Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Crossfire

Interview With Robert Smith, Interview With Barney Frank

Aired December 14, 2001 - 19:30   ET

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

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: ...treaty hinders our government's ability to develop ways to protect our people from future terrorists or rogue-state missile attacks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: Tonight, does the Bush administration have its priorities in order, spending so much money for a missile shield? Then, the U.S. government wages a new war. and this time it is a war on -- fat?

ANNOUNCER: Live from Washington, CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press. On the right, Robert Novak. In the CROSSFIRE, Republican Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire, member of the armed services committee, and Democratic Congressman Barney Frank from Massachusetts. And later, from Virginia beach, Virginia, Surgeon General Dr. David Satcher.

NOVAK: Good evening. Welcome to CROSSFIRE. While Americans were being exposed to Osama Bin Laden, George W. Bush finally dropped the other shoe -- or was it the other missile -- on the 29-year-old ABM treaty.

As long promised, the president withdrew the United States from the major U.S.-Russian arms control treaty, removing an impediment from building a national missile shield.

Actually, the news was crowded out on this morning's headlines -- intentionally or not -- by release of the now-infamous Bin Laden tape. The negative reaction to the ABM withdrawal was predictable. Criticism from Russia, from China and from Democrats in Congress. President Bush says he's getting rid of a useless relic of the Cold War.

The question is whether the president's initiative better protects America or makes the country more vulnerable -- Bill Press.

BILL PRESS, CO-HOST: Senator Smith, let's start with this question of timing. Now, this is a major announcement the president said yesterday. First time since 1978 the United States has withdrawn from a treaty and yet it just so happened he made the announcement while everybody's eyes and ears were glued to that Osama Bin Laden video. Was this just a coincidence?

White House press secretary Ari Fleischer was asked that today. I would like you to listen to his response. Here's Ari Fleischer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN: You just -- you have to pick a date. I think your question no matter what date would be picked could be a similar question.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PRESS: Actually it was yesterday, but you get the point. Now, Senator Smith, you don't believe him for a second, do you? This was just an attempt to slip this announcement out while everybody was looking the other way.

SEN. ROBERT SMITH (R), NEW HAMPSHIRE: No, I don't think so, Bill. This has -- this has been leaking out. I mean, we've been hearing about this now for several days and weeks that the president was going to do this.

And so why not now? The longer we wait, the longer the six months takes to run. I want the six months to expire so that we can move forward on a missile defense system.

I'm very proud of President Bush for finally doing it. A lot of us have been voices in the wilderness now for the last eight to ten years to have this done. So I'm glad it's happening.

PRESS: Well, awfully suspicious to me, Senator. But let me ask you about the -- the priorities. Because, you know, in the economic stimulus package the Democrats were asking for $3.9 billion for some homeland security measures which would have beefed up local law enforcement, protected some ports, protected the airports, protected some nuclear power plants, given more money to the post office for fighting the -- for dealing with the anthrax scare.

The president said no, can't afford it. All of those are directly related to 9-11. The president says no, can't afford it. And yet the defense bill passed by both houses now that the president wanted has $7.8 billion for missile defense that has nothing to do with 9/11. Don't you have the priorities totally "bass ackwards"?

SMITH: It's really a shame, Bill, that the debate degenerates this way. You know we can -- we can work...

PRESS: Why? Why? It's over money. You only have so much money.

SMITH: Can we -- can we work to cure heart disease and cancer at the same time? Can we build automobiles and airplanes at the same time? Can we walk and chew gum at the same time?

Look, if that had been a missile that hit New York from -- with biological and chemical or nuclear weapons, the point is they have -- these nations are developing the capability. I want the United States to be up there, to be ready, to stop this. To be the master of the -- of the skies, if you will, master of the -- of space to see to it that we are not going to have incoming missiles that can destroy huge populations of America.

NOVAK: Congressman Frank, let's forget for a moment about whether it was a coincidence -- it was a coincidence that it came on Bin Laden Day or the idea of gee, whizz, we don't have some money for the post office. Let's listen to the president's explanation of why it's necessary for the protection of the Americans.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Today, as the events of September 11 made all too clear, the greatest threats to both our countries come not from each other or other big powers in the world, but from terrorists who strike without warning or rogue states who seek weapons of mass destruction.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOVAK: Surely, Congressman, you don't believe the United States should be defenseless against these rogue nations who may be developing these -- this missile capability?

