Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) Michigan & Sen. Roy Blunt (R) Missouri are Interviewed About Their Bill to Fund Community Mental Health Treatment. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired March 14, 2019 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:00] JOE HAGAN, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT, "VANITY FAIR": -- figured he wasn't going to be around. Suddenly he shows up for the women's rally. I went up to his house, and he was out on the front porch. I waved him over. He said, come in the house, meet the wife and kids. And that's how I met him. And this is before the Oprah interview.

And I got to see him with his hair down really. It was a Sunday afternoon. And there he was, just this regular guy doing his thing with the kids. And I have to say there's an unvarnished, real, down to earth, charismatic character there. The question is, how is he going to be politically defined? How will he define himself? And he is sort of undefined right now. He's like a charisma candidate. And I think that the grassroots in the Democratic Party want some of that charisma, but they also want somebody who's got some meat on his bones. And we have to find out what that is.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: I think it's deliberately undefined.

HAGAN: Right.

BERMAN: And that was one of the questions I had in your article, this consistent stream. He's talking about how he took off as a candidate in Texas. He's like, I don't know how it happened. I went into speeches with nothing prepared, and something just came to me.

HAGAN: That's right.

BERMAN: So how much of that do you think is genuine? Could you tell?

HAGAN: It's very genuine.

BERMAN: You do? It's not a schtick?

HAGAN: I have met a bunch of political people in my life. Hillary Clinton. When John Edwards came out of the gate, I met him. You get a sense that there's a kind of backstage to them, you know what I mean? There is a sense that they are thinking about what they're going to say. He is somebody who is off the cuff, he's happening in the moment. And there is a realness to him.

Now, how will that translate on the national stage? And we don't know that. But his connection with people was something that even seemed to surprise him, that he had been gifted with this connection, this retail kind of politician skill. Now he has to figure out how to turn it into something.

You're right, though. I think the longer he can stay undefined, the better it is for him perhaps.

BERMAN: Perhaps.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: And a profile piece by definition, it is about the subject.

HAGAN: That's right.

CAMEROTA: And the subject knows it is about the subject, so the subject is introspective and talks about himself.

HAGAN: Right.

CAMEROTA: But it has been pointed out by some of our pundits this morning that at some point he'll have to pivot to talking about the other people. What was your impression of that?

HAGAN: You mean the other candidates?

CAMEROTA: No. He seems in your piece, but maybe it's just the way it's written, to start every sentence with here's why I'm so jazzed, here's what I'm about, I was born to do this, as opposed to, when I'm out there I hear people desperate, and that has spoken to me.

BERMAN: Me, not we.

HAGAN: He said to me -- I started to talk to him about issues, and I said what do you think are the big issues. And he said the number one issue I heard going around was health care. He went to rural Texas. And listen, his skill set seems to be that he can go anywhere and try to connect with anyone. And he's selling that. He's saying I can go out into these areas of the country where Democrats don't typically go where it could be traction, and I can connect, especially with women voters. He's like his mama raised him right. That's the vibe you get from him. And so people, he's got a folksy quality.

So whether he can -- politically in the spectrum of the candidates we're seeing now, I think he wants to split the difference between the Bernie Sanders grassroots and the Joe Biden centrists. He wants to basically cut both of them out. And he's half their age practically, so that's his sell.

BERMAN: He seems very self-aware of his perceived weaknesses. In this case, the fact that he's a white male.

HAGAN: Yes, he talks about it in the story.

BERMAN: Explain.

HAGAN: Well, listen, it's obvious that the Democratic Party, its reaction to Trump is, hey, we are the diverse party. Let's have a black woman. Let's have a person of color, another gender. And I think that's also coming out of just the disappointment of having Hillary Clinton losing in the last election.

So he realizes that's a weakness. His answer to that is I'll have a team that is diverse and reflects the country unlike the White House, what we're seeing now. He can't get over the fact that he's a white man, so he just has to accept that part. But he said in the piece, you will see. He's quoted saying, if people feel they need to vote for a person of color or a woman, I get that.

CAMEROTA: In the piece, you start it with, I think, a really compelling moment. Because he was so unvarnished you got to spend time with his family including his three young kids.

