Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

U.S. Supreme Court To Hear Arguments Today In Key Voting Rights Cases; When Did Bipartisanship Become So Partisan?; Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) On Trump's Vow Of Revenge On Republicans Who Voted For Impeachment. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired March 02, 2021 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:32:12]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments today on two Arizona laws restricting how votes can be cast and collected in that state. It happens as Republicans in more than 40 states are trying to pass new state laws that very much have the reality of making it more difficult to vote.

I'm joined now by Ari Berman -- no relation. He's a senior reporter at Mother Jones and the author of "Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America." Ari, great to have you with us.

Look, first, a broad question. We'll talk about the Supreme Court in a bit. I think the bigger issue today is all the state legislators trying to pass new laws on voting and voting access. The basic question is why now all of a sudden?

ARI BERMAN, SENIOR REPORTER, MOTHER JONES, AUTHOR, "GIVE US THE BALLOT: THE MODERN STRUGGLE FOR VOTING RIGHTS IN AMERICA (via Cisco Webex): Hi, John. Well, thank you for having me, and good to see you again.

I think why now is because we are seeing the weaponization of Trump's big lie. All around the country, Republicans are pointing to the fact that so many of their voters believe the election was stolen as a reason to cut back on voting.

So, for two months, Trump said the election was stolen. And afterwards now, we are seeing Republicans in state after state, including all of these key swing states like Georgia and Arizona, rush to restrict access to the ballot. They are not just targeting mail voting, which is what Trump has largely decried, they are also targeting early voting and other methods that are perceived to benefit Democrats.

And so, this is really the biggest assault on voting rights we've seen in decades. The numbers are stunning. Two hundred fifty restrictions on voting introduced in 43 states in just two months as a direct result of what President Trump and now former President Trump has done. J. BERMAN: Let's just take Georgia because there's been so much focus on that state and there's a bill on the floor of the State Legislature right now. Explain to people exactly what the measures being proposed in Georgia are.

A. BERMAN: There's two different bills. One passed the House yesterday. It cut back -- it cuts back on early voting, including on Sunday voting when Black churches do Souls to the Polls and Get Out the Vote drives. It eliminates or restricts mail ballot drop boxes.

It does other things. Like, it gives election officials less time to send out mail ballots and less time for voters to return their ballots. It changes runoff elections, after Democrats won those two Senate runoffs, from nine weeks to just four weeks. Just five days of early voting for runoffs.

So these are pretty major changes to Georgia's election system.

But in the Georgia Senate, there's another bill that would repeal no excuse absentee voting, which 1.3 million Georgians used in 2020, including 450,000 Republicans. So now if you want to vote absentee in Georgia, including -- according to this law, you would have to have very specific excuses to be able to it.

For example, to be over 65, or to be out of town, or to have to some conflict with work that you can't get -- that you can't get to the polls. That would take Georgia from a state where it's very easy to vote by mail to a state where it's now very difficult to vote by mail.

[07:35:09]

J. BERMAN: It just -- let's talk about mail voting for a second here -- the no excuse absentee voting here. Because two years ago, four years ago, who did it more, Republicans or Democrats?

A. BERMAN: Well, it's interesting. The parties used it equally. And if anything, it was used more by Republicans.

Georgia Republicans are the ones that wrote their state's voting law and encouraged mail voting because their voters are older and more rural and they rely more on mail voting.

And so this attack on mail voting by Republicans is very, very short- sided. Their voters have used mail voting in the past. They used it in 2020 even though Trump demonized it and they will use it again in the future.

J. BERMAN: Yes.

A. BERMAN: And I think they believe that they are disenfranchising more Democrats than Republicans because more Democrats used mail voting in 2020. But there's going to be a ton of collateral damage if they cut back on mail voting in states like Georgia because it's a very convenient way to vote. And so I think they're taking a very short-sided approach to voting rights that's going to hurt all voters, but including some of their own voters. J. BERMAN: It is interesting, but they didn't oppose it as a rule when Republicans were doing it in equal numbers or more. And then in this last election, where it does seem that Democrats or people who voted for Democrats outstripped them, now it's a problem.

But just on the Souls to the Polls, on the Sunday in-person early voting, explain to me the numbers there because I think the numbers are very important so people understand who that disproportionately affects.

A. BERMAN: Sunday voting is particularly in voting -- particularly important for Black voters because that's when they do Souls to the Polls and Get Out the vote drives.

And if you look at Georgia with Sunday voting, Black voters are about 30 percent of the electorate in Georgia, but they're 37 percent of Sunday voters.