REP. BARNEY FRANK (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Surely I do not. That's why I support a vigorous defense. And I think the best deterrent you have against a nation even thinking about doing that to us is what we just did in Afghanistan. We have just shown again the relevance of deterrence.

We have had nuclear deterrence versus the Soviet Union, but now we had an attack from Osama Bin Laden who was sheltered in Afghanistan and the consequence of that attack was dead Americans, tragically, but the end of the Taliban regime. And that's our primary defense.

In the first place, missile defense seems to me very unproven and unlikely to be able to be successful. Secondly, I am perfectly prepared to put aside the coincidence of timing. I don't care whether it came on Bin Laden Day or the fourth day of Hanukkah or the -- the day of five golden rings.

What I do care about, though, is the money. And I differ with Senator Smith. No, we cannot do everything. Can we fight heart disease and cancer? Look. We are back -- thanks to the Bush tax cut -- in a deficit situation.

We are in a situation where no, we cannot do everything. We have got very serious problems which confront Americans. We have a problem of a public health system which can barely handle in many big cities right now Friday night, much less an outbreak of bioterrorism.

So this notion that we can have it all is simply wrong. And I think it is a much, much lower priority to this untested, very expensive missile defense system when we have a very good defense against America: the absolute certainty that any country that launches an attack on America -- or is even the host to such an attack -- is going to find itself as severely punished as the Taliban.

NOVAK: On the question of priority, Congressman, how can -- how can you say that we can't afford everything and therefore we can't afford these tests to see if -- to see if this works when the Congress is about to -- I -- may have already gone to the president -- pass a -- a $15 billion subsidy for the railroad workers and their -- their widows, where the -- all these appropriation bills are laced with more pork than we have ever had, where the defense bill has a sweetheart deal with the Boeing airplane company. I mean, the -- you guys are on a spending binge.

FRANK: No, I am not. I am against many of those. I voted against the -- the defense authorization bill that came through. I'm against many of these. I'm against the agricultural subsidies in which we are awash. I am for cutting those down.

But I also recognize the reality that some of them are going to happen anyway. And even if we get rid of some of these -- by the way, unlike you, I do not think an adequate cost of living for widows of railroad workers is pork. I am not as dismissive of that as you. I am very proud to have voted to make this...

NOVAK: What -- what makes a railroad worker better than you or me?

FRANK: They are not any better than you or I. They are simply getting what they are legally entitled to. And as a matter of fact, the problem is we ought to be reaching out to protect people like the employees of Enron and elsewhere who are the victims of an inadequate pension system, so I have no apologies to make for that.

NOVAK: We are getting far afield.

FRANK: No, no. You're the one who raised this issue, Mr. Novak. You like to change the subject when it's not going well. You're the one who brought up railroad workers.

NOVAK: I thought it was going fine.

FRANK: You were -- you were bringing up these other things. The fact is that there are constraints. We have had Mitch Daniels announce that thanks to the economy and everything else, we are going to have deficits as far as the eye can see. And that does mean you have to look at cost.

PRESS: I know you want to jump in, Senator.

SMITH: I don't want to interrupt.

PRESS: God forbid.

SMITH: You know, the thing is, how do you put a price -- how do you put a price on -- on what happened to those -- to those people in New York? Do you mean to tell me, Barney or Bill, that if we knew that that attack was coming, we had the capability to stop it, that we shouldn't spend the money to do it? I'm not going to sit here and wait for North Korea, Libya, Iraq, Iran, -- let me just finish. I'll be brief -- China or anybody else to -- to take a preemptive strike against the United States because they have the capability to do it and then say, OK they hit us.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Excuse me.

SMITH: Wait. Let me just finish the point. So then they hit us so now we go -- we go after them.

FRANK: Are you aware, Senator...

SMITH: No way. That's not -- that's not acceptable.

FRANK: Are you aware that the Bush administration says this is not aimed at China? This shows the confusion on your side on this.

