Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

Will Middle East Conflict Spread?; Do New Tax Codes Benefit Citizens?

Aired April 15, 2002 - 15:00   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.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST: Hello, everybody. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.

Are you a little unnerved by the events in the Middle East? Are you afraid the conflict is going to spread? We are going to find out how those meetings between Secretary of State Colin Powell and the leaders of Lebanon and Syria are working out. Also, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon just told CNN's Wolf Blitzer he can't reach a peace deal with Yasser Arafat. We have reaction to that. And what do you think, can either side, Israel or the Palestinians, back down from the showdown? How do the personalities of Sharon and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat play into the crisis? Call me with your thoughts, 1-800-310-4CNN or e-mail talkback@cnn.com.

Now, let's take a look at what's else we have for you today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(voice-over): A familiar face is back in the spotlight.

AL GORE, FORMER U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: You know, I may have been using my razor lately, but they have been using a meat cleaver on the priorities that are important for the American people.

NEVILLE: Al Gore says he's tired of what he calls the right-wing sidewind (ph). But are Democrats tired of Gore?

Also, equal under the law, but not equal under the tax code.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We must turn to our Constitution. We must repeal the 16th Amendment, eliminate this invasive personal income tax.

NEVILLE: Protest all you want, but the filing deadline is just hours away. Do the new tax codes benefit you?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(on camera): OK, let's start in the Middle East, where about 30 minutes ago, Wolf Blitzer wrapped up an interview with Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Mr. Sharon told Wolf there's no way to reach a peace agreement with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. I want to you take a listen to this. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ARIEL SHARON, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: I believe that the American administration, which we really appreciate and keep close contact, not saying that they have -- I think that they know our thought well. But they have other problems here in the Arab world, problems which they would like -- which makes it harder for them. Therefore, I (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the terror to Arafat. But if I can express my position about that, with him, I don't think it will be any possibility to reach peace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEVILLE: Now, Mr. Sharon did suggest there might be other people he could come to an agreement with, but didn't specify who they might be. Let's get some reaction to the interview now. Our Bill Hemmer joins us from Jerusalem. Bill, thanks for joining us, first of all. And what is the reaction to Mr. Sharon's statements to Wolf Blitzer?

BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, he indicated that the military would be on the move, in a sense, would withdraw from just about everywhere with the exception of Ramallah and Bethlehem. Bethlehem, the standoff continues at the Church of the Nativity. In Ramallah, you have Yasser Arafat's compound still surrounded.

And what the prime minister said, Arthel, is that the military, within a week, would withdraw from certain areas to a certain distance, stop and wait, he seemed to suggest, and make sure that the situation stayed quiet. If it did stay quiet, he told Wolf that he would draw even further back from that.

Now, what Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat quickly after that interview -- in fact, he was on with me right after Ariel Sharon was finished -- he seemed to indicate that this its absolutely unacceptable. And, as you know, the Palestinians have been making the demand to get the military incursions finished and over with and out of the West Bank ASAP. The White House has said it as well. But at this point, given the reaction we heard from the prime minister, it appears some that movement will be under way within a matter of days here in the Middle East regarding those military incursions.

NEVILLE: Absolutely. And, Bill, on another note, expound if you will on the importance of Secretary Powell's visit to Beirut?

HEMMER: Yes, that was very significant for a lot of people essentially been watching that region for two and a half weeks. There has been cross-border shelling between Hezbollah guerrillas in southern Lebanon and Israeli troops operating in the northern part of the area here, northern part of the country.

A lot of people have come out and said, frankly, that this is one area that might concern them the most because Hezbollah has support from Syria and also they allege support from Iran as well. That's the reason why Colin Powell went up, is to try to dampen things down and make sure that everybody is aware that the U.S. and Israel will not settle for, at this point, at a widening conflict. Now it hasn't gone there just yet. And everybody throughout the region is watching it, keeping their fingers crossed that it does not go there -- Arthel.

NEVILLE: Absolutely. Bill Hemmer, thanks a lot for joining us.

HEMMER: Sure.

NEVILLE: OK. Now please meet Mark Perry. He's a Mideast analyst and Washington editor for "The Palestine Report." Mark's the author of "Fire In Zion." Also with us is Ken Stein. He's a professor of Middle Eastern history and politics at Emory University. He has authored a number of books on Middle East politics including "Kissinger", "Sadat", "Carter" and "Begin: The Quest for Peace in Israel." Welcome, gentlemen.

MARK PERRY, "THE PALESTINE REPORT": Good to be here.

NEVILLE: OK, Ken, I would like to start with you -- Professor Stein, I'd like to start with you. What do you make of Ariel Sharon's remarks to Wolf Blitzer?