And when North Carolina tried to cut back on Sunday voting a few years ago, they actually told a court that Sunday voting was used by counties that were disproportionately African-American and disproportionately Democratic. And the court said that North Carolina's restriction on Sunday voting was as close to a smoking gun as you'll ever see in modern times because the evidence was so clear that it was used disproportionately by Black voters.

So, weekend voting benefits everyone. It's simply just a more convenient time for anybody to be able to vote because a lot of people don't work on the weekends. But it's particularly important for Black voters both because they don't work then and also because churches encourage voting on that specific day.

J. BERMAN: The last question has to do a little bit with that, which is that if Democrats are upset about all of this what can they do about it? What recourse do they have? And, you know, the Supreme Court is hearing a case today but the court is stacked against Democrats right now. What could they do?

A. BERMAN: Their best bet is to pass federal legislation protecting the right to vote. The For the People Act is going to be passed by the House today, which would do things like have automatic registration, Election Day registration, and early voting in every single state. And then to restore the part of the Voting Rights Act that the Supreme Court struck down and pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act to stop new voter suppression efforts in states like Georgia.

I think passing federal legislation is going to be more powerful and effective than trying to rely on these kind of laws being struck down in conservative-dominated courts.

J. BERMAN: It won't happen though in the Senate as it is unless they get rid of the filibuster. That's a separate issue.

Ari Berman, no relation, always great to have you on. Thanks so much.

A. BERMAN: Thank you, cousin John. J. BERMAN: President Biden has prioritized bipartisanship in his administration, but how's that working out when it actually comes to passing laws? A reality check, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:42:46]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: President Joe Biden pledged to work across the aisle since he's taken office, so when did bipartisanship become so partisan?

John Avlon has our reality check. Hi, John.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Thank you, Ali.

All right. So despite having nearly 70 percent approval, President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion American recovery plan passed the House, essentially along partisan lines without a single Republican vote. And this week, the Senate is going to take it up and it's expected to pass through reconciliation, also along partisan lines just like the Trump tax cuts did.

OK, Republicans are going to point to that divide and say that Biden's stated goal of unity was always bunked (ph) but normally, a bill supported by a supermajority of the American people and even 37 percent of Republicans would get at least some bipartisan support.

(INAUDIBLE) for a reason, right? It's supposed to represent the feelings of the people, at least a little bit. But not anymore.

And it wasn't always this way. Let's go back in the way-back machine to Ronald Reagan's first term tax cut. It passed a Democratic- controlled House by a margin of 238 to 195. Also, outside of George W. Bush's first term, it was Sen. Ted Kennedy who helped pass his signature education reform -- again, along a bipartisan margin.

So when did this obstruction become the new normal? It happened for a long time but if you had to pick one moment, it might be an infamous GOP steak dinner the night of Barack Obama's inauguration. The 15 Republicans in the room decided to pursue a strategy of total obstruction to the new president.

As Kevin McCarthy, now House minority leader, said, according to author Robert Draper, "If you act like you're the minority, you're going to stay in the minority. We've got to challenge them on every single bill."

So even with the fiscal crisis in full swing, Obama's stimulus bill got zero Republican votes in the House despite containing considerable tax cuts. When Obama proposed health care reform -- which, remember, was based on ideas promoted by the conservative Heritage Foundation and then put in action by then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney -- it, again, got the Heisman among Republicans in the House.

So when bipartisanship has broken out in recent years it's often been Democrats rescuing Republicans from a mess of their own making.

For example, 2013, when the Tea Party shut down the government over the debt ceiling and Obamacare, despite Republican control, it took all 198 Democrats in the House to join with just 87 Republicans to stop the insanity.

[07:45:10]

The same thing happened after the government shut down for 35 days under Donald Trump. Republicans controlled the House but it took 223 House Democrats to reopen it, with just six Republicans.

OK, fast-forward to COVID-19 and Trump's unprecedented $2 trillion COVID relief bill -- almost three times the Obama fiscal stimulus, for what it's worth -- which passed with broad bipartisan support in the Democratic-controlled House -- 238 Democrats, 189 Republicans. Similar margins were seen in the second COVID relief bill.

But now there's a Democratic president and Republicans are back to playing Doctor No.

Americans say they want more bipartisanship, but here's the thing. Bipartisanship has become a partisan virtue.

As historian Heather Cox Richardson wrote of Biden's COVID relief bill, "The problem is not the bill. The problem is the Republican lawmakers who are determined to oppose anything the Democrats propose."