The Bush administration keeps telling the Chinese this has got nothing to do with them. And you just cited China. You have just undercut their own rationale.

SMITH: I don't think -- no, I don't think the Chinese...

FRANK: You mentioned China, Mr. Senator.

SMITH: It's a question of capability, not...

FRANK: No, no. You said that this has something to do with China. In fact it...

SMITH: I'm not -- I didn't say -- I did say China. But China has the capability.

FRANK: Yeah, you said China. But you didn't mean it.

(CROSSTALK)

SMITH: Because China has -- China has the capability.

FRANK: But this is not aimed at China. That's...

SMITH: You have to deal with the capability.

FRANK: ... in fact, if it was aimed at China, it would be destabilizing.

PRESS: Let me move on to the question of capability, because that's a big question about -- about this whole system. We have been at it for over 20 years, since Ronald Reagan unleashed this stupid idea, and we still don't know if it works.

I'd like you to look at this morning's "New York Times" page A- 12, where it says, first of all, on the same page -- side by side -- that Putin doesn't like this but he's just going to grin and bear it. Next door to it it says, "a setback for missile shield as another failed rocket test" yesterday. Senator, we've been at it for 20 years. We still don't know this thing works. Don't you think you ought to know it works before you spend $7.8 billion on it?

SMITH: Well, every -- every major weapon system, everything we do, we have failures. We have failures on -- on heart -- heart disease research. We have failures on inventions. We don't -- we don't do things the first time and say that it works. The greatness of America is you try. We have -- believe me.

We have -- let me -- let me go on the record right here and somebody can look back 30 years from now and say -- I guarantee you 30 years from now we'll have plenty of evidence this is up, operational and working. And you can look back on this show and you can say, "Bob Smith said it and he said it right here." I'm going on the record now.

PRESS: Senator, we've been doing it for 20 years.

SMITH: We haven't been doing it. We delayed...

PRESS: Yes, we have. We have tested and tested.

(CROSSTALK)

SMITH: Listen. Let me tell you something.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Billions of dollars.

PRESS: ...another 30 years.

SMITH: Bill Clinton...

PRESS: ...another 30 years.

SMITH: Bill Clinton...

PRESS: I thought were you a conservative.

SMITH: With all due respect, Bill Clinton blocked it for eight years. Blocked it. Refused to let it happen. Sam Nunn, had he had the opportunity to have his way, we would have had this system deployed right now.

NOVAK: I would like to quote from something else that appeared in "the New York Times". It was a fascinating column by Jan Lodal. I'm sure you know him. He was a --a high-ranking official in the Defense Department.

FRANK: That is one of the things of which you were sure which isn't true, but go right ahead.

NOVAK: He's an icon of the left. He's a great arms controller.

FRANK: I'm not big on icons, Mr. Novak. I don't...

NOVAK: I think you're an icon of the left, Mr. Frank.

FRANK: Well, I...

NOVAK: You've always been an icon of mine, anyway. But anyway...

FRANK: That's a frightening thought.

NOVAK: Mr. -- Mr. Lodal was a great arms controller. And this is what he wrote in "the New York Times". Quote, "President Vladimir Putin was slow to accept the changes to the treaty that President Bush reasonably requested last month in Texas. It is time to move on. The focus now should be on building a new set of understandings on nuclear weapons and ballistic missile defense." End quote.

That's not a Republican. That's not a conservative. That's not a war hawk. It's a reasonable person, isn't it?

FRANK: Well, first, the argument from authority never impresses me and is often used as a substitute for logic.

Second, I want to congratulate Senator Smith. I mean, having gotten China wrong, he's now protecting himself.

He says -- he's saying something and 30 years from now we can check. Well, since all of us will be dead he'll be safe. And I think making a prediction that can't be tested for 30 years is a very sure way -- it's a very good way to do it.

But let me -- in response to this, the basic point is precisely that we are very uncertain that this will work. It is unlikely to work. I want to stress again, we are not defenseless. We deterred Russia and we deterred China by our overwhelming deterrent force.

SMITH: ...deter terrorists?

FRANK: Yes, I think you can -- you can deny -- deter the country. I think what has happened to the Taliban is a very instructive example and anyone who tries this again has the same destruction as the Taliban.

