Return to Transcripts main page
In the Arena
Will There Be a Budget Agreement?; Government Shutdown Threatens Military Families
Aired April 07, 2011 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ELIOT SPITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. I'm Eliot Spitzer. Welcome to the program.
Here it is, folks, a live picture of the White House. The people's house where yet another emergency meeting has just begun.
President Obama has hauled House Speaker Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Reid into the Oval Office to try to come to some agreement on the plan to fund our democracy. They're working late but at least they're getting paid, and they'll keep getting paid even if there is a government shutdown.
By tomorrow, military families may not be so lucky and hundreds of thousands of federal employees are in the same boat. Unless something happens fast, it will all begin in about 28 hours, midnight, tomorrow.
Make no mistake. This is about more than just money. It has grown into an emotional battle over issues that have divided this country for decades, issues like abortion and global warming, to name just a few.
To explain all of this, let's get to some of the best reporters in Washington, Dan Lothian at the White House, Dana Bash on Capitol Hill, and Gloria Borger at our Washington bureau.
Welcome to all of you.
Dana, you just spoke with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid moments before the meeting began. Tell us what you learned.
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Eliot, I talked to him in his office literally as he was walking out the door to head to the White House. And I asked him where -- basically where the state of play is and whether or not he really thinks that there could be a government shutdown. Listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D), MAJORITY LEADER: Well, I'm hopeful that we can get something done. It seems every time we go to the White House we get close, we leave, we're further apart.
It's too bad that this most important issue dealing with funding this government for the next few months is now hung up on an issue relating to women's health. And that's too bad because that's what it is.
BASH: People out there want to know what's going to happen. You've been around here a long time. Can you just give a sense of what you think the chances are at this point that the government will shut down?
REID: Right now I'm hopeful. But I think that the odds are no better than 50/50. I have been terribly disappointed in what we've heard from the leadership in the House this last 24 hours. It just hasn't been as positive as I'd like it to be.
We should be able to get this done, but we can't continually negotiate with ourselves. This is not a debate between Democrats and Republicans. It's a debate between Republicans and Republicans.
(END OF VIDEO CLIP)
BASH: Now, of course, Eliot, the other side of this, on the Republican side, they say that the Democrats aren't giving enough and that Republicans have given a lot. Not only on how much to spend but also on what to cut. What to cut.
And you talked -- you heard a little bit of an allusion there from Harry Reid about the idea that there are other issues out there. And you talked about at the top of the show, and this really does seem to be the big issue that they're focusing on.
It was at the White House meeting earlier today and we expect it to be tonight as well. And we're talking about some policy issues that House Republicans passed in their original bill dealing with everything from the environment to abortion.
And they say that these are issues that they are -- that their conservative members are absolutely standing firm on. And Democrats say that they're non-starters. And this is -- it is coming down to this in a big way, but I will tell you, politically, I know that you know this, Eliot, it also serves the Democrats to make the point over and over again that Republicans are trying to hold this up over what the consider unrelated policy issues as opposed to spending issues.
SPITZER: You know, Dana, it sounds to me like I hear a lot of things in what Senator Reid is saying most important. He's suggesting the Tea Party is the tail that's wagging the dog of the Republican Party. And as you've just told us, there are really three separate issues here. One is how much you spend, second is where you cuts, how you distribute them across the government, and three, these policy issues that are so thorny.
And Senator Reid is saying that's when it's come down to right now, those policy debates, more than the numbers, more than the dollars, that is making this a very, very hard agreement to reach.
Let me go to Dan Lothian who's at the White House. Dan, tell us what is the mood as the participants have arrived at the White House? Is there a sense that there can be a breakthrough tonight? Or is this going to be deja vu all over again? You know, we're watching the same movie over and over, it's sort of "Groundhog Day" again tonight.
DAN LOTHIAN, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It does feel a little bit like we're watching that same movie over and over again. You know last night after the meetings and then when the congressional leaders came out to the microphones, there was a sense of optimism, but that seemed to really change today despite the fact that the teams from the White House and those on the Hill had been talking late into the night.
But now the sense at the White House is that it really is a tossup, a 50/50 chance that they'll get a deal. After the meeting that took place this afternoon, that meeting lasted for about an hour 20 minutes, you heard the typical lines that, you know, the talks were productive, that we are getting close.
But nonetheless there is this disappointment among Democrats in general and the White House in particular that they have not been able to get a deal and take this across the finish line. And you keep hearing that they're very close, but what's complicated in this is that how close is close?
If they had been this close, then a deal would have been done by now. But they've not been able to do that. So that's why the president had asked for these leaders to come back here to the White House to meet again in this last-ditch effort to try and get a deal done as the clock winds down.
The meeting was supposed to have started at 7:00. It was pushed back to 8:00. And of course the hope is that indeed they can find some kind of compromise.
