Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Health Care Reform in Danger?; America's Debt Piling Up
Aired December 16, 2009 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Making news right now on your national conversation. On the brink of a disaster.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are on a path to bankruptcy as a nation and it's that simple.
SANCHEZ: How high can it go and who's keeping track of our national debt?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Most calculators won't even handle what we do.
SANCHEZ: Inside the numbers every American should be concerned about.
Was it a street fight that got out of hand, or a hate crime? And what about the police investigation?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think it was a cover-up?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I do believe that was.
SANCHEZ: New details in this man's death about discrimination and a possible police cover-up.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have his number, right?
CHARLES BARKLEY, FORMER NBA PLAYER: Oh, he has changed his number.
SANCHEZ: Tiger, answer your phone. Your famous friends say they want to help you.
And it is time for R&R, Rick and Roland, as in Martin, as in fired up about health care and the so-called Gitmo of the north.
My access becomes your access with tweets from Eric Cantor, John McCain, Congress, the White House, in this truly national conversation for Wednesday, December 16, 2009.
And it starts right now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: Hello again, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez with the next generation of news, a conversation, not a speech, and your turn to get involved.
Two hot-button issues are being argued right now on opposite sides of the Capitol, health care in the Senate, and the national debt in the House. First, I want to bring you up to date on what is going on with your health care in the future.
President Obama says it is on the precipice of victory. But every day, there is a new roadblock that seems to pop up. And boy, is that ever the case today. Yesterday, you remember, right, Senator Joe Lieberman blocked expanding Medicare to more Americans. Today, it is the liberal Democrats who are threatening to take a hike.
Howard Dean is telling the Democrats, telling them vote against this thing. Now, take a look at this. Senator Bernie Sanders is doing Howard Dean even one better. You know what he did earlier? He introduced an amendment to put government health coverage right back in the bill, like going back to square one.
Well, today, Republican Tom Coburn has done Bernie Sanders one better by forcing the entire bill to be read aloud, all 767 pages of this thing. Talk about tit for tat.
Now, then Majority Leader Harry Reid, he decides to pull the Sanders amendment. He has had enough of this tomfoolery. That set Bernie Sanders off.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: The day will come, although I recognize it is not today, when the United States Congress will have the courage to stand up to the private insurance companies and the drug companies and the medical equipment suppliers and all of those who profit and make billions of dollars every single year off of human sickness.
And on that day, when it comes -- and it will come -- the United States Congress will finally proclaim that health care is a right of all people, and not just a privilege.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: I will tell you, that is Bernie Sanders. That was only about 10 minutes ago. This is happening as we speak. Most of the information I just shared with you happened within the last couple of hours, and, as you could see, he is teed off.
All right. What else is holding up the health care bill at this point? We are still waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to tell us just how much this latest version is going to end up costing. And that could become the next big bone of contention.
We are going to be all over that throughout this entire newscast, but now to the other side of the Capitol, where the House is scheduled to vote on raising the federal debt ceiling by $200 billion. Take a look at this. Just in the last six months, the U.S. national debt -- that is the red line -- has gone from $11.4 trillion to more than $12 trillion.
This is important. Spread that across all of the taxpayers in the United States, we each owe more than $111,000. That is what you owe. That's your take, your share of this.
The problem is, there is a limit on it. All right. Go back to the graphic, if you got it there, Rog. All right. We're about to hit it again, that limit. You see the blue line at the top, $12.1 trillion? That is supposed to be our limit, what we as a government had limited ourselves to. We don't want to borrow more than that. Well, what if you did that with your home or your business budget?
Think about it. Think about what the government does compared to what you are doing or hopefully doing. You set a limit of how much you should owe, you and your wife or you and your husband, and you just keep raising it. Oh, what the heck. It ain't your money, right?
Well, for Congress, it ain't their money. I showed you this chart Monday, but it is worth looking at one more time. It shows a steady string of annual deficit since 2002. The deficits are just how much more we borrow each year compared to how much we spend. So, deficit is more of an annual thing. The debt is more of a long-term thing.
Look at the sharp increases in fiscal 2009, and that line is going to continue to go up and up and up. I promised you that I am going to stay on stories like this. I will follow the money for you as long as I am employed here at CNN.
Folks, here is the rub. Here is why you need to start thinking about this. An independent panel is warning that if nothing is done, this could cause financial panic to our nation. So, now the president is thinking about forming a bipartisan commission to figure out how to avert this.
