whether to sign off on a deal to free some women and children held hostage by hamas. cnn correspondents are in the region and right here in washington covering this critical moment in the war, first i want to go to cnn s matthew chance in tel aviv, israel. what s the latest word on this deal and what it entails? reporter: well, that deal, pam, is still being debated by the israeli cabinet. they ve been meeting for hours, and it could be several hours still, we re told, before a decision is finally reached but the terms of that deal are pretty clear, it would involve the release of at least 50 israeli hostages from gaza by the palestinian group, hamas. over a period of between four and five days, so there would be about ten people every day being released. in the meantime, israel would pause its conflict, pause its hostilities there and allow for that hostage release to take place. the israelis have said they d be open to the possibility of a further pause as well as long as
you d expect there to be at least 33 or 33 plus and less games being played. i think it has two really important implications. one is that for most of our lives this law, this texas redistricting plan, couldn t have just gone into effect. because there was a voting rights act since 1965, which said if such a law is to take effect it first has to be precleared, given a thumbs up by either a court or by the justice department. because the supreme court recently struck that down, texas s war against democracy can go foo effect right away so merrick garland is saying wait a minute. we re going to court to challenge that. that is the first thing. the second interesting point is that directly intersects with the conversation you and i and others were having last week about abortion. because what the conservatives there were saying, hey, this should be up to the people to decide. courts can t take a decision about whether to have choice or not have choice away from the
now that expiration date means the president has the upper hand. it s clear with from what they were saying today, the principle has been won. taxes are going up on the wealthy. what we are just fighting about now is the price and the form of the tax increase. now, the formatters i think, and the president would simply like the clinton rates to come foo effect. the republicans say we can get the money we need from tax reform. i m a little skeptical of that. and it goes back to where you started. if he does nothing, the original clinton rates come back and they get blamed for raising middle class taxes. i think the politics runs mostly one way which hasn t happened often in washington over the last couple of years. michelle, that s the political side of it. but on the absolute every day living side of it, why would they not want to just do what the senators have already done, and that is to continue the tax cuts for the middle class and the working class who need it