Return to Transcripts main page
In the Arena
Federal Government on Brink of Shutdown
Aired April 08, 2011 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ELIOT SPITZER, HOST: Good evening. I'm Eliot Spitzer. Welcome to the program.
Take a look at this. The Statue of Liberty in New York harbor, the ultimate symbol of all the great things this democracy stands for. Thanks to the guys running this country, if you can call it that, lady liberty, a national monument, will be closing down in about four hours. I can't think of a more profound symbol of government dysfunction. Pathetic, isn't it?
We've heard the charges, we've heard the countercharges over and over again. Republicans claim Democrats refuse to get serious about cutting spending. Democrats charge Republicans are holding the government hostage to their social agenda.
With four hours on the clock, it's still possible that we'll dodge the bullet, that knowing how angry America is, the parties will come up with a last minute fix. I sure hope so.
Let's turn now to our powerhouse lineup of reporters in Washington. Joining me now, John King, host of "John king, USA," Ed Henry, senior White House correspondent, and Dana Bash, senior congressional correspondent. Let's start with you, Dana. You have breaking news from Speaker Boehner. What is it?
DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Let me set the scene for you. I'm in the Capitol, right down the hall behind me, that is where House Speaker John Boehner's office is. And while I've been here talking on the air and e-mailing with sources, we have an incredible team here including our producers, they caught up with the speaker a few minutes ago, asked him the obvious question, is there a deal. And he said not yet. So not yet there is a deal.
He is optimistic they're getting closer, but the other question, of course, as we get so close, Eliot, to the midnight hour, whether or not Congress is going to do anything to keep the government open. Will they pass a stopgap measure whether it is one day or a few days, I should say or one week? His answer was only if there is a deal. Only if there is a deal will they agree to keep the government running in a short-term way.
So but they're still working. There are members of congress, there are leadership aides still working behind me going back and forth, passing paper back and forth, trying to finalize that deal. We're told they are a lot closer now, though, Eliot.
SPITZER: Well, he hears the question I've got. I've got a mechanical question. Let's say they get to yes, let's say they have that magical meeting of the minds, how long would it take to get the members of the House and the Senate on the floor to pass some resolution so that the government doesn't begin to shut down? Mechanically, how much time do they need to do that?
BASH: It depends how much agreement they need to do that. In the Senate, they could do that without very many people on the floor at all. They could pass it by what is known as unanimous consent, which means they don't have to take a roll call vote.
It will likely be harder in the House because there are so many different opinions, and there are so many more people, more representatives obviously in the House. But the House is still open, and the people are still around and people realize they would have to come back pretty quickly to do that if that is the way that they want to go.
SPITZER: Dana, don't let anybody sneak out that door without you going after them to get the latest.
Now to John King. John, what are you hearing about whether there say possibility of a deal and also what are you hearing about this sort of civil war within the Republican Party that seems to have John Boehner sort of off balance and off kilter through all of this?
KING: It certainly has been complicated. What I'm told tonight is that they hope and they hope in this hour, they hope in this hour, as we speak, to fashion a one-week continuing resolution for those of you at home who don't speak Washington speak, that means one week Band-Aid budget to keep the government going and would only agree to that if they felt they were so close in the negotiations that they would not have a shutdown, continue the negotiations, have one more week, one more week and try to get that deal for the rest of the six months of the fiscal year.
They say they're close to that, Eliot. You start dotting the I's and crossing the t's and you know this well, these deals can collapse. That's one interesting part.
John Boehner would have to sell it to a conservative caucus. He's actually getting a lot of help tonight. In recent days we heard the Tea Party people don't think there is enough cuts in recent days. The social activists want the abortion language in there.
But a growing number of outside conservatives are saying cut the best deal you can cut now, do not put the party back on its heels and then debate those things in the much bigger fight that is about to come over next year's budget.
You have Sarah Palin saying if you have to, shut down the government. But Michele Bachmann, a big Tea Party person, Mike Huckabee, a conservative and a lot of socials, Karl Rove saying don't pay that price now. Do the best you can now, get what you can, Mr. Speaker, move on and fight another day.
SPITZER: John, you're raising such a hugely important point. We're not going to dig into it too much tonight because it will be next month's story, the debt ceiling vote, an enormous debate and that's where the conservative voices have been pouring on the heat, saying no way will we increase the debt ceiling unless there is significant cuts. That's next month.