I want you to take a look at what we have found out here at CNN about this very topic.
Here is our senior White House correspondent, Ed Henry.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Documents obtained by CNN reveal the president considering an executive order that would create an outside commission to weigh sweeping tax increases and deep spending cuts to programs like Medicare that affect millions of Americans, all aimed at slashing the exploding federal deficit, which the president has promised to tackle after the economic recovery takes hold.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And I'm looking forward to working with the group of leaders that I just met today about how we can structure a plausible scenario to get to medium- and long-term deficit reduction.
HENRY: The documents suggest a split within the administration, some advisers arguing the commission should have a narrow mandate, because it's too complicated to tackle reform of Social Security, taxes, and Medicare all at once.
But other advisers, according to the documents, believe there should be -- quote -- "everything on the table."
SEN. JUDD GREGG (R), NEW HAMPSHIRE: We are on path to bankruptcy as a nation, and it's that simple.
HENRY: The White House is facing heavy pressure from senators threatening to block a large increase in the nation's debt ceiling, unless the president signs on to their version of a deficit commission.
SEN. KENT CONRAD (D), NORTH DAKOTA: I believe a defining moment -- 27 senators, 12 Democrats, 15 Republicans, have signed on in just a matter of hours.
HENRY: The Senate version of the commission would give 10 Democrats and eight Republicans power to study the problem, and then vote after the midterm elections on a reform package that could include dramatic tax hikes and spending cuts.
If 14 of the 18 members approve the package, giving it a bipartisan nod, it would force an automatic up-or-down vote in both the House and Senate. White House officials, meanwhile, are considering their own version of a commission, with more Obama officials on the panel to give the president more control, though the documents obtained by CNN warn that also brings political risk -- quote -- "the promise of greater say over the deliberations and final product of the commission, but the peril of being more deeply implicated in the event of failure."
(on camera): There is fear among some of the president's advisers that handing so much power to an outside commission could be dangerous. What if they recommend raising taxes on people making less than $250,000 a year, breaking an Obama campaign promise?
But other advisers say that this bipartisan commission could give the president the political cover to make the tough decisions necessary to cut the deficit.
Ed Henry, CNN, the White House.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: All right, that is the deficit.
Now, I want you to take look at that number just below me right here. You see that? That is the debt, the national debt, the total that we owe. It is not a government problem. It is our problem. Where will this lead to, as a people, as a nation? I am going to drill down on this for you.
Also, a man dies after a street fight where he was obviously discriminated against. Did local police there try and cover it up, rather than thoroughly investigate it? We are going to take you through this case. And then I want you to be able to make a decision for yourself.
I'm going to ask you a very important question. Also, don't forget the other way you can participate in the national conversation. Just call us here in the United States. The number is 877-742-5751. Say, hey, Rick.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CALLER: Hey, Rick. This is Connie (ph) from Arizona.
Listen, I do agree with Howard Dean. I think we need to kill this bill. I do not want to be mandated and then give the insurance company a big windfall.
Thanks.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: That is Rick's List and we are so proud of it, because it is already getting a lot of attention.
What we do is, we create a list every day on the top stories of the day with relevant people who might have something to say about them. They are either members of Congress or the White House or different representatives or organizations.
Today, we are following two big stories, obviously. We are following what is going on with the health care debate for you, and that is moving and changing. And, as it does, I will tell you what is going on.
The other big story that Americans are going to start zooming into now like a laser is the national debt and the deficit. We told you just how horrible it is at this point, and what the predictions are about it.
Well, let me tell you what some folks in the know are saying about it. Let's go the Rick's List, if we possibly can. These are some of the tweets that I have been getting in that I want to share with you. This is from Bill Gale. He's the senior fellow on economics at the Brookings Institute.
He says, "If entitlements are not fixed, the debt-to-GDP ratio will rise 82 percent by 2019, 109 percent in 2026."
I mean, think about that. I mean, what he is saying is, we are going to be all but in hock, all right? He goes on the say -- listen to this. This is an interesting perspective that puts this whole thing in context.
He says: "Current year to deficit of the United States is larger, larger than the GDP of all but six other countries in the entire world," all but six other countries in the entire world. He says that is a real concern for the next 10 years.
He goes on to say that "Americans are right to worry about deficits, but we can keep the recovery going and restore financial discipline -- fiscal discipline," he writes.