SPITZER: You know, Dan, as the cliche goes, close doesn't matter except in hand grenades and horse shows.
LOTHIAN: That's right.
SPITZER: Thanks it's not hand grenade but it's also not horseshoes. So close doesn't matter.
Let's go now to Gloria Borger, who's probably the best connected political reporter in Washington.
Gloria, what are people saying? Who wins or loses if this drags out? Does anybody win or does one party actually think --
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: No, I don't --
SPITZER: -- maybe it comes out ahead?
BORGER: I don't think anybody wins. And I just got off the phone with someone at the White House, who said look, at this point, we're not sure how much negotiating is even going on anymore.
What this is about is John Boehner and how he is going to be perceived in his caucus. I think the question the Democrats are sort of waiting to find the answer to is, they know the John Boehner who lived through the '95 shutdown does not want another shutdown.
The question is whether he can convince his 87 new Republicans, many of whom ran on cutting the deficit, that this is the best deal he can get and that they need to cut a deal because otherwise they will get blamed for shutting down the government and it won't be good for them.
Now, Barack Obama is also repositioning himself, Eliot, to a certain degree. We see him -- dare I use the word triangulating, as we used to say about Bill Clinton?
SPITZER: Yes.
BORGER: This is a president who's now coming up, wants to be the grownup, sitting the kids at the table, and saying, you finish your homework and you don't get up from the table until your homework is done. And the bet at the White House is that the American public are going to like what they see in that Barack Obama.
SPITZER: You know, Gloria, it's fascinating. You make the absolutely correct point that -- that John Boehner has to prove to the Tea Party membership in his party that he's playing hardball and he's tough.
BORGER: Right.
SPITZER: It may be the only way he can show he's tough is by looking over the precipice into a shutdown. What short of that will persuade the Tea Party members to come along with him? And you know what? Some of them may want to shut down anyway so even that strategy may not work.
BORGER: But you know I was talking to a Republican senator yesterday who said that he has been going over to the House and talking to House Republicans and saying to them, you know what? This isn't the big fight you want to have.
The big fight you might want to have is getting budget cuts when it comes time to raise the debt ceiling, for example, which is coming up this spring and also maybe the larger fight you want to have is defending the budget of Congressman Paul Ryan that was just introduced this week.
So senators are -- Republican senators are saying to the new House folks, just, you know, hold your fire. Get this done.
SPITZER: You know --
BORGER: We don't want this shutdown.
SPITZER: Gloria, you're right. Let me go over to Dana on Capitol Hill. It seems to me this is only the first of three chapters. This could be -- you know a tragedy with three different verses in it, to use a bad metaphor. Chapter one is this -- how we closed last year's budget, chapter two is raising the debt ceiling, which is going to have to be confronted in about a month, chapter three is next year's budget, which is going to have to be passed by October if they're going to be on time.
So this is just the warm-up act. How does all this play in the context of those larger battles down the road?
BASH: It is just a warm-up act and I've talked to many members of the Republican Party over the past couple of days, especially over in the House, who've said that they've seen kind of the long-term battle, that they've seen the fact that they really are going to have to fight for cutting trillions of dollars, not billions, that they're talking about right now.
But one point I wanted to make -- I know you and Gloria were talking a lot about the pressure on Republicans. But I think we can't underestimate the fact that there is also pressure on Democrats. There's also pressure on the Democratic leader not to give in from his perspective too much.
And there's been frustration at the White House because they felt -- the Democrats here that the White House is not pushing enough for the Democrats' point of view to just -- you know they're giving in too much on these spending cuts.
So, you know, there definitely are pressures on both sides of the aisle, not just the Republicans, but also on the Democrats. And that is definitely contributing to the stalemate.
SPITZER: Dana, there's no doubt about it. There's enormous frustration building up in many corners of the Democratic Party where people are saying we're giving, giving, giving, getting nothing back. In fact this debate has been done on the terms of the Republican Party.
All the cuts are in the areas they want cut. At least that's what the public is hearing. And it may be the case. And so there's real frustration that the White House didn't push back harder and at least stake out another position and define the terms of the debate.
Dan, let me come back to you at the White House. You know they've been in there theoretically for all of about nine minutes yet. You know, are they doing real substantive work tonight? Are they having pizza delivered to suggest this is going to be a long meeting?
You know when I was back -- as a lawyer, if you started a meeting at 8:00, you said to folks, we're going to be here a long time, you urns of coffee, bad pizza, lock the doors, nobody could go to bathroom. That's how you get a deal.
Are they doing that or are they playing Tiddlywinks? LOTHIAN: Well, I think they're really serious about these negotiations here tonight. And yes, the sense here is that this -- we're getting to. This is perhaps not the last effort, but it's getting very close to the last effort as the clock winds down.
