Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Interview with Paul Begala, John Fund

Aired December 17, 2001 - 08:38   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to our "Sound off" segment this morning. What does America need more for Christmas? To get of Osama bin Laden or an economic stimulus package. While the nation stands united in the war on terror, there is deep division in Washington on a plan to stimulate the economy. Now the House has approved a bill. It is currently stalled in the Senate.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D-SD), MAJORITY LEADER: What this is about in large measure, is stimulating the economy by helping one million workers who are unemployed today. A million workers whose families have no prospect of jobs in the near future.

REP. DICK ARMEY (R), TEXAS: I don't think they'll put people back to work with the things they want to do. But we have tried to give them what they feel like they need.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: Well the clock is ticking. Can Congress deliver a compromise to the President by week's end, which is what he wants. Joining us now, Paul Begala former advisor to President Bill Clinton, and John Fund of the "Wall Street Journal". Glad to have both of you with us this morning. Good morning.

John I'm going to start with you this morning. We just saw those faultlines clearly drawn when we listened to Mr. Daschle and Mr. Armey. What are the chances of this package being passed by week's end?

JOHN FUND, "WALL STREET JOURNAL": Not good. I think that right now both sides are just scurrying for political advantage, to make sure that neither is really blamed for killing the stimulus package. What's in the stimulus package right now, I don't think would do a whole lot to improve the economy. What you really should do is accelerate the tax cuts that have already been planned. And the way to get this economy moving is not just to help people who are unemployed.

Of course that can be done, but also to make sure that there are jobs that they can step into after a few months. And I think we are seeing the beginnings of an economic recovery. We could accelerate that with more tax cuts, but Mr. Daschle is playing Lucy with Charlie Brown with the football. Every time the President says I'll give you something, he takes the football away, and the stimulus package compromise goes poof.

ZAHN: Yeah, well what about that, Paul? I mean, Mr. Daschle has been criticized -- the "Wall Street Journal" took him on again this morning. And basically saying, he's protecting his hind. And he's just looking at the next election, and he might have presidential aspirations himself.

PAUL BEGALA, FORMER CLINTON ADVISOR: Well, what we need is presidential leadership. Tom Daschle, for example, went along with the Republican idea to accelerate one of those tax cuts. A 27 percent tax rate, the Republicans want to reduce it to 25. Daschle said, well let's split the difference and take it to 26. So, that's moving half way. The Republicans move not at all. What we need here is presidential leadership. George W. Bush to sit down with these folks, and to hammer out the deal.

Here's the sticking point and this is why we won't get a deal this week. The Republicans and Bush have this religious commitment to giving the biggest corporations in this country a 15-year retroactive rebate. It is an obscenity. Can you imagine, they want the biggest corporate donors to the Republican party, the biggest corporations in America to get a refund on every penny of tax they paid for the last 15 years.

Now we're not giving rebates to active-duty military; we're not giving rebates to cops and firefighters. We're not giving rebates to the other heroes who are doing so much for our country. But, we're telling big corporations they should get 15 years of their taxes back? It's obscene.

ZAHN: All right, John you want to defend that?

FUND: That was part of the House bill. I doubt that would have been part of any stimulus package at the final moment. The White House certainly knows this is politically toxic. The real problem is Senator Daschle said, that he had to get agreement from two-thirds of his Democratic caucus for any stimulus package.

That means, Paula, that literally only 17 members of the United States Senate could veto anything. And 17 members of the United States Senate, including Paul Wellstone would veto anything resembling a taxcut. The bottom line is Daschle set down conditions that no one could meet. And 17 members - I think that is far less than a majority. I don't think 17 members should veto something that the American people need to improve the economy.

ZAHN: All right, but John you heard what Paul just said. He said that he does believe that Daschle has gone more than half way here. I'm sure that's not your characterization.

FUND: Well, after the White House conceded a great deal. Remember, there are about three or four different rate cuts. Daschle agreed that he might scale back one, or accelerate one of those tax cuts by one percentage point. I don't call that a compromise. I call that giving an inch when Bush has already given a foot.

ZAHN: Paul?

