0 sector job growth without the stimulus, unemployment was projected to hit 12% in 2010. only three republican lawmakers supported the stimulus. but as the president points out, a whole lot of them enjoyed the benefits. >> and i know you want these job-creating projects in your district. i've seen all those ribbon cuttings. >> by 2010, there were 110 gop lawmakers who lobbied for stimulus money for their home states. all of these lawmakers voted to kill the bill. the stimulus worked. but republicans just can't shake their demand for more cuts in government spending. in fact, republicans are committed to making sure devastating cuts are going to kick in on march 1st. now these cuts are called the government sequester, and it would hit the middle class and the poor the hardest. no doubt about it. 70,000 children will be kicked off headstart education programs. 109 -- actually, $902 million in aren't we really headed right down this way when it comes to government spending? >> well, we certainly are with this sequester, which will lead to a lot of loss of jobs. it will have a very negative effect on the economy. if you're running a business and you have to fly salespeople or engineers around the country, you're going to discover with 4,000 fewer air traffic controllers, that plane may not get there. all across the economy, this is going to be a terrible problem because this is government spending, ed, that allows the private sector to prosper and to grow. it's commonwealth spending for common good. >> is there any way to suggest that the stimulus did not help pull us out of a recession? had we not done it, where would we be? >> had we not done it we would be in a terrible disaster. we lost trillions of dollars of wealth, and yet we didn't have rampant homelessness. why? because the stimulus included money to make sure that people who were going to lose their homes, especially with children, didn't end up on the streets. that is certainly not good. >> if we go down the road with the sequester, and the cuts kick in, i mean, are we going to go right back into a recession? and how fast would it happen? >> i think you'd see very quick effects, ed. and let's focus on one piece of this. 600,000 pregnant women and mothers of small children will be cut from the women, infants, and nutrition program. the republicans are always tells us about their reverence for life. really? they're going to have 600,000 poor women and children not have proper food. there is a life-time effect on development, especially mental development if you don't have proper nutrition in the womb and when you're an infant. but they are determined to cut those poor children who are helpless out of good nutrition. >> david cay johnston, stay with us, please. let's bring in sam stein of the "huffington post." also with us tonight eugene robinson, with the "washington post." eugene, what about this politically? if these cuts kick in, and as they follow the plan that barrasso has put out there and says look, these cuts are going to go in and tax increases aren't going to happen, who is going to pay the price politically? >> the republicans are going to pay the price. when you go through something like this or go through a government shutdown which we may have because of the continuing resolution still being up in the air -- look, history tells us that the president comes out smelling better than congress does. and with congress' approval rating already down to friends and family, they're certainly going to lose more if they actually go through with the sequester. but i think they just can't figure a way to keep themselves from going through this, or they haven't figured through with this, or they haven't figured it out yet. >> sam, if there are senators obviously like rand paul of kentucky who are saying hey, bring on the sequester. are republican leaders at the mercy of just a few tea partiers on this issue? i mean, they've been begging for spending cuts. now they have it. now they're going to take the big bite. they know what it's going to do to the economy and then they can blame president obama. >> i think you're right. but i also think the first chapter of this was the fiscal cliff deal where the party had to swallow, the republican party had to swallow about $600 billion in revenue increases. premised on that was the promise down the road they were going to cut. and the first thing that came up with the sequestration, which satisfied the very basic need to cut government spending, regardless of how it was done or how blunt the impact would be. now, there are some in the party, including john mccain who say this is insane, we should put some tax loophole closures on the table in exchange for getting rid of these defense cuts. but their voices aren't getting through to leadership right now. so what you have is a republican party that is welcoming sequestration even though six, eight months ago they were worrying about it. >> how can they get away with it and do the math on it to keep this economy going? >> this is not a party that >> the focus for the president, the lens through which he is going to see the fight is the same lens he has seen each of the fight. what is the impact on middle class families and the kinds of investments that we expect for the economy to grow from the middle out. >> eugene, how can the republicans avoid being the bad guy against the middle class here? i think this is all part of the republican obstruction plan. we saw a record number of filibusters in the last session of the congress come in the senate. and now what we're seeing come from the house. first of all, we're not going to work. second we're going to let the sequester ride this thing out and blame president obama. that appears to be the plan right now. >> well if this is a plan, they need better planning. they've done the obstruction number before, and it hasn't worked out very well for them. the real issue i think is the internal dynamics within the republican party, the fact that there are sensible members of party who realize you can't cut right now or else you go back into recession. but they have to deal with the tea party wing. and they have to deal with the part that is angry that feels they got rolled in the fiscal cliff negotiation and wants to roll the president, damn the cost. >> sam, would the congress let this sequester kick in and then come back and try to pass something their way? what do you think, just to save face? >> that might be the case. i did an interview with representative jim miranda of west virginia a couple of weeks ago where he predicted that is the outcome. where you do hit sequestration there is an obvious and tangible economic blowback because of it. and congress sort of gets scared into acting, finding a replacement. the concern i'm hearing now from democrats is that sequestration will happen, and then republicans will introduce a bill to basically tack back the defense cuts portion of it and leave all the social safety programs untouched. and what you end up having there is you force democrats to have to vote against additional defense spending in which they can be labeled soft on defense if they vote no. >> david, what is the worst case scenario for the economy? $85 billion in cuts between now and september 30th would be a real hatchet job on the economy. what would be the worst case scenario? >> well, you're going to see unemployment tick up. now the administration is going to try every way it can to not have that happen. but you're going to see employers not hiring. you're going to see cutbacks in investment and you will see the difference very soon and don't forget all the seniors who won't get meals, who are locked in, the mentally ill who will not get treatment and be cut from the rolls. >> david cay johnston, sam stein, eugene robinson, thank you very much. share your thoughts with us on twitter at ed show. we always want to know what you think. colonel lawrence wilkerson is here to separate fact from fiction. stay with us. reak and they're already bored. hmm, we need a new game. ♪ that'll save the day. ♪ so will bounty select-a-size. it's the smaller powerful sheet. the only one with trap + lock technology. look! one select-a-size sheet of bounty is 50% more absorbent than a full size sheet of the leading ordinary brand. use less. with the small but powerful picker upper, bounty select-a-size. ♪ they hatin' ♪ patrolling they tryin' to catch me ridin' dirty ♪ ♪ tryin' to catch me ridin' dirty ♪ ♪ tryin' to -- [ woman ] hi there. why do we always have to take your mom's car? [ male announcer ] the security of an iihs top safety pick, the 2013 volkswagen tiguan. that's the power of german engineering. right now lease a 2013 tiguan for $219 a month. ♪