You know it's unclear, as Dana has been referring to, there are a lot of issues that are being debated, but we don't know exactly on paper what it is that they're haggling over, how far indeed they are apart. And so, you know, certainly the hope is that tonight they will come here really serious about making a commitment to make some concessions so they can walk away with an agreement.
Certainly not a done deal, but if they can get something and show some positive signs of getting a deal, the president has said that he's willing to go along with a short-term funding measure, two, three days, just so they can, you know, cross the T's and dot the I's.
Beyond that, though, he said he's not interested in a short-term measure that would go a week because they've already had two of those.
SPITZER: You know, I think that's exactly right, Dan. He has made it very clear he wants the pressure to be up, turn up those flames, turn up the heat. He said two or three days if it's just, as you say, papering over a deal that's been cut. That's one thing. If it's a matter of open issues, no way. That's what we're hearing out of the White House.
All right, Dan, Dana, Gloria, great reporting. Thank you for joining us. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: As the deadline for a shutdown takes closer, outrage is on the rise. And no one is angrier than military families. They already live in fear of losing their loved ones. Now they have to worry about whether they'll be able to pay for their bills and food on the table.
Amy Tersigni has two small children. Her husband, Private 1st Class Kevin Tersigni, is risking his neck right now in Iraq.
Amy joins me from Southfield, Michigan.
Amy, first, thank you so much for joining us. And let me ask you simply, what message do you want to send to the folks in Congress and in the White House?
AMY TERSIGNI, ARMY WIFE: That it's real. We don't have reserve money. And we don't have -- we live paycheck to paycheck. We need to be paid. They're risking their live and they don't deserve to not have their paycheck.
SPITZER: You know have you been told by the military, don't worry, at the end of the day you're going to get all your money? Have they said, here's how you can get a short-term loan overnight? Have they reached out to you to say, here's how we can help in the event of -- that there is no budget and there's a government shutdown?
TERSIGNI: No.
SPITZER: Just radio silence, nothing at all.
TERSIGNI: Nope.
SPITZER: Let me ask you, have you spoken to Kevin? Do you speak to him often, and does he know there may be this other crisis that -- you know hard enough for you to live back at home when he's over in Iraq. He's been for, what, seven months now he's been over at Iraq?
TERSIGNI: Yes.
SPITZER: And has he -- does he know that you may also be running out of cash?
TERSIGNI: Yes. It's -- and they don't need more stress. They don't need to be worrying about us back here. They need to focus on finishing what they need to do and keeping themselves safe. So the financial stress doesn't need to happen.
SPITZER: What was his reaction when you told him, look, you know, it's hard enough, we're living paycheck to paycheck, you know, what they pay our soldiers certainly isn't enough for you to save any money, put anything aside.
What was his reaction when you told him, I'm not even getting your paycheck next week?
TERSIGNI: Obviously, he was upset. But there's not really much we can do. He still has to go to work. He still has to abide by his contract and we're just kind of out.
SPITZER: Tell us more about how you live. Do you have any other income? Are there friends there who can help you out? Have you been able to save any money because he's been in the military for what -- am I right, about two years?
TERSIGNI: Yes. No, we don't have much saved. We have two small children, and as we know, kids cost money. We have a lot of support from our family and friends, and they have helped us out tremendously already. And we don't know what we're going to do.
SPITZER: Yes.
TERSIGNI: But we're not alone. There's thousands of other families in our same situation.
SPITZER: Well, is there any effort for all of the military families to get together and sort of send letters in to Capitol Hill to say, guys, get your act together, pay us? I mean, we're defending our nation and you're sitting there doing press conferences, putting out press release. Please at least pay the military that's defending our nation.
Have you guys organized to do that at this point?
TERSIGNI: We have petitions started, and trying to get support through online. We're doing our best to come together and try and get them to realize and see and hear our message.
SPITZER: You know, I hate to ask personal questions like this, but do you have enough money to pay for the food next week, to pay for diapers? You have a 6-month-old, right?
TERSIGNI: I have a 3-month-old.
SPITZER: Three-month-old.
TERSIGNI: For next week? Yes. By the end of the month? No.
SPITZER: And so what you're telling us is if this thing goes on for a week or so, then you're going to be flat out of cash, no food for diapers, no -- money for food. You're going to be literally at the end of your capacity to pay for your kids.
TERSIGNI: Yes.
SPITZER: Let me ask you -- I just hope --
TERSIGNI: And you can't tell your kid why they can't eat.
SPITZER: I hope they're watching this in the Oval Office and that John Boehner and Harry Reid and the president just look at each other and saying, this is why we've got to resolve this. And shame on us if we don't.
Let me ask you, are you -- are you following this day in and day out? I mean are you wrapped up in this? Or are you just saying, I don't want to know any more, this is just too terrible?
TERSIGNI: I've definitely been following it. It's very real for me. It's my life. It's whether my kids get fed or not.