Let's hope so, folks, and cross our fingers, for the good of all.
Also, this. All right. It is hard not to stare when the number keeps growing like that. Is that what I am supposed to do. There it is under me. So, who is keeping track of those numbers? Where do they literally balance the nation's checkbook? That is next.
Also, can Charles Barkley get through the Tiger Woods' incident? Apparently not. I'm going to let you know why just ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CALLER: Hey, Rick. This is Bunny (ph) from Missouri.
Could somebody please tell the senators to quit acting like children and agree to what they can agree on, get it passed, and come back to what they are bickering about later?
Thank you.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: She is referring to the fact that yesterday Lieberman cut out, Senator Joe Lieberman, and now today many of the liberal Democrats are saying, fine, if he is going to cut out, then we're not going to vote for this thing, and now it is looking like this thing could be in peril once again.
Meanwhile, the Republicans today made them in the Senate read the entire bill from beginning to end. Yes, it is crazy to watch, and we are going to following it for you throughout the day.
We're also talking about the national debt. And on Rick's List, and I think we can a shot of this real quick, we have been getting all types of organizations and people who are concerned about this, like the Brookings Institute, who want to share their feelings with the rest of you. That is how we use Rick's List, and we will continue the use it for you, literally letting our access, my access, become your access.
Now back to the national debt. Let's stay on this, shall we? As we told you, it is just over $1 trillion and rising quickly. But if you are looking for a more precise number, you can always go to the usdebtclock.org, where they are literally keeping a running tally.
We have been checking on it this. There is the big number right there right under me. We are going to keep the clock on the screen while we tell you about the place where the government keeps its own tally of the debt. It is called the Bureau of the Public Debt. And it is located in, of all places, Parkersburg, West Virginia.
Some of the people who work there talked with CNN Radio's Lisa Desjardins.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I get very excited. They call me a nerd several times. And I think it is all because I get really excited about the work that we do. I think it is interesting because you can see what the debt is made up of.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: All right, and CNN Radio's Lisa Desjardins is in Washington. Do I say your name with a little too much "dawn"?
LISA DESJARDINS, CNN RADIO CORRESPONDENT: You know, well, I will take all the sauce and spice I can get. It works.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: My executive producer just told me to work on your name.
All right, let's start with the most important part of this story, and I will tell you, Lisa, I am glad that you are so honed in on this, because this could -- we talk about a lot of stuff in the news, but this could end up being the most important story that -- seriously, that we talk about here on CNN over the next several years.
We have seen the number. It is frightening. How much do we owe? Explain it...
DESJARDINS: Yes.
SANCHEZ: ... that the viewers could understand the severity of this for us, if you would.
DESJARDINS: Right now, we are at $12.1 trillion that the United States owes. That is its -- our absolute limit. And in fact we have reached that limit.
Those folks that we just showed their picture in Parkersburg, Jamie Stanley (ph) and Mike Linder (ph), those are the guys that every day are figuring out the national debt.
And, right now, let me tell you their lives are very difficult, because we have hit the debt limit. Those folks in Parkersburg, everyday working folks, are waiting for Congress to raise the debt limit.
And I am told that they are working on that this week, but $12.1 trillion, no joke, Rick. You know, that is $1.2 billion a day in interest payments. This is the thing, in interest payments, $1.2 billion a day that we throw out the window on the national debt. SANCHEZ: Well, let me show you something. I want to ask you, by the way, about this limit, because, as far as I'm concerned, it is an artificial limit anyway, because they can put it wherever the hell they want to. It's not their money, which is frustrating, by the way.
But let's talk about it being in a way our money. How much do I owe as a taxpayer? How much do I owe as a citizen?
Roger, I don't know if you can get that, but -- oh, there it is. Thanks. Thanks, Rog. Thanks, Angie.
All right, you see that right there? This is your part of the debt if you pay taxes in the United States. She just told you what the government owes, right? That is what you owe, $111,388.
That is a whole lot of moolah, Lisa.
DESJARDINS: It is an incredible amount. And if you look at the national debt and then you look at how much we're spending on say the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, if we didn't even have those interest payments on the debt, just the interest alone, forget the debt, two years of interest on the national debt, and you would have paid for everything in Iraq and Afghanistan this year.