KEN STEIN, EMORY UNIVERSITY: I think Ariel Sharon is preparing Israel and the general public for what may be called a regional conference of foreign ministers. That way he doesn't have to deal with Arafat directly, but he can move into a situation where there will be stages where they will withdraw and a phased implementation of some of the agreements that the Palestinians and Israelis agreed upon even before Colin Powell reached the Middle East.

NEVILLE: But wouldn't Arafat have to be involved in that process as well?

STEIN: He could involved from behind the scenes. In 1991, when there was a Madrid/Middle East peace conference, a fellow by the name of Dr. Heider Abdul Shafti (ph) represented the Palestinians. Arafat was not there personally. So there is the precedent and it could happen again.

NEVILLE: Right. Right. Mark Perry, what do you make of the remarks?

PERRY: Well, I agree with Professor Stein. I think that Ariel Sharon, however, sounds very reasonable, but his actions aren't always reasonable. We heard the anger in Saeb Erakat's voice in his interview with Bill Hemmer and it's still there among the Palestinians. I think tomorrow, the Palestinians will come back and say we are not going to negotiate under fire. There has to be a full withdrawal even before we consider a regional conference.

NEVILLE: And then there we are, back to square one.

(CROSSTALK)

STEIN: I think you have to mesh a cease-fire and Israeli withdrawal with the application of guarantees about Israeli security. And they can be done simultaneously, not exactly what all the Palestinians want and not exactly what all the Israelis want, but something that will move the process forward because Colin Powell can't stay in the Middle East forever. So you have to have something that's phased and staged that leads us into this so-called regional conference.

NEVILLE: So are you saying negotiations can't take place without a cease-fire?

STEIN: I'm saying negotiations are taking place right now. I think one of the reasons that Colin Powell is in Beirut and going to Damascus is in order to get the Lebanese and the Syrian foreign ministers to perhaps participate in such a conference.

NEVILLE: Mark Perry, your thoughts on that.

PERRY: I think that's probably right. We have here for the first time something that the United States and Israel have rejected for a long time, which is that a political and a cease-fire track could occur together. That's always what Yasser Arafat has asked for. Here is what he has. He can say yes to it, but it's going to be very difficult for him to do so while he's under siege in Ramallah.

NEVILLE: Do you think it's too personal at this point between Sharon and Arafat?

STEIN: Well, these two have been chasing each other for decades. They are two grizzled septuagenarians. They don't particularly like each other. They both would like to get up tomorrow morning and know the other one is not around. But that's not the reality of it.

But I do believe that ultimately, the Palestinian national movement is greater than Yasser Arafat and I think Israel's national interests are greater than Sharon. So ultimately, you get to a position where both sides are going to have to negotiate regardless.

NEVILLE: And, Frank -- go ahead, Mark Perry.

PERRY: I think that's right. You heard it in what Dr. Erakat said. Neither side can choose the leader for the other. There is Yasser Arafat, like him or not. The Israelis clearly don't and Ariel Sharon doesn't. He's the elected leader of the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinians have rallied around him as never before as have the Israelis around Ariel Sharon.

NEVILLE: Frank, your thoughts are?

FRANK: I just believe Arafat is a terrorist and United States policy is not to negotiate with a terrorist. So, I don't think he belongs in the conference.

NEVILLE: So it's wrong for Secretary Powell to go over there and meet with Arafat?

FRANK: I think it is. I think he wants to eliminate the Jewish faith and I don't see he wants peace and he doesn't denounce the attacks, the suicide bombings, and I don't see no reason for him to negotiate with him.

NEVILLE: Then, who should he negotiate with?

FRANK: I think they should find someone else in the Palestinian group that is willing for peace, you know, who is willing to accept a dividing the country up, you know, not eliminating the Israeli people.

NEVILLE: Thank you, sir. Mark Perry, your thoughts?

PERRY: Ariel Sharon has the same kind of reputation in the Palestinian community that Arafat does in the Israeli community. He's blamed for the massacre at Sabrun Shatilah (ph) camps. Whether he had responsibility or not is open to question, but he's blamed. He's viewed as an extremist, even in Israel. He's viewed as an extremist.

I have to revert to what we said before. To negotiate a peace, you have to bring two enemies together. Maybe the way to do this is to bring Sharon and Arafat to the table. I think Arafat would come to the table with Sharon. He did that once before at the Wye Plantation. He can do it again.

NEVILLE: But Sharon won't do it.

PERRY: I don't think so.

NEVILLE: All right. We have to take a break right now. We're going to talk about this a little bit more in a minute. And later this hour, Al Gore rallies Democrats in Florida. Do you think he will make a comeback in 2004? We'll be right back.