SPITZER: You know, Amy --
TERSIGNI: At this point, it's just frustrating.
SPITZER: Look, it's more than frustrating. You're being too polite and I think your emotions are obviously stronger than that and they should be. And so thank you for coming on the air with us. And I hope --
TERSIGNI: Thank you.
SPITZER: -- folks who are watching get a real sense of what's at stake here.
Amy, thanks so much and good luck.
TERSIGNI: Thanks.
SPITZER: We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: As we heard just moments ago, if the government shuts down, hundreds of thousands of people will have to do without. At least for a while. But a lot of the details are just now becoming clear.
Tom Foreman has been digging into the impact of a shutdown. He joins us now from Washington.
Tom, if the government shuts down, describe for us exactly what's going to happen.
TOM FOREMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Eliot. Well, let's talk about who's going to be affected. Because that's really the people who are most worried right now, like the young lady you were speaking to a moment ago.
If you have a shutdown, who's affected? An estimated 800,000 federal workers could be furloughed. U.S. troops, as that woman mentioned, would not be paid on time. Processing of paper tax returns and refunds would stop. Passport applications would be processed at a slower pace.
National parks and museums will close. Approval of small business loans will stop at SBA, no new FHA loans. The EPA would cease monitoring pollution. No new clinical trials at NIH. Those are the people who will be affected if the shutdown comes through, Eliot.
SPITZER: Now, I also gather, Tom, that there's going to be a different impact in different states around the country.
FOREMAN: Yes. Totally.
SPITZER: How does that play?
FOREMAN: Totally. Different people, look at this. If you have the government shutdown, who will get paid? Air traffic controllers, airport screening, food inspection, Border Patrol, members of Congress.
I said earlier, you know, this totally depends on where you live, what you do and who you are as to whether or not you're affected. If you are like somebody who's in a military family, this is a big deal for you. If you work for the government, this is a big deal for you.
If you look at this, though, and you're not directly tied to those things, it's kind of like Columbus Day without the parade. It just might go on and on. And you're right, it differs where you are in the country.
Look at this map. This is where the most federal employees are in the country by state. Now there are many all over the place, but if you look at the big states, over 150,000, that's California and D.C., 75,000 to 150,000, that's places like Texas, Florida, Georgia, up in this area. Less than 75,000, Colorado, Arizona, Alabama, places like that.
So you can see, Eliot, there are big parts of the country where there will be a lot of people who will basically say, look, if you weren't telling me there was a shutdown, if it only goes on a few days, I wouldn't even notice it. And then there are other places which is going to be a big deal. Interestingly enough, Eliot, more federal workers in California than there are in Washington.
SPITZER: Fascinating. That I would not have guessed.
You know one thing you just said amazed me. Who made the determination that members of Congress are essential? I guess my question is, essential to whom and for what reason?
(LAUGHTER)
FOREMAN: They made that -- come on, Eliot. Who made that --
SPITZER: I shouldn't say that. All right.
FOREMAN: They made that -- I did some calculations earlier that I know you're going to love here. They make about $174,000 a year so while this is shut down, every hour that every member of the Senate or the House is just breathing, as long as they're alive, every single hour each one of them, right there, $20 of taxpayers' money go to them. While they're not solving this thing.
So if we put a box on those steps of the Capitol, we made everyone on every hour until it's solved drop a $20 bill and say, we're going to have raffle and then take --
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: I like that idea, Tom.
One other thing I saw that's kind of amazing. You know you have this image of museums closing so people can't get in.
FOREMAN: Right.
SPITZER: I read it's worse than that. There are people who are on, you know, their annual vacations who are camping in the national parks. They're affirmatively going to be kicked out.
FOREMAN: Yes. They're going to be told, you have to leave. Because -- for a lot of different reasons, including liability reasons, you can't have people staying in an area that you're supposed to be monitoring if you're not monitoring.
SPITZER: Right.
FOREMAN: But again, I think, Eliot, what we're seeing here is this real -- it's almost like a war shack test. People who really think that government is fundamentally sort of an impediment and a pain in the neck, their view is, so what? Let it shut down. This will be good for us. People who fundamentally think government is a force for good are saying, no, no, this is a big mistake to do that. And it does break down a little by where you are and what you do, although I will say this. The longer it goes on, things like the loans for homes -- it owns a quarter of the loans in this country. If you -- stop processing those, the ones that are connected to the government, it doesn't take too long before a lot of people who don't think they're going to see it then will -- Eliot.
SPITZER: All right, Tom, fascinating stuff. Especially as you point out, this really is a measure of how people view government, good, bad, indifferent, how they view the possibility of a shutdown.
And just for folks --
FOREMAN: Eliot, you've got $20 there?