HAGAN: Yes.

CAMEROTA: And so we don't have a full screen of this, but I just want to read it, where his eight-year-old says, dad, if you run for president I'm going to cry all day. And then he says, O'Rourke says, just the one day? And the son says, every day. And so obviously that's some of what he was weighing, the pressure from his kids.

HAGAN: Can I give you a little context about that.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

HAGAN: We had just picked his kids up from school. So I was with him. He and his wife were -- it looked like a typical family situation where it's a patchwork of trying to figure out who was going to go pick the kids up. So he decided I'll go pick up the kids.

[08:05:07] While this is happening he's taking phone calls the whole time about, hey, Trump's coming, you have got to do a rally. But the kids were fully in on the conversation. It was obviously a rolling conversation that had been going on. And with a reporter in the car, they were very happy to declare, and you could see him like, oh, boy, here come the opinions. But he just rolls with it. And that's his style. He wasn't going to try to pretend it wasn't happening.

BERMAN: In terms of the framing of the whole election, he talked a lot about how he wants to run a positive campaign with proactive ideas, not just anti-Trump, he kept telling you.

HAGAN: Yes.

BERMAN: However, he then framed this as a "Star Wars" like struggle against the evil empire or the battle for Middle Earth in "The Lord of the Rings." It appealed to me as somebody who grew up in the 70s and 80s, "The Lord of the Rings," "Star Wars," but what does he mean? Can he have it both ways? Can he have a battle against evil and remain positive?

HAGAN: Luke Skywalker did it. I don't know. That is a question for me. In a primary where you don't have a boogieman to draw on energy, you don't have a Cruz or a Trump who's going to energize. It's Democrats versus Democrats. So how is going to define himself in that? And can he stay positive in that? There are some people that doubt that he can stay positive in a primary when he's getting attacked from all sides. That is something that he's going to be working out in real time and we're about to watch it.

CAMEROTA: Joe Hagan, good timing for the cover of "Vanity Fair."

BERMAN: Complete coincidence. Absolutely coincidence.

CAMEROTA: You have the Midas touch. Thank you very much. It's a really compelling read and everybody should take a look at that. Thanks so much for being here.

HAGAN: Thanks for having me.

BERMAN: There is a lot of other news going on today. Also developing overnight, new questions about what President Trump talked about and directed to his then acting attorney general about the investigation into Michael Cohen. Joining us now is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Jerry Nadler. Congressman Nadler, thank you so much for being with us, Mr. Chairman.

REP. JERROLD NADLER, (D-NY) HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: You're welcome.

BERMAN: Before I get to the he said, he said on Matt Whitaker testifying before your committee, I just want you to explain to people in your mind, what is significant? Why does it matter what President Trump discussed with his then attorney general about the Michael Cohen investigation?

NADLER: What matters is if the president, in fact, discussed -- well, remember that Jeff Sessions was fired as attorney general for one reason and one reason only. He recused himself from involvement in the Russia investigation. And the president fired him for that reason. He said he wanted an attorney general who would personally protect him from the investigation.

And then he appoints Whitaker who had no visible qualifications for the job at that level, except that he had commented very negatively on Mueller's investigation. And so he went in there specifically so as not to be recused.

And so the question obviously -- and then in the testimony yesterday when presented directly with an opportunity to deny that the president talked to him about the Michael Cohen investigation, he refused to deny it. He evaded a lot of questions, but he refused to deny that. And he talked about how while he was attorney general for a brief period of time, and he was only there for a few months, he was involved in discussions about firing U.S. attorneys, about the scope of the recusal by the U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York from the investigation. And our question is, why was he doing these things? Why was he interested in that recusal? Was the president talking to him? He didn't say he was, but he refused to deny it, because this goes to the heart of our investigation, which would be obstruction of justice and abuse of power. If the president was seeking to influence that investigation in which

he was possibly implicated, then that's a very grave abuse of power. It's a very grave obstruction of justice. And we don't have enough answers at this point. We got some answers yesterday, namely that Whitaker refused to deny when presented the opportunity to do so.

BERMAN: Right.