So, it is a huge amount of money. In fact, Rick, the interest payments on the national debt are by most estimates our fourth largest expenditure as a government. The fourth largest expenditure that we have is the interest on the national debt.
SANCHEZ: By the way, am I wrong what about this limit that they're -- who cares? They can move this thing as high as they want to. It is their ceiling. And the troubling part is, it is not their money, because I guarantee you, if it were, they would not be spending the way they do, right?
DESJARDINS: Well, the thing is, the government does set its own credit card limit, so you are exactly right about that.
The thing, though, is that world financial markets watch that limit. They say, OK, we get that you set your limit. That is your right, your financial right. But can you keep to it, United States, or not? And are you going to be able to pay back the money that we are loaning you, the rest of the world? And that's the issue.
SANCHEZ: And that is what makes the value of the dollar go down, right?
DESJARDINS: In part, in part. And when we're right now where the U.S. has said, OK, we're setting the debt limit at $12.1 trillion, and we are about to go above it, if we -- if the United States Congress does not pass a new debt ceiling, then we will literally not have funds to work with.
So, those folks in Parkersburg, West Virginia, six hours from Washington, in the Hills of West Virginia right now, they are trying -- they are treading water keeping our accounts balanced, watching every penny, because we don't have any pennies to give right now.
SANCHEZ: That is so cool that you would go there and interview those folks.
DESJARDINS: Amazing people.
SANCHEZ: And I never even knew that they existed. I think most people would not know that they existed. And what you have done is, you have turned what is a very complicated story for most Americans into something that we can now relate to and at least partially understand.
But we're going to stay on it, and we thank you for doing that, Lisa. Appreciate it.
DESJARDINS: Hey, my pleasure. Those are great folks, a little bit nerdy, they say, out in Parkersburg, but really good, good people.
SANCHEZ: All right, thanks so much.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: A little bit nerdy. Aren't we all?
DESJARDINS: Me, too, yes.
SANCHEZ: All right, once again, let me show you what folks are saying about this, going to Rick's List once again, which is what we call our list of -- that we compile everyday on relevant stories.
Bob Pozen, he is predicting that next year's budget deficit will be seven percent of the GDP vs. last fiscal year, which was approximately 12 percent of the GDP.
That's from HBSNews. We thank him. We thank you.
Coming up:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have his number, right?
BARKLEY: Oh, he has changed his number.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Would Tiger open up to a fellow celebrity? Charles Barkley says, yes, he will. Why he thinks it is necessary for Tiger to do that, to talk to guys like Charles Barkley, who are his friends and are fellow celebrities.
Also, an undocumented immigrant beaten, killed, and if that is not bad enough, some accuse the police of a cover-up. And now the feds are stepping in. Should they? That is a question to you. Also, remember the after-show on CNN.com/live at 4:00.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: The last few weeks have been hell for Tiger Woods, but people within his inner circle say that shutting everybody out around him is just going to make the situation for Tiger worse.
Friends say he has put up a wall of silence while he tries to sort this mess out. But some of his celebrity pals are saying that he is approaching this thing entirely wrong. That is their perspective, including Spike Lee, including Charles Barkley, who probably know a thing or two about dealing with situations like this.
Here is what they told my colleague Robin Meade.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SPIKE LEE, DIRECTOR: I was just wondering, I hope that Charles, that Michael Jordan, these guys get to him, because we were just talking about this in the back room. I mean, here in -- he is insulated.
And no one -- if Charles -- if Charles Barkley and Michael Jordan can't get to him...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right. That's insulation, because you have like his number.
LEE: And those are his boys.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You have his number, right?
BARKLEY: Oh, he changed his number.
LEE: He changed it.
(LAUGHTER)
LEE: If Charles and Mike can't get to him, then...
(CROSSTALK)
LEE: ... these other people are making bad moves.
(CROSSTALK)
BARKLEY: I think that when you have these fires in your life, as I call them, you need to talk to somebody else who is famous who have been through things in their life. I don't think that you can talk about it to your family and friends, because your family and friends, they are not famous.
(END VIDEO CLIP) SANCHEZ: It is an interesting discussion. You can catch this whole discussion, by the way, on Tiger on the HLN special. It's called "With All Due Respect," which airs this Sunday at 10:00 p.m. Eastern.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: How does this one compare?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Like a joke.
O'BRIEN: Do you think it was a cover-up?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I do believe that was.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Accusations that police tried to cover up the fatal beating of what many are calling a hateful crime. We are going to take you through this troubling case. It is coming up next.