SPITZER: Well, I was going to say the White House meeting literally just started so that's half an hour. So that was $10 just for that half hour that they didn't meet.
(LAUGHTER)
FOREMAN: You know, for each one. Each one.
SPITZER: But you know -- the math is getting too complicated for me.
All right, thank you, Tom, for joining us tonight.
If there's one independent voice in this shutdown mess, one who's been almost as critical as I have is Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. He's the longest serving independent congressman in history. He joins us now from Washington.
Welcome, Senator. It's always a joy to have you on the show. Senator --
SE. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: Good to be with you, Eliot.
SPITZER: What do you make of this? Is this an embarrassment, is this a fight for equity? What should happen now?
SANDERS: Well, it's all of the above and many other things. You know, the bottom line here is that we have our Republican friends who think that the way to balance the budget is to give huge tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country at a time when the rich are already getting richer and to savagely cut back on educational programs, health care needs, the Social Security administration, at a time when the middle class is disappearing and poverty is increasing.
So I think that is totally absurd. And then, on top of all of that, after all of the concessions, far too many to my mind, that the Democrats have already made in terms of cuts, which are going to hurt a whole lot of people, what the Republicans are now saying, that's not good enough. Yes, you cut, you cut, you cut. But now what we want you to do, before we sign on and prevent a government shutdown, is we want you to stop the District of Columbia from using their own money for pregnancy prevention and for abortions. Or we want you to eviscerate the Environmental Protection Agency from enforcing clean air and clean water regulations.
So what you're seeing now is not only the Republican drive to eviscerate and cut so many programs that working families need, which is really going to hurt, but they also now into their right-wing ideology about telling the District of Columbia how they can use their own money.
SPITZER: Look, Senator, anybody -- I think you know and anybody who's listening to this show knows that I basically agree with you on just about everything you just said. But here's the question I've just got to ask you.
This is the Democrats' fault. The president and the Democratic Congress didn't pass a budget last year when you should have.
SANDERS: Now --
SPITZER: Now explain to me why that decision was made, because last year with the majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives and a Democratic president, that was the moment, one would have thought, when the Democratic Party would pass a budget reflecting all the ideological points you just made.
So what happened last year?
SANDERS: Well, I am not going to argue with you, if you suggest that the Democrats have played this poorly, that they have not been aggressive, that they have not raised the whole issue of revenue. Why is it that when we talk about the budget the only thing we can talk about is throwing hundreds of thousands of children off of head start or cutting back substantially on Pell Grants? Why don't we do away with corporate loopholes for the oil companies, some of whom pay nothing in taxes or tax breaks for billionaires?
In that case, you're right. But in terms of the budget, what you have to understand, Eliot, is that we have seen a record-breaking number of filibusters on the part of the Republicans, obstructed, obstructed, obstructed and have brought us to where we are right now.
SPITZER: Look, I don't disagree with you that's why a lot of us are focusing on the possibility of filibuster reform a couple months ago when the new Congress came in. That's a discussion for another day I think.
But, look, back in December when the so-called compromise about tax cuts was passed, some of us, I included, were saying, wait a minute, it is as certain as the sun will rise tomorrow that come early spring we're going to be talking about massive cuts and everybody is going to be wringing their hands saying, my goodness, there's not enough revenue. Well, you just gave it away through extending tax cuts. Why did you do that? We're now paying the piper for the decisions made in December.
SANDERS: Absolutely.
SPITZER: So who should be angry at them?
SANDERS: OK, Eliot, I was on the floor of the Senate you may recall for 8-1/2 hours.
SPITZER: We remember. We tried to play the whole thing, we couldn't.
SANDERS: A book came out recently. If you read the book, that's exactly what I said.
SPITZER: Wait a minute. Can I interrupt you? I don't want to be rude, but you took your 8-1/2 hours to say what you just said, right? Why should I buy the book?
SANDERS: Because you're a nice guy.
SPITZER: All right. I'll buy it.
SANDERS: All right. Here's the point. The point is, everybody understands that if the president came to an agreement with the Republicans, which gives huge tax breaks to the wealthiest people, which lowers the estate tax, which pushes forward the low rates on dividends and capital gains.
But the next thing the Republicans would say, my goodness, we have a tremendous deficit, and the only way we as Republicans know how to deal with the deficit is to savagely cut programs that low income and working people need. So, of course, you're absolutely right.
The reason I objected so strongly to the president's agreement with the Republicans on the tax proposal is exactly for that reason. Poll after poll show that what the American people want is shared sacrifice. They think that the oil companies should pay something in taxes to help us reduce the deficit.
That you don't give huge tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires and then come down heavy on people who already are hurting. Did the Democrats go forward with that agenda? Of course they did not.
I have to tell you though that in the Democratic caucus of which I'm a member there is more and more discussion about a surge tax on millionaires. I have no argument with what you're saying.