As the eight ball might say, signs point to yes.

And that's your reality check.

J. BERMAN: Thank you so much, John. We'll see. Look, they have -- they have 10 days to figure this out and see if a single Republican votes for it.

AVLON: To see if bipartisanship breaks out.

J. BERMAN: So, new this morning, six Dr. Seuss books will no longer be published because they contain racist stereotypes and insensitive imagery. The late author's company announced the move this morning, saying the books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong.

Best-known among the books are "And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street" and "If I Ran the Zoo" -- Dr. Seuss. These are the ones they will not sell.

CAMEROTA: Got it.

J. BERMAN: That's the point.

"The Cat in the Hat" is still being sold, "How the Grinch Stole Christmas!", "One Fish, Two Fish." The books that I think you know really well will still be sold.

CAMEROTA: Right.

J. BERMAN: These are the books that they say contain racist themes, tropes, and images. And, frankly, if you read them, you can see the way they portray Africans and Asians, among other things, is insensitive, to say the least. The other books, though, will continue to be sold.

CAMEROTA: Really interesting.

J. BERMAN: Yes. Look --

CAMEROTA: I haven't read those for a long time so I haven't --

J. BERMAN: -- it jumps out at you. The way that he depicts different groups of people jumps out at you in 2021.

Former President Trump taking aim at Republicans who voted to impeach him. One of those Republican lawmakers joins us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:51:45]

CAMEROTA: Former President Trump made his first public reappearance over the weekend, telling loyalists at CPAC that he wants to get rid of Republicans who supported his second impeachment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Democrats don't have grandstanders like Mitt Romney, little Ben Sasse, Richard Burr, Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins. And in the House, Tom Rice of South Carolina, Adam Kinzinger.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Joining us now is Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger.

J. BERMAN: He got a three-syllable.

CAMEROTA: People do have a hard time with your last name, by the way.

REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R-IL) (via Skype): They do, yes.

CAMEROTA: OK. So, I know that you've said you consider that moment a badge of honor and I understand where you are. But do you -- when you hear the applause and you hear the enthusiasm of the crowd there -- the base -- the Republican base at CPAC -- do you ever worry that you're the outsider? That you're not where the party is?

KINZINGER: Yes, that is a worry. It's not a worry because I'm worried about my future and oh heavens, I might lose an election. It's a worry because if that is where the party fully is -- and CPAC is usually -- it's kind of a little different of a group. It may not be this year.

But if that's where the party is the party's in real trouble because what that's showing is you had 17 people between the House and Senate that said that an insurrection on the Capitol was impeachable and removable. And even if you didn't believe it but you thought it was bad, that's one thing, but what they seem to be doing there is saying that we were completely wrong for actually defending the Constitution.

So that -- where I would be worried is not so much on what it means for me. I mean, if -- I think I'm going to win but if I'm out of this job, OK, I'll move on. It's what would -- what it would mean for the party.

CAMEROTA: Did you really think that his speech was boring, low- energy, and weak, as you wrote?

KINZINGER: I really did because I think if that was the first time we had heard Donald Trump speak, it would be a shocking -- you know, all that stuff.

But it was the same exact -- I mean, you literally could have -- you could have given that -- he could have given that speech in September and with the exception of having talked about impeachment, it would have been the same speech he gave this time. No new ideas. It was just -- I mean, to me, it looked like somebody that just needed his monthly dose of adoration in front of a crowd.

So I really was bored. I mean, I honestly -- I watched it because I knew he was going to call my name out and I wanted to be able to -- you know, to know how to respond and what was said. But it was a hard speech to get through because I was just like, you know, looking at my phone a lot --

CAMEROTA: Well --

KINZINGER: -- as you can tell by the number of tweets I put out.

CAMEROTA: Well, here's another one that I thought -- that I found interesting. You -- Nikki Haley thought that was a strong speech.

She said "Strong speech by President Trump about the winning policies of his administration and what the party needs to unite behind moving forward. The liberal media wants a GOP civil war. Not gonna happen."

And you responded, "Geesh, what happened to you. Sad."

What --

KINZINGER: Yes. I mean, look, Nikki Haley --

CAMEROTA: What do you -- how do you explain Nikki Haley?