NADLER: And talked about that he was involved in these discussions about the Southern District investigation.

BERMAN: Did not deny. Let me ask about did not deny, because that is what you told our Manu Raju yesterday. That is what you said publicly. You just told me that he did not deny he had conversations. What did he admit to discussing with the president?

NADLER: He did not admit to discussing with the president anything. But when presented with the opportunity, when asked by Mr. Collins at the end of the interview if it was correct that he had not spoken to the president about the Cohen case, he said that that had not been his testimony.

[08:10:05] So presented with a direct opportunity to deny that he spoke to the president about it, he refused to do so.

BERMAN: I understand the did not deny, and the legal standard of that is something that could be discussed here. but do you have any evidence, proactive evidence, that he discussed it with the president?

NADLER: Other than press reports of various people. And we have talked to some people who have said he had discussions with the president. Yes.

BERMAN: OK. This gets to Michael Cohen. The bigger issue here is, as you laid out, is was the president involved with the investigation into Michael Cohen? That would be late. That would be in the winter of 2018.

NADLER: That's right.

BERMAN: There are also questions about the president's team and if they were trying to send signals to Michael Cohen in the early days of the investigation. CNN's Gloria Borger broke this reporting that there was a lawyer, Robert Costello, who served as an intermediary between Michael Cohen and Rudy Giuliani who had just been hired by President Trump at that point as his personal lawyer. And Costello was sending messages in exchanges. And there is an e-mail where Costello tells Michael Cohen, "I spoke with Rudy. Very, very, positive. You are loved. There was never any doubt --

NADLER: That would be --

BERMAN: Hang on. "And they are in our corner. Sleep well tonight. You have friends in high places." That is a message from a lawyer who said he spoke to Rudy Giuliani. When you are told you have friends in high places, how do you take it? NADLER: I take that as the president or people on his behalf may have

been dangling the possibility of a pardon in front of Mr. Cohen to say to him, don't tell the truth. Don't implicate the president. Play the game right and you have friends in high places and you'll be OK, we'll give you a pardon. And that, too, would be, if true, a terrible obstruction of justice and an abuse of power.

And this is why our committee is investigating the questions of abuse of power and obstruction of justice. All of these things. And Whitaker did not clear it up. Whitaker, what's the word? He made it more -- he made it more possible to contemplate that the president was, in fact, involving himself in the Cohen case at that end, and now we have this reporting at the other end. All of this would be an obstruction of justice. That's why we sent out 81 requests for testimony, for documents, and why our committee has to investigate and get to the bottom of this.

BERMAN: One very quick question.

NADLER: It's also why, it's also why it is essential that when the Mueller report comes out, the entire report and the evidence behind it be released certainly to Congress, and as much as possible to the public, because the Justice Department has taken the position that you can't indict a president just because he is a president no matter how much evidence you have.

BERMAN: Mr. Chairman --

NADLER: That being the case, that being the case, Congress is the only body that can hold the president accountable. And we have to have that information. That's why we are doing the resolution today.

BERMAN: I understand, although Nancy Pelosi has said as of now she's in no rush to impeach the president. And that is the way you hold the president --

NADLER: That's a different question.

BERMAN: It is a different question.

NADLER: We don't have the facts now. We have to get the facts.

BERMAN: And we have discussed that I think quite a bit.

I to want to get your take, chairman, because a couple hours ago a former Texas Democratic congressman Beto O'Rourke announced he is running for president. You served three terms with him in Congress. What were your impressions of the then congressman?

NADLER: My impressions where that he was energetic. And I didn't serve on any committees with him, so I didn't get to know him well. But he's energetic and he's forceful and he's sincere. Those are my impressions of him.

BERMAN: How important do you think experience is for a Democratic candidate? NADLER: It is obviously a factor. But of course, Abraham Lincoln was

totally inexperienced. He served one term in the House. So it's not perhaps the most important factor.

BERMAN: Chairman Jerry Nadler, thanks so much for being with us this morning. I appreciate it.

NADLER: You're quite welcome.