SPITZER: OK, it seems to me that this momentary crisis -- let's hope it's momentary will be overcome, but then we face raising the debt limit, then we face next year's budget. Those are the really big battles. It seems to me that we have Paul Ryan's budget plan, we don't have time to discuss it now. I've heard you ultimately attacking it. We also have the Bowles/Simpson report, a series of reports out there.
When will there be an alternative that you will sign onto that will explain what can be done to both solve the revenue crisis, spend and invest in the future and deal with what is a real issue about entitlements down the road?
SANDERS: Well, I hope very much -- it's not likely that I will sign onto this agreement. I've voted against the other packages because it did not have revenue in it. I hope the day after this agreement is reached that the Democrats seriously go forward in terms of shared sacrifice.
And demand that large corporations and the wealthiest people in this country, who are doing phenomenally well, corporate profits are at an all-time high, rich are paying the lowest tax rates that we've seen in decades. There has got to be shared sacrifice and I will fight as hard as I can to make that happen.
SPITZER: All right, Senator Bernie Sanders, as always, thanks so much for joining us. It's a pleasure to chat with you.
SANDERS: Good to be with you, Eliot.
SPITZER: Coming up, some of those questions Bernie Sanders just raised. I'll be putting to one of the nicest guys in the Senate, but I bet he can take it. Don't go away.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: Will Cain joins me now. You know what, Will, this is good theatre, but it's not theater. This is reality. These are tough issues, a lot of lives being affected. It just kind boggles the mind where we are right now.
CAIN: Yes. Short time ago, you and I had a great conversation with Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida. He was a real gentleman, but that didn't save him from some tough questions. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SPITZER: Senator Nelson, thanks so much for joining us.
SENATOR BILL NELSON (D), FLORIDA: It's a pleasure, Eliot.
SPITZER: Senator, I hate to side with John Boehner on anything, but I'm with him on this. What is the president doing trying to raise money for his campaign 48 hours out from the government shut down?
He hasn't given a speech to the nation to rally ideologically a foundation, creative foundation for what he believes in. I don't even know what he believes in right now. I think this is a vacuum of void the Democratic Party will be held accountable for. NELSON: You're making an assumption as president that the parties are willing to come together in good faith.
SPITZER: No.
NELSON: And thus far it doesn't look like they are.
SPITZER: No. I don't presume no good faith in the other side quite frankly. I've been there and I've seen it, but I do believe if there's not going to be a good faith on the other side, we need a clarion call, which is very precise and very accurate and clear about what we do believe in.
NELSON: Sadly there is so much posturing going on. If you took somebody like a Chambliss and a Mark Warner, put them together, keep all the outside influences, put a Lamar Alexander and Kent Conrad together, a Democrat and Republican, both tend to be more centrist, we could get this thing done in five hours.
But what you have is the poisoned political atmosphere. Now, when are the American people going to say, this is enough. We're tired of this partisanship. We're tired of picking up your little ideological bag and running off in the corner and saying, it's going to be my way or no way.
You can't govern a country as big and as complex and as diverse as this country unless people of good will are willing to come together and build a consensus. That's what's going on right now. People unwilling to do that.
CAIN: But Senator Nelson, I have to say, from my perspective as I'm watching this, it looks like only one side, the Republican side is putting out any proposals. We hear nothing from you guys.
You say you're talking about $100 billion cuts behind the scenes. We hear nothing from President Obama. The Republicans are the only ones suggesting any potential cuts to this budget. Are they the only ones who care about the deficit then?
NELSON: Well, Will, you haven't been listening to my speeches then because I think within short order we could get an agreement.
CAIN: Senator Nelson, I've got to ask you this, in all honesty, earnestness, I watch what's going on and I see the Democrats oppose any kind of cuts or at least anything above $33 billion in cuts in the different discretionary spending.
I hear you say, no, I'm not interested in a lot of Medicare or Medicaid reform. What I hear Democrats say then, on the other side, they really are concerned about the rising deficit, the national debt.
And you just told me that you have some proposals of your own about how to attack that. I'm starving to hear them because all I hear -- look right now it sounds to me like you guys are becoming the party of no.
NELSON: Will, you didn't listen to what I said.
CAIN: Well, I'm -- my ears are wide open right now. Please fix the budget for me.
NELSON: May I give you one, for example? It would be tens and billions of dollars. How about the royalty payments that are not being paid by oil companies for the privilege of extracting oil out of federal lands? That's a good starter and you can go on from there on a number of tax expenditures.
CAIN: On the spending side, Senator Nelson, do you have any suggestions on the spending side or only revenues?
NELSON: Will, you can't approach it like you are. You're either one side or the other.
CAIN: No, sir. No, sir.
NELSON: No, no. Now listen.
CAIN: I'm all ears.