Also, you can join us for the national conversation whenever you visit Atlanta. You can. You can be right here on the set with me, in fact. We will take pictures. We will have a conversation, 877-4CNN- TOUR, 877-4CNN-TOUR.
I'm Rick Sanchez, and I will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: You know I like to call this hour the "National Conversation," because there really are some conversations that we, as a nation, need to have, and by golly, this is one of them. Here is my question to start this off. What do you think of hate crimes legislation? If you are like me and if you are like most Americans, you probably ask when you hear about this, what do we need it for, right?
I mean, if it is illegal to kill somebody, if it's illegal to rob somebody, if it's illegal to beat somebody up, why do you need another law on top of that law? It should have nothing to do with hate? Why do you need a law that compounds the other law by examining intent?
It is a good question. I hear a lot of people say that. I mean, you almost go back to a case like hate crime cases, and you ask, he either did it or she either did it, or she didn't do it, right? Well, here is why sometimes we need to have to consider something like hate crimes legislation. Because in some places, in some communities, certainly in the nation's past in this country, and even now, some local laws, some local prosecutors, some local police create a situation where if you are not one of them, then the law is going to be stacked against you.
And that is where with hate crimes legislation, sometimes the feds arguably have to step in to make things more equal or more just. All right. Two different points of view on that. Now, watch this report by my colleague and friend Soledad O'Brien, and then tell me what you think of this.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Shenandoah, Pennsylvania, a place that's welcomed immigrants for generations. And then one night in July, 2008...
CRYSTAL DILLMAN, FIANCEE OF VICTIM: Truly in my heart I believe they beat him up because he was Latino.
O'BRIEN: Crystal Dillman's fiancee, Luis Ramirez, was walking down this street when he came across a group of white high school football players.
EILEEN BURKE, EYEWITNESS: I heard this screaming and yelling, ethnic -- F-this, Mexican that, spic this, the whole nine yards.
O'BRIEN (on camera): That's what they were saying?
BURKE: Yes.
O'BRIEN (voice-over): Ramirez and the boys started fighting. When it was over, Luis was on the ground barely breathing. Two days later, he was dead.
(on camera): Do you think about the way he died?
DILLMAN: Every day. I think about seeing him in the hospital bed and I mean I don't wish that on my worst enemy.
O'BRIEN (voice-over): From the beginning there were questions about how local police handled the case, taking two weeks to arrest suspects, despite multiple eyewitness, like Eileen Burke, a retired Philadelphia police officer.
(on camera): For the 30 or so crime scenes that you've been involved in the eight years you were a police officer, how does this one compare?
BURKE: Like a joke.
O'BRIEN (voice-over): More questions were raised at the April trial of the two young men, Brandon Piekarsky and Derrick Donchak. A third defendant, who took a federal plea deal, testified that Shenandoah Police urged the boys to get their stories straight.
Piekarsky and Donchak were convicted of the least serious charge against them, simple assault, and received minimum sentences of six and seven months, respectively.
(on camera): Do you think it was a cover-up?
BURKE: I do believe that was. O'BRIEN (voice-over): Now, the Department of Justice agrees, unsealing indictments yesterday charging Piekarsky and Donchak with a hate crime. The indictment also alleges three Shenandoah police officers, including the police chief, conspired to obstruct justice. One, Lieutenant Bill Moyer, accused of lying to the FBI and destroying evidence.
The sneakers authorities say the boys used to kick Ramirez to death. The officers have pled not guilty. Lawyer Gladys Limon has been at Dillman's side throughout the case.
GLADYS LIMON, MALDEF: It has been very difficult for her so this has provided some sense of relief and will provide her with a sense of peace this Christmas.
O'BRIEN: Piekarsky and Donchak could have been released from state prison in just weeks. The new federal charges carry a maximum sentence of life.
Soledad O'Brien, CNN, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: And there is more. When the beating happened, one of the officers involved in the alleged cover-up was dating the mother of one of the suspects. Another one of the police officers investigating this crime, he had a son who played on the football team with the guys who were involved in the attack. Neither one of them recused themselves from the case however.
A look at why hate crimes may or may not be necessary, and how sometimes we may need a higher authority to bring about justice. Or do we? You have been letting me know what you think, and I'm going to check on those on our little tweet board when we come back. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MATT TAIBBI, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR, ROLLING STONE: We have to break from that past, and they didn't do that. And that's the problem.