[07:55:00]

KINZINGER: I don't know because she's -- look, I thought when she came out of her job, like, she was going to be a strong contender for the presidency. And then she came out and, like, you know, kind of blamed Trump for January, and then didn't blame him, then did. And it's like you can't walk a tightrope if you're a Republican leader

and especially if you're looking for 2024, I think. I think you have to pick a lane. You're either a Trump-first Republican like Josh Hawley -- you know, like Ted Cruz -- or you're a country-first Republican. I can't really think of -- I can think of Larry Hogan from Maryland that's kind of going the country-first lane.

And so, I feel like Gov. Haley's trying to have it kind of both ways and you can't.

You can't -- look, you can -- as a party, you can win -- I guess some of the Trump base, yes -- but you cannot have fealty to Donald Trump and then say that the country is the most important thing because he demands that he be the most important thing.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about what's going to happen today. About two hours from now, FBI Dir. Christopher Wray is going to appear in front of Congress for the first time since the January sixth insurrection. He's going to go in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

And two of those aforementioned senators, Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz, are on that committee. They voted after the insurrection against certifying the election results.

And so, when Dir. Wray appears -- I mean, how is this going to go? What are these questions going to be like? Are we going to get answers for what the FBI knew and what went wrong here?

KINZINGER: I think we'll get some answers.

But look, all you had to do was see Josh Hawley's smug face at CPAC as he stood in front -- you know, getting these -- this adulation from the crowd about how he -- you know, you might have seen I rejected the -- like -- and everybody's -- and he's out there, like, feeling great about it.

Like, there are five people dead, two that took their own life on top of that, as a result of what you did. It was embarrassing for us around the world. It's actually for me -- as a guy that's involved in foreign policy, it's been difficult for me to talk to other countries about how to do democracy in the wake of that.

But as long as you're the most important thing and you can run for president, that's great. So in my mind -- look, I think these people, like Hawley, are going to not be contenders in 2024. I actually have an optimistic view of the future of the party, which I know is kind of hard to imagine now.

But I hope we get some answers today and, you know, we need a dose of humility, too, I think.

CAMEROTA: But you don't think he's going to run or you don't think he'll get any traction?

KINZINGER: Oh, I'm sure he'll run and, you know -- because he -- what is it -- what do they say, like the old joke for senators? You know what most senators say when they look in the mirror in the morning -- good morning, Mr. President. And he certainly is one of those.

I mean, he's -- since he's gotten in he thinks he can entertain and adore crowds, and it works. Look, the base loves him.

Where I lost a lot of respect for him was not his -- I mean, I'm probably as conservative as him -- he is. The difference is I am not going to use the Constitution as a prop to get elected and violate the Constitution as a prop to get elected.

He knew. He's one of the smartest guys in the Senate. He knew that he shouldn't have objected to those results.

I mean, before the days of Twitter, Congress didn't know all these allegations about every election. We just knew that we would certify whatever electors were brought to us. And so, that was our role and he knew that.

CAMEROTA: Senator Ted Cruz was asked yesterday by CNN what he thought of President Trump's CPAC speech, and I think we have that moment. Give me a moment. Yes, listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: I wanted to ask you about some of the president's comments yesterday.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): I didn't see it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: He didn't watch President Trump's speech?

KINZINGER: I don't believe it. But look, I mean, OK. I -- maybe he didn't. I -- you know, I --

CAMEROTA: But why would he say that? Like, I mean -- again, like, if you're currying favor with the base why would he say that?

KINZINGER: I don't know. I can't -- I don't know why Ted Cruz would say anything he says or doesn't say. I just know -- maybe I wouldn't have watched the president's speech. I guess I can't say for sure I know he didn't because I wouldn't have watched it if I didn't think he was going to address me.

But, yes -- I mean, I think -- I think -- look, it was the high water mark of the president -- of the post-presidency. It's like when everybody's going to pay attention to him. And I think now, going forward, there's just -- he's just -- the president's out of new ideas and I just think he's going to get less and less attention. And that's going to drive him nuts, by the way.

CAMEROTA: So you really think he's going to get less and less attention? I mean, that doesn't seem to be his plan.

KINZINGER: I do.

CAMEROTA: Why?

KINZINGER: Well, yes, that's -- that's not his plan. But as somebody once told me, they said America doesn't necessarily solve problems, they just leave them behind, right? America moves on. And I think that's about the American people is we do move on from has-beens and from losers, and Donald Trump is a loser. He lost the presidential race.

And so while at this moment people are defending, thinking he won, we all know he didn't win. And I think people will just move on. It doesn't mean that the party's going to heal itself, but I think it means that Trump is going to be less and less important.

And so, for me, I watched this country first.