NELSON: What I have been saying in this whole interview is that you've got to have people of good will come together that are not trying to score partisan and ideological political points.
That's the way at the end of the day we're going to get something done. And the way it's going to be done by the way is because the American people are going to demand it.
SPITZER: Senator, we wish you nothing but the best in resolving this issue. Nonpartisan way that we know you could. You could handle it if you had the authority.
NELSON: Thank you, Eliot. Thank you, Will.
CAIN: Thanks a lot, Senator Nelson. I really enjoyed it.
NELSON: Yes indeed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CAIN: Senator Nelson and I had a good time. I really do think he's a great gentleman. I'd love to get together with him for coffee and work out these problems, but they seem a little big, Eliot, right now.
SPITZER: I don't think your agreement matters. I think we need the White House and we need the congressmen. I'm going to get in trouble of saying this. He is such a consummate gentleman, he sounds just like my father-in-law.
We're going to check back in to the White House in a moment, see if the meeting is producing any results that matter to the American public. If they're just eating pizza and drinking coffee, we'll find out soon. We'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: Let's go back to Capitol Hill and check in with our senior congressional correspondent Dana Bash. Dana, apparently, it's not just the Tea Party within the Republican Party that's putting a lot of pressure on Speaker Boehner. What are you marrying about this?
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's very interesting. You know, you hear the term "Tea Party" you so much especially by Democrats here, Eliot, because they feel it's an easy way to paint Republicans in a certain way.
That they're just kind of listening to the masses if you will, but I've been talking to a lot of members of Congress on the Republican side some of whom are not freshmen and they are not Tea Party Republicans, but maybe even some of the old guard who have said that they, too, are pressing the speaker to hold the line on spending.
So it just is an interesting dynamic that has been playing out here as I walk the halls and talk to Republicans. There's some frustration that they say they're getting painted as the Tea Party.
But it's kind of really a broad sentiment in the Republican Party for the speaker to say, don't give any more on the spending bills, even if they're only talking about a couple billion dollars.
SPITZER: Interesting thing you're focusing on, the spending. What are those senior veteran Republicans saying about their willingness or necessity of including the so-called riders on issues like abortion and global warming on this agreement? Are they saying they'll give on that as long as they don't give on the money?
BASH: It's a very good question. It depends on who you talk to. Depends on where they are on the spectrum, if you will. There are some Republicans who have been around here a long time who are socially conservative who say they're not going to vote for this unless there are some of those policy issues in there.
We're talking about clean air. We're talking about abortion. Things like that and so it really doesn't necessarily fall on where they are in the ranks here, but it does fall on where they stand on the political spectrum, which I'm sure that doesn't surprise you at all. But interest is a lot of pressure on the speaker to hold out on those issues as well.
SPITZER: Dana, thanks so much. Fascinating insights.
The House Budget Committee is ground zero in this budget fight. I talked to one of its key members a short time ago. Congressman Tom Cole has some thoughtful ideas on what's going on right now. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SPITZER: Congressman, thank you so much for joining us this evening. REPRESENTATIVE TOM COLE (R), HOUSE BUDGET COMMITTEE: My pleasure.
SPITZER: So it seems to me that this potential government shutdown right now is being driven not so much by disagreement about numbers, we're kind of close on that, but it's being driven by the so- called riders that are being added into the debate.
These changes in policy about abortion and EPA regulation that the Republican Party is insisting upon. So here's the question -- is this the right moment to be doing that? Shouldn't we just agree on the numbers and leave those issues for down the road?
COLE: Well, I actually think anytime you agree on the numbers you decide where to spend, that's an ideological decision, a values- based decision. I think it's appropriate to talk about them here.
Having said that, I agree with your basic premise that let's get the numbers right and let's see if there's common ground. Remember, a lot of Democrats, for instance, were very supportive on the EPA restrictions.
So there are some these riders that are very bipartisan. I think they'd be appropriate to include in the final settlement.
SPITZER: Yes, but it just seems to me that raising the issue of abortion and the scope of EPA regulation right now when we're still trying to pass last year's budget, trying to prevent the government shutting down.
Is this the moment to open up such divisive issues that frankly even divided up your party and opened all sorts of wounds, why not just get this deal done and understand those issues have to be dealt with later on and this isn't the document to do it in?
COLE: Well, I think the speaker made it very clear. Look, his aim is not to shut down the government. It's to reduce spending. That's first and foremost what we're trying to do here.
Again, there's some policy considerations. Most of riders that might be included are on things that frankly Democrats have accepted in the past, again, broad partisan support for.
But, again, I think we can find a deal if both side come to the table in good faith. We think we have. We did pass our original bill also 50 days ago now.
We provided two extensions and a third today so we can continue the discussions. And our aim in all of those has been to continually reduce spending, but not shutdown the government.