PRESS: Real quick.

SMITH: I'm sure if we just had a nice conversation with Bin Laden or Saddam Hussein or nice reasonable people like that -- or Qadhafi -- we could stop all this.

FRANK: No one says they were reasonable.

SMITH: We could have stopped it all. No problem.

PRESS: Senator Smith, Congressman Frank, thank you very much for coming in and something tells how we are going to fight that war.

Speaking of wars, when we come back, America has a new war. A war against fat. Would you believe it? Are you ready to give up all of these, your favorite foods? When we come back we'll ask the surgeon general of the United States, David Satcher.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PRESS: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE. Well, we have got a war on poverty, a war on drugs, a war on terrorism and now America's newest war. Are you ready? A war on fat, which challenges overweight Americans to shed pounds as a gesture of patriotism. You know, love your country, lose 10 pounds.

This national action on obesity was announced yesterday by Surgeon General David Satcher. And he joins us now from Virginia Beach. Bob?

NOVAK: Dr. Satcher, welcome. Your ideological forefathers tried to -- in fact they did -- have prohibition of alcohol. It was disastrous. People have tried and have virtually had prohibition of tobacco.

And now as I read what you're saying, you want a prohibition of fat foods -- fast foods and fat foods -- like these Twinkies I have here. Are you going to take these Twinkies away from American children? Are you going to take them away from me?

DAVID SATCHER, SURGEON GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, I hope you'll read the report, Bob. Very clearly what we are recommending in this report that people work toward a balanced approach to nutrition and physical activity.

We have had a doubling of overweight and obesity in this country in the last 20 years. 61 percent of adults in this country are overweight or obese. 14 percent of children are overweight, and obesity tripled among adolescents in the last 20 years.

What we are saying is that we need to look at our eating habits and work toward healthy choices. We're not denying anybody anything but we're trying to make sure that people choose wisely what they eat. And we can save a lot of lives from heart disease, diabetes, even cancer and respiratory disease by reducing overweight and obesity.

NOVAK: Dr. Satcher, I'm 70 years old. I'm in good -- excellent health. I'm a two-time cancer survivor. I'm overweight. I do no exercise whatsoever, as a -- as a rigorous diet.

And my food, well, this noon, I had fried oysters, a steak -- I didn't touch the vegetables -- I had cake and ice cream for dessert. I had three cups of black coffee. And I enjoyed it. Are you going to take those pleasures away? Why -- why do you want to interfere with the way I live?

SATCHER: I would certainly like to change your eating habits, Bob...

NOVAK: Why?

SATCHER: And I believe I can allow you to enjoy your food but also allow you to be healthy and prevent some cancer and heart disease and diabetes.

NOVAK: I am healthy.

SATCHER: But I believe you can be more healthy. I'm more concerned about children. There are a lot of young people out there who can change their lifestyles today and prevent diabetes. Do you realize the magnitude of type-2 diabetes in some of our populations? American Indians, Hispanic, even children? It's really no laughing matter. We really have a lot of young people who are at great risk.

NOVAK: I'm not laughing either.

PRESS: Well, Dr. -- Dr. Satcher, Bill Press here. I eat a lot healthier than Bob and I'm going to live a lot longer. But -- so I'm all for your war on fat. But I am -- I must admit I'm skeptical. Look. We've had a war on poverty going back to Lyndon Johnson's days. We've got the war on drugs going back to Ronald Reagan's days. Neither one has been very effective.

You've got absolutely no power. So how do you think that this war on fat is going to be any more effective, any more successful than the war on drugs?

SATCHER: Well, you know, we didn't call it a war on fat. Now, that's your terminology. But I understand what you're saying.

I think this is a very reasonable report, and if people read it, they will see that what we're saying is that we have an opportunity to considerably improve the health of the American people. We are investigating a lot of money in treating diseases that we can prevent. That's what we are saying.

And I think we owe it to ourselves and to our families and our communities to do the best we can. We spend $117 billion a year treating problems that are related to overweight and obesity.

But more important than the money, from my perspective, is a lot of unnecessary pain and suffering in this country if we could just change the way we eat and also we could increase our physical activity.