(APPLAUSE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(JOINED IN PROGRESS)

STEIN: He cannot speak to anyone else because only the Palestinians will give him Yasser Arafat to speak to. So he has to negotiate with Arafat, even if Arafat is seen as a terrorist in the eyes of some people. So that's why it appears that the United States foreign policy is inconsistent. We have an ideology not to foster terrorism. We oppose terrorism. We oppose people who engage in terrorism. But on the other side, if we are going to negotiate a peace or a settlement or an interim agreement or a non-belligerency something between Israel and the Palestinians, Arafat is the only interlocker that the Palestinians are willing to provide.

NEVILLE: Exactly, because I was going to say, the Palestinians wouldn't have it any other way.

STEIN: That's correct.

NEVILLE: OK. I want to bring Mary in California now. Mary, you are live on TALKBACK LIVE. Go ahead and speak out.

MARY: Hi. Thank you for taking my call.

First of all, I'm a Palestinian. And I would like to say that Yasser Arafat was a terrorist, is a terrorist and will always be a terrorist. When Colin Powell was sent to the region, I was appalled. Why is he going there? This country said that America would not negotiate with terrorists. And yet, our president sends Colin Powell over there to negotiate with a terrorist. It's like Mr. Bush telling Osama bin Laden, hey, come on over -- better well, I'll go over to you and negotiate a truce.

Yasser Arafat should not be in power and so is Ariel Sharon. Yasser Arafat said that he wants to be a martyr for his people. Well, it's about time that he puts his foot in his mouth. Let us get him up, put some bombs on him and go and give Ariel Sharon a big hug.

NEVILLE: Mary, thank you very much for those comments. And I want to get Bob from Pennsylvania now to speak out.

BOB: Professor, you said in some people's eyes, Yasser Arafat is a terrorist. How can you view him as anything but a terrorist? And at the same time, you talk about United States foreign policy. How can the United States go after Israel when we have troops in Afghanistan pursuing terrorists that are doing the same thing that Yasser Arafat's people are doing?

STEIN: It's a good question. Some people don't believe Yasser Arafat is a terrorist, and those are the people who support the Palestinian cause. You may not agree with them, but those are the folks whose say that Yasser Arafat is the leader of their liberation movement. The point of it is is that the United States has been engaged in American foreign policy toward the Middle East as mediator since the late 1960's. And we have always taken the respective leaders that have been there in order to negotiate. We took it with Sadat. We took it with Begin. We didn't necessarily like Begin. Jimmy Carter didn't love Menachem Begin, but we had to negotiate with him.

PERRY: Menachem Begin, by the way, was the person who bombed the King David hotel in 1947 and '48 and he was on the most wanted list as a terrorist by British forces then occupying Palestine.

STEIN: And it was Menachem Begin who also withdrew from Sinai, who said he would never withdraw.

PERRY: That's right.

STEIN: Once you create a negotiating dynamic, the ideology of the leaders gets fudged. It changes. There's a certain warmth that develops because they want to reach an agreement. Now the point is are these two big leaders, these two veterans, willing to make the compromises that are necessary? Only a process that is unfolded with America being the umpire and the judge will we find out for sure.

PERRY: Let me add one thing if I could.

NEVILLE: Go ahead.

PERRY: I often heard Arafat compared to Osama bin Laden. Certainly this is what the Israelis call him. Ariel Sharon has called him Osama bin Laden. The PLO has been considered the Taliban. There are some real differences in our war against terrorism and Israel's war against terrorism and they're fairly simple to explain. We might not like them, but they are facts.

Israel has occupied the West Bank and Gaza for 35 years. We never occupied Afghanistan. Israel has built settlements, ripped up orchards in that area for 35 years. We have never done that to Afghanistan. The terror attack against us in New York was absolutely the result of nothing that we ever did to these people. The Palestinians claim that they have a legitimate right to oppose the Israeli occupation. And while that doesn't excuse terrorist bombings, that what they believe, and that's the reality of the situation there.

NEVILLE: Mark Perry, Professor Stein, thank you so much for joining us here today on TALKBACK LIVE.

And up next, Al Gore is back in Florida, clean-shaven and sounding like a candidate.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GORE: Here in America, patriotism does not mean keeping quiet. It means speaking up. It means speaking out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEVILLE: OK. And we are going to go now to President Bush, where he is in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, speaking about taxes.

(INTERRUPTED FOR LIVE EVENT)

NEVILLE: And you just heard President Bush speaking on homeland security and touting his tax-cut proposals. And what better day to talk about taxes than today. Joining us now, Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. He has served on the National Commission on Restructuring the IRS; and Robert McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice, a tax reform think tank. Welcome, gentlemen.

Mr. McIntyre, I want to ask you first, has President Bush's tax- cut plan been good for Americans?

ROBERT MCINTYRE, CITIZENS FOR TAX REFORM: Well, it was interesting to hear his speech, because what he mostly wanted to talk about were the parts that his administration resisted to the bitter end, the rebates that went out last year that the Democrats wanted and the president finally accepted. And they were good for the economy. It put some money into consumers' pockets, and that helped keep us from getting into a serious recession, I think in part.