And as you said, we have next year's budget. So this is really a tragedy in three parts. And this is only chapter one of what is going to be a long, ugly hot summer of debates like this.
But you're exactly right, a lot of outside voices saying to the Republican party, line up behind the deal that John Boehner cuts, if he in fact gets to cut one, so we'll have to watch over the next couple of hours and see what happens.
Let's go to Ed Henry at the White House. Who are you hearing, seeing? Is there a lost activity, anybody indicating that the president is going to say something to the nation tonight?
ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Eliot. We're hearing it is very possible that the president will come out later tonight, but it is all contingent upon what exactly happens on Capitol Hill. And frankly there is not a lot of activity here at the White House. There is a lot more activity on the Hill, as one top aide here said. They're kind of in a holding pattern in the White House behind me. They're waiting for these leaders on the hill to finally come together.
The stakes for this president, enormous, as you know, Eliot. The bottom line is there may be some anger around the country that we have even gotten to this point, a feeling of a pox on both your houses, on both parties, but they feel inside the White House that the president has got the bully pulpit. If he uses it tonight, as he has in the last few days, they think -- if there were a government shutdown, he can blame the Republicans very clearly tonight and in the days ahead if it were to shut down.
If it is not shut down, they believe firmly here at the White House by the president getting so directly involved in the last 48, 72 hours, after really frankly not getting his hands very dirty throughout this process, he can look like the grown-up here who brought everybody together, and they're certainly hoping to claim some credit for a deal. They have a few more hours to get that done, Eliot.
SPITZER: Ed, I think that's right. If there is no deal, I think the public will be disappointed, and who knows how the blame will be spread. If there is a deal, then the president will have emerged looking like the grown-up, he came in at the last minute, put his arms out, pulled everybody together. They'll play this quite deftly and I think John Boehner will have been left outside struggling to pull his caucus and conference with him.
John, Dana, Ed, thank you for the great reporting. We'll check back in with you throughout the program.
Now, as we just discussed, one of the chief sticking points in the shutdown debate turned out to be of all things abortion. To pass any compromise, Republicans are demanding the end of federal money for family planning and health clinics.
When this issue came up for an angry House debate a few months ago, California Congresswoman Jackie Speier volunteered this amazing story about her own abortion, one she had for medical reasons. Take a watch at this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JACKIE SPEIER, (R) CALIFORNIA: That procedure that you just talk about was a procedure that I endure d. I lost a baby. But for you to stand on this floor and to suggest, as you have, that somehow this is a procedure that is either welcomed or done cavalierly or done without any thought is preposterous. To think that we are here tonight debating this issue when the American people, if they are listening, are scratching their heads and wondering what does this have to do with me getting a job.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SPITZER: Congresswoman Speier joins us now from Capitol Hill. Also joining us CNN contributor and Tea Party founder Dana Loesch from St. Louis. Welcome to you both.
Congresswoman, let me begin with you. That powerful, emotive speech barely two months ago, less than two months ago, is still the fulcrum around the entire budget debate. Does it strike you as right, reasonable, or does it make any sense at all that the entire federal budget hinges on money to Planned Parenthood for family planning services?
SPEIER: You know, as I said on the floor this morning, Eliot, we are holding this budget process, this potential shutdown is going to happen over contraceptive pills. I mean, it is unbelievable.
And furthermore, when you realize that family planning dollars for every dollar that is spent on family planning actually saves the government about $4, it actually is reducing the deficit you can make the case for. It is certainly saving women's lives.
SPITZER: Let me go to Dana Loesch. Dana, you have just heard that powerful argument by the congresswoman, the most senior members of the Republican Party other than, I don't want to call them the fringe, but perhaps other than the Tea Party voices are saying this isn't the moment to raise this issue and to hold hostage the entire budget.
Why does it make sense? What the congresswoman said is correct in terms of the budget, correct in terms of the minuscule portion of funding that goes to clearly, emotionally compelling or divisive services, but that issue has been dealt with before. The rules are set. Why now, why hold up the entire budget over this? DANA LOESCH, TEA PARTY FOUNDER: What I don't understand is how this has become such a huge social issue and why we have a particular party in Congress that is willing to actually take a stand on planned parenthood, on taxpayer funded abortion with Washington, D.C. clinics.
