trying to convince people that mitt romney is not trustworthy. every time he tries to do that, something else comes out where he himself has switched his position to the point where you really never know what's going to come out of his mouth. you cannot be sort of the slow, steady, conservative alternative to mitt romney if you have all of the same faults that mitt romney has only you just have them from the -- a more conservative perspective. so you know, i think that gingrich's only shot here is to really wound romney in a fundamental way, but the more that this stuff comes out about him, the tougher it is. it is so important that people understand that what's happening in this republican primary is that these guys are freaking out about the fact that, oh, my god, we might get caught actually wanting to help americans have health insurance! you know? hello? most people actually want health insurance. how dare they go out acting like this is the worst thing that could ever possibly happen. and i think that when it comes to a general election, president obama, it doesn't matter if it's newt gingrich or mitt romney, he's going to wipe the floor with them because actually people want health care. >> i want to watch that floor wiping when we get there, but let me say, anderson, i just turned 65 so i'm on medicare, so i'm out of this conversation. >> you are. you're protected. >> hilary, it's not just they're not saying people shouldn't have health insurance or health care, it's a question of what the government role in it should be. >> well, it is. and newt gingrich stepped right in it because he used to -- the republican conservative line is that these are all free marketeers, but he unveiled today the real reason that it's important to have more universal coverage because he actually called them free-riders, people who aren't willing to pay into a system for health care or aren't willing to live with some mandates. they're free-riders, because, as we all know, the system ends up paying for everybody and those who don't participate, you know, get the biggest benefit. >> i want to ask you just before our show tonight, moments before our show tonight, rick perry, he's always said he's pro-life except in cases of rape or incest or the health of the mother. he just told an eye crowd this evening he now opposes abortion in all of those cases as well. >> he didn't say life of the mother. he said the first two. >> the first two. what do you make of that? >> well, romney -- i'm sorry -- perry. it was rick perry, yeah. he's been running ads claiming himself to be the purest of the evangelical conservatives in the race, and maybe he is. and this is just another step along that way. the conservative side of the equation in iowa is being split and split and split. and i think romney may be making a little headway. i think santorum's making a lot of headway. i don't think bachmann's going to do much. but every one of those votes, but every time somebody decides they want to go to perry or a santorum, that comes right out of newt's hide. and i think that's one of the reasons we're seeing this drop. perry is not going to be the nominee either. so the fact that this is probably playing better in texas than it is in southeastern -- >> that's perry's last stand. >> how does gingrich have to do in iowa, hillary? >> you know he has to do well. he doesn't have to win, but he has to at least come in i think second to stay in this. but you know, we're going to go into new hampshire in a week, after iowa, then south carolina a week later, florida a week after that. gingrich is doing very well in south carolina and florida right now. but the primaries tend to have a sort of momentum factor. and people had a lot of expectations for gingrich essentially as the viable anti-romney candidate. if ron paul ends up winning iowa, i frankly think that iowa gets dismissed and it all just moves to the next three caucuses. to really determine it. >> we'll be there again in four years, i think, because it's just what we do. but this reminds me very much of the thompson campaign four years ago, hilary, of which i was a member, where we came in third just barely beating out john mccain. it wasn't quite bad enough to drop out right then, which would have made life easier. we skipped new hampshire and went right to south carolina. we didn't do as well there as we wanted. so that was the end of it for us. i would suspect that's the route that gingrich might take as well. >> gingrich is raising a lot of money right now and he has money. obviously mitt romney has money. i think coming out of iowa, anderson, the real question is what happens to rick perry, what happens to rick santorum? those are candidates that might have still some extra support, still some extra resources and a base to deliver to either gingrich or romney. >> iowa doesn't identify winners, but it does identify losers. >> thank for being honest. >> the iowa caucus will be one week from today. our coverage that night begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern. that's january 3rd. let us know what you think of facebook, google plus. add us to your circles. i'll be tweeting tonight. just ahead, you may know that tens of thousands of americans were sterilized without their consent here in the united states back in the 20th century. certainly a shameful fact of our history. we look at something you may not know, the refusal by states to compensate those victims. elizabeth cohen interviews victims of this unimaginable horror. >> the state of south carolina has said they're sorry. is that enough? >> no. >> more on his story tonight. also tonight a deadly blaze left experienced firefighters shaken. they could not save three little girls or their grand parents from the flames. what caused that fire. let's check in with isha. what are you following? >> thousands of anti-government protesters took to the streets again today in the volatile city of homs. eyewitnesses said security forces fired into the crowd. opposition groups said more than three dozen people were killed across the country. this, despite the arrival of arab league monitors. that and much more when "360" that and much more when "360" continues. st fi years' tax returns. high school report cards. and i'm gonna need to see a receipt for that watch you're wearing. you know, you really should provide us with a checklist of documents we're gonna need up front. who do you think i am? quicken loans? at quicken loans, we provide a checklist of the mortgage documents you'll need up front. it helps keep you in the know every step of the way. one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. what's going on? we ordered a gift online and we really need to do something with it... i'm just not sure what... what is it? oh just return it. returning gifts is easier than ever with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service. if it fits, it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. plus i can pick it up for free. perfect because we have to get that outta this house. c'mon, it's not that... gahh, oh yeah that's gotta go... priority mail flat rate shipping starts at just $4.95. only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship and return. so i used my citi thank you card to pick up some accessories. a new belt. some nylons. and what girl wouldn't need new shoes? we talked about getting a diamond. but with all the thank you points i've been earning... ♪ ...i flew us to the rock i really had in mind. ♪ [ male announcer ] the citi thank you card. earn points you can use for travel on any airline, with no blackout dates. tonight a report on a really disturbing chapter in our history, one that's a lot more recent than you might think. did you know that at one point in the united states, more than half the states had four sterilization laws. we're talking about eugenic, a word that is typically associated with nazi germany. but a large eugenics movement in america before and after world war ii. sterilizations continued in some states into the 1970s. tens of thousands of americans who were deemed unfit to reproduce were operated on without their will or their consent. some of those victims are still alive today and many want justice. so far all they've gotten is a handful of official apologies. one state, north carolina, promised nearly a decade teague compensate victims. but we find they're still waiting. elizabeth cohen has more. >> at the time, i couldn't do nothing about it. >> reporter: october 22, 1968. charles holt was 19 at the time, living in an institution for boys in buttner, north carolina, when his life was drastically changed, without his consent. >> they sent me to the hospital and they put me in a room and she gave me gas and i just went off to sleep. then when i woke up finally, i noticed something was wrong. and they told me what they done. and i was -- i wasn't happy. >> reporter: what they had done was surgery, a vasectomy to make him sterile. but why? it turns out the order came from the state, which said he was feeble-minded and unworthy of having children. >> i wanted to be just like any other young man, to try to have a family, have some kids that i could call my own. it's sad that it happened that way. >> reporter: charles holt wasn't alone. in fact, his story is only one representing a shameful chapter in american history. from 1907 through the 1970s more than 60,000 americans were sterilized because they had, quote, unfit human traits. it was called eugenics. the goal -- breed out those considered to be a burden on the rest of society and make, quote, better huma