PRESS: Well, here's the thing. You're -- you're talking mainly to -- I know you want to -- you're talking about kids. But you're not starting where I think you can really affect kids, which is in the schools in physical education programs.

Our research department checked today. Do you know, Dr. Satcher, there's only one state in the entire country that requires physical education for all school students? Do you know what that state is?

SATCHER: Well, you know, we -- that was our -- you are quoting my report.

PRESS: All right. Well, there it is. It's one state. It's Illinois. Bob Novak comes from Illinois. Well, I mean if you -- if you'd started him out right maybe he wouldn't be where he is today. SATCHER: Bill, I really want to urge the American people to read this report. The report strongly recommends that schools require physical education K through 12.

NOVAK: Oh, that...

SATCHER: In fact, I was director of the CDC when we did the study to show that only 25% of teenagers were taking physical education in high school.

NOVAK: But...

SATCHER: So clearly we have targeted physical activity in the schools and in the community.

NOVAK: Dr. Satcher, I went to the web site of the surgeon general today and we found an entry called "My Job." I guess you must have written it, because you use the word my. And it's the duties of the surgeon general.

And in all seriousness, sir, as I read these duties, one thing I didn't find was that the surgeon general of the United States is big mother to the American people, that it is the surgeon general's duty to tell us about our lifestyles. Aren't you really overreaching yourself and intruding into personal choice in this country?

SATCHER: By no means. The purpose of this report is to help people to become more aware of what they can do for themselves and their families and their communities.

The surgeon general is responsible for communicating directly to the American people based on the best available public health science, not politics, not religion, not personal opinion. The best available public health science. And that's what this report is.

And I -- again, despite our discussion here, I hope the American people will read this report.

NOVAK: Dr. Satcher, thank you very, very much.

SATCHER: Thank you.

NOVAK: Bill Press and I are going to be back in a -- in a moment. Coming up, we'll have some really perceptive opinions of Bill Press from you, the viewers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NOVAK: It's fire back time on CROSSFIRE. The viewers getting their chance to fire back at press and me. First tonight, Howard Thomas. "Bill Press's one-sided, know-it-all demeanor is sickening to watch. God help us if Osama Bin Laden stands trial in America and Bill covers the trial. I'm sure he would take the position that Osama Bin Laden cannot get a fair trial in America."

PRESS: I think Howard should listen to what I say and you should eat your peas, Bob. By the way, look, I've said -- all I've said about Osama Bin Laden is I'm convinced he can get a fair trial in this country. I have confidence in our American system of justice. So bring him back here. Put him on trial and nail him.

Bob, got one for you. G. Jones from upstate New York has you nailed, Bob. "When are Robert Novak and the rest of the prejudiced reporters going to leave the Clintons alone? Now they're trying to blame President Bill Clinton for Bin Laden. If the first President George Bush had got rid of Saddam Hussein after Desert Storm, we wouldn't be going through what we're going through now."

You must agree that's right.

NOVAK: Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with what's going on now. Bill Clinton is responsible for Bin Laden. I'm going to tell you something very -- I'm going to tell you and your friend from upstate New York something. I will never let the Clintons alone.

PRESS: Bob, you've just got to move on. Move on. Please.

NOVAK: Next from Richard Rogers. I remember, he was a very good...

PRESS: Great composer.

NOVAK: ...composer. "Bill, if you had invested two percent of your Social Security in the stock market for the past thirty years, you would still have more than you get from Social Security alone, even with the stock market down. Don't take one company -- Enron -- out of the thousands to make your point. You should do your homework before you try to convince someone of something."

PRESS: Yeah. I will be the first to admit that I don't make the best stock market choices. I may have -- may not have invested in Enron, but I might have invested in pets.com. Stupid moves. Shouldn't be allowed to do it.

NOVAK: I don't...

PRESS: Hey, Bob, that's it.

NOVAK: I don't understand what you said in the slightest. Explain to me when we get off the air, because it was incomprehensible.

PRESS: Everybody else knows what I'm talking about. Bad moves. From the left, folks, have a good weekend. Good night for CROSSFIRE.

NOVAK: From the right, I'm Robert Novak. Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE.

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