BEGALA: Well, again, as I said, the truth is that the tax rate is at 27. Bush wants it at 25, Daschle said, let's split the difference and go to 26. But the sticking point is this, you know corporate taxcuts that are in - Democrats have some taxcuts for business and so did the Republicans. The difference is what will actually stimulate the economy. And even John Fund, who I admire his candor, cannot defend giving corporations back 15 years of their taxes. And by the way ...

FUND: But that's not in the final compromise, Paul.

BEGALA: One of the biggest beneficiaries of this, John, is Enron which just ripped off about 21,000 people out of their life savings and out of their jobs. But, happens to be the single largest donor to George W. Bush and the Republicans ...

ZAHN: But Paul, you heard what John said, he said that's not in the final version of the bill.

BEGALA: It is. It is, in the version that is on the table right now. He said it is unlikely to be in the final version because it is so indefensible. But it is today in the plan that the House Republicans passed through the Congress, in the plan that Bush is fighting for today. This is why Tom Daschle and the Democrats are raising cane, and they should. We don't need to be giving Enron $254 million of yours and my tax money. That's not going to stimulate the economy. We've got a million people who have lost their jobs since September 11th, 8 million people out of work in the Bush recession all together. Let's give them some cash in their pockets for the holidays, so we can stimulate the economy.

ZAHN: Well there is some loaded comments there, John. You want to take those apart one by one? You want to start with the Bush recession for starters ...

FUND: Enron - he can call it anything he wants, the slowdown began in the summer of 2000. I don't think we should be assigning blame, I think we should be figuring out how to get some progress. And frankly allowing 17 senators, the 17 most liberal senators, a veto power over the final stimulus package is designed to make sure there is no stimulus package. So Tom Daschle can go and continue to call it the Bush recession. This is all about political advantage on both sides now. And I think it is a shame. Because there are about 300,000 people who could get their jobs back if we passed a bill that really meant something.

ZAHN: Let's move on to the whole issue of what the President has to do to protect his political turf. We have seen that plan that the Democrats came up with, trying to make allowances for the fact that maybe the President can't concentrate on the economy maybe now as much as he'd like to because of the war on terror. What about factoring that into the equation, John? FUND: Well we have a back page piece in the "Wall Street Journal" today which explains that the President is going to become very much engaged now that the war is entering a new phase. And he is going to go front and center on his domestic agenda, which includes by the way an energy package which has been tied up in the Senate. We import a million barrels a day from Iraq which we may have to go into conflict with in the next few months.

Yet at the same time, legitimate domestic energy needs, that we could get, for example in Alaska, are being bottled up. Even though a majority of the Senate supports it. It's yet another example of Daschle's obstructionism. He apparently doesn't mind that we import 1 million barrels a day of oil from Iraq.

ZAHN: All right, I'm going to give you the final word here. Paul, this morning, the "Wall Street Journal" - over the last three weeks - has hit Tom Daschle pretty hard for what they say is nothing more than political maneuvering towards an end goal in 2004. Final thoughts on that?

BEGALA: Well this is something that the "Wall Street Journal" Editorial Page specializes, it's called the politics of personal destruction. They want to demonize Tom Daschle. And the truth is, he is simply trying to find a middle ground. He is as moderate and decent a person as there is in the Congress. So much so, that no one, less than George W. Bush gave him a big hug on the floor of the Congress just a few weeks ago. But they can't defend the indefensible. They can't defend giving Enron, Exxon, IBM, General Electric billions of dollars of our tax money when there is a recession on.

We are funding 15 years of their taxes, and so what do they do? They attack a good guy like Daschle. The truth is, Daschle has passed more of Bush's agenda than any Republican would have ever passed, if Al Gore - who actually won the election - had been inaugurated. So I think the "Wall Street Journal" needs to try to defend the substance of their Republican taxcut, instead of attacks on Tom Daschle.

ZAHN: All right, I saw John just roll his eyes when you talked about that hug on the floor. John you want to give me about a 5-second parting thought? Then I've got to move on.

FUND: Well these are the same members of Congress who always talk about their esteemed and dear colleague, while at the same time they are looking for a knife to stab each other in the back. I mean, you can't take any of that seriously.

ZAHN: All right, gentlemen, we're going to have to leave it there. This morning John Fund, Paul Begala, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com