SPITZER: Congressman, I want to ask you a question about basic fairness now. This is it a context where the top 1 percent of the income earners in our nation earn 25 percent of all income, control 40 percent of the wealth in the nation, and those numbers as we all know have been getting bigger over time. And we gave those wealthy folks the top 2 percent a huge tax break last year, the extending the Bush tax cuts. Now we could call them the Obama tax cuts. In that context, the Ryan budget balances the budget two-thirds of the cuts fall on the poor.
I'm not talking anything other than simple fairness now. Does it strike you that's a fair way to go forward?
COLE: Well, remember, you know, this is on top of an enormous expansion in discretionary spending in the last two or three years. The Obama budget raised nondefense discretionary spending by 24 percent in a two-year period and frankly over 80 percent if you count the stimulus money toward that number.
So we're not asking for drastic draconian cuts. We're about going back to around 2008, 2007, frankly something that many American families have had to do. At the end of the day, though, I think we all agree we want to spur economic growth.
We want the tax system that encourages people to invest, to save, to help create jobs right here in America. I think Paul is trying to accomplish that. And, again, just if the president will show us what his alternative is, we might be able to find out where there's common ground.
The current tax situation, we've got to remember the president negotiated the agreement putting it off for additional two years because he thought that those lower tax rates were important to economic growth. It wasn't something he wanted to do, but he actually believed that that would help bring the economy back.
So there's at least some thinking I hope on the other side that lower tax rates are an incentive for faster growth and ultimately more income over the long term.
SPITZER: Congressman, that's why I said, if we could close the loopholes, lower the rates, the devil's in the details and some other day we'll get into the loopholes that will close.
Just to be clear, I was talking about the close to trillion dollar cut in Medicaid alone, really health care for the poor, not nondefense discretionary.
That's where the biggest cuts are coming from. Is that fair to do that to the poor when the wealthy got a tax cut almost to the identical amount?
COLE: Most of those cuts in Medicaid that you're pointing to are really because we don't believe in going forward with the Obamacare legislation. You know, most of the people, over half the people, got, quote, insurance under Obamacare got it simply because we raised Medicare eligibility rates, doubled the number of people on Medicaid.
So we're not taking away money from the poor. We're not enacting a program that the president had supported and that the democratic congress passed. It's no big surprise that we don't believe in that program. No Republicans voted for it.
SPITZER: I think it's been pretty clear that's one of those pretty crisp divides in the political arena. Having said that, just so it's clear, if you take away and reduce those eligibility numbers, you're going to be saying to tens of millions of people, you have no way of getting health insurance, then they won't get the health care. That's a pretty significant hit.
Anyway, Congressman, I appreciate you're joining us tonight. Look forward to continuing this conversation with you down the road.
COLE: Eliot, thank you. It's a privilege to be with you.
SPITZER: Thank you, sir.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SPITZER: Up next -- the latest from Washington where they're running out of fingers to cross. Stay tuned.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: Back to Washington now for the latest on the shutdown showdown, Dan Lothian at the White House, Gloria Borger in our Washington bureau.
Dan, what are you hearing out of the White House, anything to suggest progress or anything at all, for that matter?
DAN LOTHIAN, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: No word yet on what's going on in there, but one interesting thing is that the last time I spoke with you. We thought at that time that the meeting had already gotten under way. I was supposed to have taken place at 8:00, but that meeting did not get started until 8:25.
Now, initially the meeting was pushed back from 7:00 to 8:00 we were told because of the congressional leaders had some meetings up on the Hill. It's unclear as to why that further 25-minute delay, but they are deep in their negotiations now.
And the hope is they can either get something sealed up tonight or at least make some major progress that they can build on over the last few hours tomorrow.
SPITZER: Dan, I think the answer to that time delay may be Washington, D.C., lives in its own time zone. Clocks are set in a fundamentally different way. We're still in last year's fiscal year.
Gloria, last question we have time for. At what point time do people, if there isn't an agreement, go to their political trenches and start playing defense. And say, we got to start making their case about why there's a shutdown rather than even trying to get to an agreement?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, I think what we've been seeing, Eliot, is kind of the pre-emptive strikes that people are already taking. You see the Democrats talking about, they shouldn't legislate social policy on this bill.
You see Republicans saying, no, no, that's not what it's about. It's really about spending. So I think they're each staking out their ground. The president went into great detail about what would happen if the government closed, what kind of pain people would be suffering, particularly if it were prolonged, talking about military families as you spoke about earlier in the show.
So I think they've each sort of staked out their political position. I think right now they have to figure out a way so they can both save face. Because that's what this is about, because it's in no one's interest, no one's political interest, for this government to shutdown. It may help the Republican Party with its base, not in the long term.
SPITZER: Gloria, you are so right about that. Dan and Gloria, thank you so much for being here.
Good night from New York. "PIERS MORGAN TONIGHT" starts right now.