CAMEROTA: All right, John, the Senate is expected to vote today to block President Trump's wall emergency declaration. Two senators from both sides of the aisle weigh in on this and more, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:18:03] CAMEROTA: The Senate is expected to vote today on whether to block President Trump's national emergency declaration for his border wall. Five Republicans have said publicly that they will vote against the president. The White House has been trying to prevent further defections while the president this morning vows to veto this.

Joining us to discuss this and so much more, we have Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow and Republican Senator Roy Blunt.

Great to see both of you this morning.

SEN. DEBBIE STABENOW (D), MICHIGAN: Good morning.

CAMEROTA: I look forward to the bipartisan effort that you're both working on --

STABENOW: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- because it's vitally important.

But, Senator Blunt, I want to start with you. You don't like how the president has done this. I read that you've said you don't like that he's circumventing Congress to get funding for the wall. So, how are you going to vote today?

SEN. ROY BLUNT (R), MISSOURI: I'm going to vote today. I'm going to talk about that this afternoon. Right now, we are talking about this. I have an Ebola, serious disease hearing after this and two or three other things. I'm going to wait for that vote to occur this afternoon. I'll be explaining my vote then.

CAMEROTA: OK, you don't want to give us a preview.

BLUNT: No.

STABENOW: Come on.

(LAUGHTER)

CAMEROTA: This would be a great opportunity on national TV.

BLUNT: It would be. It's a better opportunity to talk about excellence in mental health.

CAMEROTA: Yes, and we will. I promise. I promise. I love that topic. We do it all the time on NEW DAY. I can't wait to hear your plans for mental health and addiction in particular.

But are you leaning towards --

BLUNT: No, no. The answer is I'm going to talk about it this afternoon.

CAMEROTA: That's still your answer, OK.

Let me ask you this, hypothetically before we move on. Have you heard more than these five? Rand Paul, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Thom Tillis and Mike Lee. Have you heard of your colleagues, any other senators who may vote against it?

BLUNT: I have not had a whip count done on this. And don't know -- I was with the president yesterday in the White House where he talked about trade and this issue and other issues.

[08:20:01] I was glad to have the chance to talk directly to him about this.

CAMEROTA: OK. Let's talk --

STABENOW: Alisyn, just for the record, I will be voting for the resolution against the national emergency. So, we work together on so many wonderful things. I'm not sure how Senator Blunt is going to vote today. But I will supporting the resolution to --

CAMEROTA: To block it, to block it. Understood. Thank you very much for offering that.

Let's talk about your bipartisan bill.

STABENOW: Yes.

CAMEROTA: You want to expand the 2014 act that did a lot towards helping mental health issues. What are you trying to improve upon? What still needs to be done, Senator Stabenow?

STABENOW: Well, this is a wonderful bipartisan effort. Senator Blunt and I are both very committed to make sure that mental health and addiction treatment is treated the same as physical health which is not the case now. We have community funding for health care. Both of us are deeply involved in continuing to fund health centers as well, leading the effort.

When it comes to mental health or addiction, it's mostly grants. And when the grant runs out, no more services. So, we got together, developed quality standards for behavioral health care in the community. We were able to get funding for eight demonstration states and have been, frankly, thrilled at the response that we've seen in the last two years. So, today, we announced the next step to add funding for 11 more

states. This is something broadly supported by law enforcement, by health and mental health care professionals, mayors and governors in the states. I know Missouri Senator Blunt's state is one of the states that's doing a great job.

BLUNT: Well, I think, Alisyn, too, what we are hoping to do with this and what we hoped to do when we started this effort in 2013 is to really create a mountain of evidence of what happens when you treat behavioral health like all other health. This is really not a long- term desire for the federal government to become the funder of behavioral health. But a long-term effort to really show the states that when you treat behavioral health like all other health, frankly the other health challenges people have are so much easier to treat.

STABENOW: Yes.

BLUNT: And we have seen it in our state, one of the eight pilot states. We need a couple more years of compiling information to make the case persuasive. But, frankly, I don't think any state that makes this decision will go backward on this decision. One, it is the right thing to do. I think we are also showing it's financially the smart thing to do as well.

STABENOW: Right.