SANCHEZ: Well, wait.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: It's going to be part two of my interview with Rolling Stone's contributing editor Matt Taibbi, why he thinks the president is, quote, "selling out" to the fat cats on Wall Street.
Also, don't forget, the other way to participate in this "National Conversation," call us in the United States. The number is 1-877-742-5751.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. Let's go to our list if we possibly can. First, Robert, let's go to the one on the outside, "Rick's List." This one right here. This is where we collect information from people who are relevant to the stories that we are covering on any given day. And that one is from a U.S. senator, Richard Burr, watching our newscast. He sent us this comment on our story about the national debt and the deficit.
He says: "We are borrowing 43 cents of every dollar we spend from somebody somewhere in the world." That again from U.S. senator from North Carolina, I believe, right? Richard Burr. My thanks to you, Senator.
Also, real people now commenting on the story that we just showed you, the one that Soledad O'Brien brought us. And I asked the question, should we have hate crime legislation? Two comments at the top. "We can't punish someone for what is in their head when they commit a crime. All crimes are hate crimes."
But then the one underneath that says: "Ramirez's shocking death at the hands of those cruel killers is a hate crime and they deserve to be punished." There you have it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TAIBBI: The banks took that money that they borrowed basically for free and they lent it out at market rates. They borrow it at 1 percent, they lend it out at 20 percent, and that is where all of these bonuses came from.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Matt Taibbi is fired up about the bankers and business- as-usual on Wall Street. And he is getting a lot of heat for saying it. Part two of my interview with Rolling Stone's contributing editor. What he is getting heat for, by the way, is what he said about the president of the United States.
And speaking of fired up, Roland Martin is fired up about President Obama's meeting with Wall Street's bankers. Does he agree with Taibbi? I'm going to ask him.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
CALLER: Hey, Rick, this is Kathy (ph) from Houston. I was wondering, are we in $12 trillion debt and killing our soldiers to give our jobs to China, Mexico, or India?
(END AUDIO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Interesting questions. Has the president of the United States blatantly put the interests of Wall Street ahead of Main Street? Has he packed the economic team with Wall Street insiders who were the same people who created the economic crisis in the first place? Rolling Stone's contributing editor, Matt Taibbi, has written about just that. Here now part two of my interview with this controversial Rolling Stone writer. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: So why would the president of the United States, who was selling hope and the populist message, and all of these things, get, as you write -- or opine, so tied to these investment bankers and Citigroup in particular? What -- is there a motive?
TAIBBI: Well, that is really the big mystery in all of this, and I asked a lot of people who are in and around the Hill who work in government or in Congress, what is the opinion? Why did Barack Obama opt for these guys?
And there is a whole range of opinions. some people think that he was just naive, I mean, the financial services industry is extremely complex and it is hard -- you know, it is very believable to think that he would want to appeal to the people who have been there before and have done these jobs before.
There is the more cynical explanation that bringing these guys in guarantees that they're going to get money in the form of campaign contributions for a couple of election cycles going forward.
SANCHEZ: What do you think of that? I mean, look, ever since the Clinton administration, I think one could reasonably assume -- and by the way, it is perfectly legal. I am not accusing them of doing anything wrong. It is perfectly legal to solicit campaign funds. Ever since the Clinton administration, Democrats have done very well with investment bankers as far as campaign contributions go.
TAIBBI: That's absolutely true. And in fact, you know, companies like Goldman Sachs in the last couple of decades have supported the Democrats more than they have the Republicans.
SANCHEZ: Yes, they have.
TAIBBI: So, there is definitely a case to be made that this is part of the strategic MO of the modern Democratic Party. That they rely upon the financial services industry to fund their campaigns. And so there is...
SANCHEZ: But that would make what you are saying -- what you and I are talking about right now really a business-as-usual accusation, not to say that they have done anything illegal, but just to say that they are no different than anybody else who has held that office that we've criticized for putting politics above the good of the country.
TAIBBI: Well, that is absolutely true. I mean, I think that's the problem. I think if this were any other time when -- you know, if a catastrophe hadn't happened last year, then maybe you would not look at this kind of decision and this kind of staffing effort as being such a -- you know, a questionable thing.