But what he didn't want to talk about is all the debt that they are planning to build up over the next 10 years, all the raids in the Social Security trust fund, or the fact that these remaining tax cuts that he wants to keep phasing in will mostly go to the best off one percent of the population. So it's interesting. He wants to talk like a Democrat, but his plan, the rest of it, is very, very, very regressive and doesn't do much for most people.

NEVILLE: Mr. Norquist, how do you see it?

GROVER NORQUIST, AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM: I think the president is very right to be proud of his leadership and reducing taxes last year and for the next 10 years. It was a bipartisan bill that got good support from Democrats and the Senate as well. It abolished the death tax. It phased out the marriage penalty tax. It reduced rates for all Americans, for small businesses.

Now we need to go back and make it a permanent tax cut. We have seen a couple of votes already this year. The majorities of both Houses support getting rid of the death tax, making that permanent, making sure we get permanent elimination of the marriage penalty tax. So there's more to be done, but we have made a very good start.

NEVILLE: So, in fact, should Bush's tax cut plans be made permanent?

NORQUIST: Oh, absolutely. And again, look, there's majority bipartisan support to make them permanent in both houses. The only problem is Tom Daschle, who is a very left of center political leader from South Dakota, a state that last year had on its ballot the abolition of the death tax and it passed 80-20 on the November 2000 election. And he led the fight against the farmers of his own state, against the people of his own state in support of higher taxes. So he's campaigning against the people of South Dakota in what they want and need. And, unfortunately, with 41 votes, like the Southern segregationists used to do, he'll filibuster and slow things down.

NEVILLE: Now, what do you think about Steve Forbes' idea of a flat tax.

NORQUIST: I think flat tax is a good idea. We need to move towards a single-rate tax so that all Americans pay the same rate. Ted Kennedy doesn't pay a higher or a lower rate than an average citizen. We don't want any special privileges. Everyone pays the same rate. And the government only taxes income one time.

Today, they tax it with when you earn it, when you save it, when it invest, when you spend it. If you're stupid enough to die, they steal up to half of it. They keep coming back. They ought to say, look, when you earn it, we'll take some of it or when you spend it, the idea of a retail sales tax. But we're going to take it one time, at one rate. That's what the state of Massachusetts does. And if it's good enough for the liberals in Massachusetts, we ought to be able to do it nationally.

NEVILLE: OK. Jean (ph), what do you think?

JEAN (ph): Taxes, I don't mind paying them. I have been a corporate owner of a New York state corporation for over 33 years. And when I am successful, I can pay my taxes proudly.

NEVILLE: And you have shelters, though, as a corporation.

JEAN: Yes, I do.

NEVILLE: What about your friends who don't have those shelters? What do they say?

JEAN: Too bad. Too bad.

NEVILLE: You are saying too bad for them?

JEAN: No. Too bad for them, yes.

NEVILLE: Of course. Here's a question. Thank you very much, first of all. Here's a question before we go here. OK, the General Accounting Office estimates that Americans will overpay their taxes by $1 billion due to the complexity of the tax code. I mean, can they come up with something simpler, the IRS?

MCINTYRE: Well, you know, we'd like to come up with something simpler, and we did about 15 years ago. But then the politicians got their hands on the system again. They adopted more and more loopholes for corporations, for wealthy people. And pretty soon, you get a system that no one can understand any more. Yes, it would be nice to go to a simple system. We may need different management in the Congress because right now, we have people there who have never seen a loophole they didn't like. And that is not going to give us a simple tax code.

NORQUIST: The most simple tax code and the tax code that would be easiest for people to pay is one that taxes income at one rate and you only get taxed one time. The death tax is such that they have to know about the fillings in your teeth, the gold in your teeth. They have to know every dollar you have, every car you have, every thing in your house so that they can take half of it.

We need a tax code that makes the IRS less intrusive in your life, so it doesn't have to know every thing about you and follow you around and go through the change in your pockets and so on. That's the way to get simplicity. And we simply -- we can move towards a single rate, flat-rate income tax.

One other thing that is happening in this month is Congress will vote on a Constitutional amendment to require a two-third super- majority vote to raise taxes. A lot of your listeners from the state of California, they have that protection in the state level. Arizona does. South Dakota does. Nevada does. A number of states require a super-majority to raise taxes, makes its tougher for the politicians to get their hands in your pocket.

NEVILLE: OK. I'm going to jump in there because we are out of time. Grover Norquist and Robert McIntyre, thank you so much for both of you being here with us today on TALKBACK LIVE. And thanks to all of you for watching. I'm Arthel Neville.

I'll be back again tomorrow at 3:00 Eastern with more TALKBACK LIVE. The Pope is calling all American cardinals to task over the child sex scandal. We'll see where that's going. I'll see you then.

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