BLUNT: And interestingly in the states where this started and started before we begin to deal with the opioid challenge, I think we have seen the incredible benefit of having access in our state at 200 different locations where if part of your addiction treatment needs to be the behavioral health side of that. And that can't be over in two weeks, or 14 days, or 21 days which is the limit in most states that haven't been part of the early excellence effort. It is making a difference there as well.

STABENOW: Well, look, that will be music to the ears of so many people in the grips of addiction right now.

Senator Stabenow, do you consider the opioid issue a national emergency?

STABENOW: No question. Right now, overdoses are the leading cause of death for people under age 50. I should also mention one out of five people will have a mental illness in their lifetime. So these are very serious.

And as Senator Blunt said, when we see them being treated as part of a health care system we actually are finding in the last two years it costs less than people think and people aren't going to jail because law enforcement doesn't know what to do.

Part of it is 24-hour psychiatric emergency facilities that are -- so people are getting treatment the way they should. People aren't sitting in emergency rooms, trying to figure out what to do and get help. They are getting quality help. It's saving lives. And we just need to do this and demonstrate this across the country. CAMEROTA: Yes. Senator Blunt, would you rather millions of dollars

go to this effort than building a wall?

BLUNT: No. I'm actually for securing the border. I don't think that's the question. I think you hit on an interesting point there of what future presidents could consider to be a national emergency.

CAMEROTA: National emergency.

BLUNT: And what we're doing -- we went to the floor the last day of October 2013 when we initially introduced this bill. It was the 50th anniversary of the last bill President Kennedy signed which was the Community Mental Health Act. As we went through that bill together on the floor that day, it was obvious that the places that the bill anticipated would be closed and probably should have been closed actually all were closed, but it was just as obvious that the alternatives that 53 years ago or so that the country thought would become alternatives haven't been alternatives for most people.

[08:25:11] And that's what we are trying to show in excellence in mental health. One in five people, as Debbie said, the NIH says has a diagnosable and almost always treatable mental health issue.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BLUNT: And that 20 percent of the population also has other health issues that are being dealt with better if you are seeing your doctor, taking your medicine, eating better, sleeping better. All the dialysis costs, hypertension costs, whatever that is are so much more easily dealt with.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BLUNT: So, I think we're showing that doing the right thing actually is the smart thing financially as well.

CAMEROTA: Senator Blunt, I want to ask you because you are on transportation quickly about the Boeing 737 MAX 8. So, now, the planes are grounded. Some believe it took too long for the U.S. to make the decision. At least 24 hours after other countries.

You are having a hearing on Tuesday. What are you trying to get to the bottom of?

BLUNT: Well, I don't know that we are having a hearing Tuesday, but the Commerce Committee will have a hearing on this, I'm convinced. Just to be sure we understand the process that went on at FAA. Also the process of how things are tested and checked.

You know, Boeing has a great defense footprint in Missouri. It's an important part of our state. But I think the president after talking to Boeing yesterday made the right decision and fortunately made the right decision. We'll find out later how critical that decision was.

But there is no reason to have any unnecessary uncertainty when you are up in the sky or people you care about are up in the sky. You shouldn't have to worry about what plane they're on.

This is a great airplane. We need to be sure we find if this is a specific problem, that we find it was a problem and how to solve it.

CAMEROTA: Senator Stabenow, do you think it took too long to ground the plane?

STABENOW: I wish it had been done sooner. But I'm glad they did it. You know, I fly home every week to home. We are all on planes all the time, as well as family members.

And it's very concerning. I found myself looking at what was the plane that I was going to be on this weekend.

BLUNT: Right, right.

STABENOW: I asked my staff to make sure I was not flying on that plane. If that was my reaction, I know that was the reaction of everybody else in the country, certainly in Michigan.

So, I'm glad they grounded the plane. Sounds like it's fixable and they need to fix it quickly.

BLUNT: Right.

CAMEROTA: Yes, you aren't alone.

Senator Stabenow, Senator Blunt, thank you very much for covering this with us this morning.

BLUNT: Great to be with you.

STABENOW: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: You two.

John?

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: So, now that Beto O'Rourke is a 2020 candidate, what does that entry do to the overall race? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END