But we had a major, you know, event take place last year and I think it really required them to go in a different direction, more like what FDR did when he completely revamped and reformed Wall Street. That was kind of what was needed, and they needed to break from that past, and they didn't do that, and that is the problem.
SANCHEZ: Well, let's talk about that real quick. I think I had some notes on here. And whether I can find them or not, you can take me through this, because a big part of your write-through explains how -- here it is. You say that what this administration has given average people, part of the stimulus, for example, is dwarfed by what it has given to the financial giants.
Can you kind of explain that or quantify it for us as best you can?
TAIBBI: Sure. You know, one of the problems that we have is that the banks have successfully convinced the public that the TARP was the entire bailout. The TARP was $700 billion and the stimulus was $700 billion, and most people see those two numbers and they think that they are equal. In point of fact, the bailouts were really -- the TARP was probably one-twentieth of the total outlay of the bailout.
Most of the bailout came in the -- through little-known programs from the Fed like the TALF, the TIP, the PPI, there are all of these programs that nobody has ever heard of that either provide guarantees or cheap money that was lent out to these banks. And the banks took that money that they borrowed basically for free and they lent it out at market rates.
They borrow it at 1 percent, they lend it out at 20 percent. And that's where all of these bonuses came from. And that is what people don't really understand. And really, they gave much, much more money and much more government largess to that small group of people than they did to the actual population.
SANCHEZ: Have you ever wondered, as I have, what would have happened if they would have just had taken all or almost all of the money and just divvied it up between the heads of households in the United States? I mean, I have tried to sit down and talk about that with economists, but they always look at me like I am crazy.
TAIBBI: No, that is a perfectly legitimate -- I mean, I have talked to a friend of mine, Nomi Prins, who is a former Goldman Sachs executive, who wrote a book, "It Takes a Pillage," about them, she points out that we could have bought and paid off every single subprime mortgage in this country in full for $1.4 trillion last year, and we ended up giving about 10 times that amount to Wall Street mainly to pay off bets on those assets that Wall Street had made.
SANCHEZ: Yes, it's the trickle up as opposed to trickle down argument?
TAIBBI: Exactly right. Instead of paying off the underlying assets, we paid off the gambles that were made on those assets.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: Matt Taibbi. And you see more of that interview with Matt of Rolling Stone on our blog, cnn.com/ricksanchez. It's longer on the blog.
A bold smash and grab is caught on camera. You are going to see this one play out for yourself.
And then Roland Martin hot about the health care reform, hot about the president's meeting with bankers, executive pay. He is just hot about a lot of stuff. And that is what makes him such a great guest. He and I are going to be going at it when we come back. Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez here in the world headquarters of CNN. This is what I tell my teenage sons over and over again, it's what my dad used to tell me over and over again. I want you always home before midnight, because, all together now dads out there, nothing good ever happens after midnight. You heard it, I heard it, I tell it. Let's do "Fotos del Dia."
Guess what? It's well after midnight in Indiana. Thieves slam a stolen SUV into a store to grab guns that are inside. If the store had been open, someone could have been hurt or killed. Police are looking for those guys and using that as their explanation against them if they charge them. But this just proves once again, that after midnight, you don't have to find trouble, it will find you.
It's Florida. Watch this person ride a bike up a driveway in the middle of the night. By the way, that is someone else's home. He or she grabs a gas tank, then pours gas into a car, lights the match, and boom. The suspect flees, maybe with some singed hair.
To the Gulf of Mexico we go, an 80-year-old man enjoying some sailing until the skies part and a violent storm rolls in. The man loses control of his boat and ends up adrift at sea for 10 days, but here we go again, semper paratus, always prepared, that's the Coast Guard motto. And here they are, like clockwork, to save another life. You've got to love these guys.
I have never seen anything like this. You might want to call it a secret weapon. Tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. Eastern right here, you will see this powerful weapon. The U.S. military is testing it because of its -- well, a lot of things. It does things that no other weapon could ever possibly do, go around, hit people that may be in groups. I'm going to talk live to an armory in New Jersey tomorrow to take a look at what those are. It's an Army colonel, pardon me, I misspoke.
More on that, also, Roland Martin is here, and he's fired up about health care once again. We usually disagree on issues. Today I'm not quite sure, but he's coming up next. Stay in there, big guy.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Got to love that opening. Really crazy what happened today in the halls of our -- of Washington, D.C., with lawmakers, Republicans make the Democrats weed out the health care bill, Senator Bernie Sanders says, you know what, let's put the stuff they took out back in. They start reading that amendment over again. Then they kill that, and Bernie Sanders gets really upset about the fact that they killed his amendment.
Here he is, as a matter of fact, Roland. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: We have a $12 trillion national debt, and the best the Republicans can do is try to bring the United States government to a halt.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: I mean, that's Bernie Sanders, he's fired up. Roland, you say what?
ROLAND MARTIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I love it. I mean, look, you've had Senator Joe Lieberman holding up the entire United States Senate to satisfy his ego for the past several days, and so this is what happened when you have true believers.
And so you have Howard Dean, a former Democratic National Committee chairman, who has made it perfectly clear that he thinks that any bill is not good enough. And so, frankly, you have folks like Sanders, you even have Senator Roland Burris out there from Illinois who has made made it clear he's not going to vote for anything...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Well, but has he? But -- wait, hold on, hold on. Let me stop you there. Listen to Roland Burris. We've got him on tape. Listen to what he says. He's backing away from what I thought he said yesterday, as well as you thought. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ROLAND BURRIS (D), ILLINOIS: I am committed to voting for a bill that achieves the goals of a public option, competition, cost- savings and accountability. I will not be able to vote for lesser legislation that ignores these fundamentals.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: I don't know about you, but I just heard him say that achieves the goals of a public option.
MARTIN: Oh, no, absolutely, he -- look...
SANCHEZ: Yesterday I thought he was saying, I ain't voting for this thing.
MARTIN: Look, first of all, I interviewed him on the "Tom Joyner Morning Show" and he said, I will not vote for any bill that does not contain a robust public option. On my show on TV One cable network, he said the exact same thing. And so yes, he is now backing away from it.
But again, this is where the rubber meets the road. And that is, are you going to have Democrats who have strong convictions, are they going to stand in the way of the president's most important initiative? That is going to be the test for them. You have people on the -- you have conservative Democrats, are they going to do it? We know where the Republicans stand. They're not going to vote for it.
SANCHEZ: But wait a minute, the president is standing in the way of the president's most important initiative. I'm getting word from the White House, and there was a wonderful article written about this in Politico yesterday, that seemed to indicate that it's the president who is telling Democrats, look, let's just pass whatever we can get, whether it has the extended Medicare or not.
MARTIN: First of all, the president has been clear, he a not wedded to a public option, he is not wedded to expanded Medicare. He simply wants a bill. And that's the point of Howard Dean. When Howard Dean says having a bill for the sake of a bill is not what you campaigned on, and the White House is obviously ticked off at Howard Dean.
But look, since they have come out of the House and gone to the Senate, they have been sitting here dancing with anybody just to get a vote. Every senator knows that, and so you're going to have even more senators say, I want this, I want this, I want that.
Look, the president of the United States co-sponsored a bill to allow the importation of drugs from Canada. The president did when he was a senator. Rahm Emanuel voted for the same thing. What did they do? They actually fought the bill to allow for the reimportation of drugs to satisfy the deal they cut with the pharmaceutical companies.
Dana Millbank has a great column in today's "Washington Post" on this. And so two issues they agreed on, they're dancing away from. They want to get any bill for the sake of a bill.
SANCHEZ: What do you make of the president of the United States meeting with bankers earlier this week and apparently scolding them -- if he did, he did seem angry after the meeting. And Matt Taibbi basically saying, look, this guy is in bed with these guys.
MARTIN: OK. Here's the deal, Rick. When I acted a fool when I was a child, my dad had two options. He could keep wagging his finger at me or he would go get his -- get the belt and beat my behind. You know what, if he wagged his finger all day, I was going to keep acting a fool, but when he beat my behind, I got the message.
The president is going to have to kick some tail when it comes to these bankers. They are sitting here saying, OK, Mr. President, you can sit here and wag your finger, give us a tongue-lashing, we still took your billions, we're still giving out $140 billion in bonuses. So you know what, if all it's going to take for you to wag your finger, go right ahead, we don't care. These bankers are not going to do anything until somebody puts the belt to their behinds, and unless you do that, they're just going to say, man, keep yelling. Plus, everybody hates bankers. They don't care.
SANCHEZ: Let's continue the conversation about bankers and the president. Let's go now to Wolf Blitzer, and he is going to pick things up for us in "THE SITUATION ROOM."
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Rick, thanks very much.