It is a little bit more than contraceptive pills. And had Planned Parenthood actually maybe perhaps spent their money a little more wisely, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Honestly, I tell you, we wouldn't even be -- let me finish. We wouldn't be having this discussion if Democrats had actually passed a budget last year and this would be moot, this would be completely moot.
SPEIER: Let me just got to correct you. We attempted to get that budget passed in an omnibus bill at the end of last year and it was the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, Mitch McConnell who refused to have the Bill taken up on the Senate floor, and challenged a filibuster if it was taken up. So to say that is just absolutely wrong.
LOESCH: I understand what the congresswoman is saying. Yes, they tried to get this passed. But we had Democrats that had a majority in congress. If we had gotten this budget done, this would not even be an issue. And I don't understand why Democrats are choosing Planned Parenthood of all things to try to bring government to a halt over taxpayer funded abortion, period.
SPEIER: First of all, providing services through Planned Parenthood saves taxpayers money. It does not have anything to do with abortion. The abortion issue has been resolved through the Hyde Amendment years ago and no federal funds can go for abortion unless there is forcible rape or incest.
(CROSSTALK)
LOESCH: It is fair game. I'll show you the same level of respect you show me, congresswoman. It goes both ways here in the United States.
SPITZER: OK, Dana, Dana, hold on one second.
(CROSSTALK)
SPITZER: Dana, hold on one second. The congresswoman is correct, the Hyde Amendment and the subsequent amendments that dealt with this issue --
LOESCH: Eliot, you keep saying the same thing. But I'm telling you what the health and human services secretary said, that this funding goes into one pot, and unless you're there earmarking dollars specifically to prevent certain monies from being used for abortions, which I seriously doubt our government actually has the capability to do and the manpower to do, there is no assurances on this. So we can say this --
SPITZER: Dana, listen for one second, please. Listen for one second please. There is a body of law that is crystal clear, as the congresswoman said, that makes it very clear what can and cannot be funded. What you're saying is that money is fungible.
LOESCH: I'm quoting the health and human services secretary.
SPITZER: Under that logic, Dana, you would cut off money off every hospital in the nation that provides any abortion services. That is not the law. You're trying to change the law now at the wrong moment is the point you're making.
LOESCH: I'm simply quoting the health and human services secretary. If there is a problem with that particular message, I suggest you take it up with Mrs. Sebelius, because I'm simply quoting her.
SPITZER: OK, Dana, hold on for a moment. I want to change the topic for a second.
Do you agree -- let's put this in context, do you agree, just so the public understands, this is in fact the issue that is holding up the budget? Because I know that congressman speaker Boehner tried over the course of the day sometimes to say no, there is not an agreement on the numbers. Everybody else is saying, no, there was an agreement on the numbers.
Based on what you're hearing, is it in fact these policy disagreements, not the numbers that are the sticking points? I think that's an important point for the public to understand what the dynamic is right now. Whatever your view is on this, is this the dispute?
LOESCH: I think it is perhaps a combination of both. I think you have certain members who definitely don't understand why taxpayers should be forced to fund something that provides abortion. And I think you also have a group of people who are like me, and I'm saying, look, I want to cut the subsidies for everything, period. If we are going to have a discussion about the budget and cutting spending, we added $1 trillion to the deficit last year. Oil subsidies, I'm talking everything.
SPITZER: Let me ask you this question, Dana, because I think this really goes to the heart of it. Is the Tea Party saying to Speaker Boehner, we know you cut this deal, but we're not going to support you if you do not -- if you go forward with it?
LOESCH: Well, I don't speak for the Tea Party. As you know, there isn't a spokesman for it. But I don't think that either party has offered nearly enough to be cut. I'm really disappointed with every single congressional member in Washington, D.C. right now.
SPITZER: That's not the question I asked because there is a theory out there that Congressman Boehner, Speaker Boehner shook hands on a deal, he agreed to a deal, and then he backed out and welched on it because the Tea Party went to him and said we'll come after you if you go forward with this.
LOESCH: I don't know who in the Tea Party went to speaker Boehner? SPITZER: There is a --
SPEIER: There have been rallies all week with Tea Party members here in the capitol, so you can speculate as to who might have gone to him. He's also hearing from his members. And I don't think there is any doubt that his speakership is in the offing here, that if he doesn't deliver for the Tea Party members within the House Republican Party, that there will be some effort to try and undo his speakership.
SPITZER: Dana Loesch, thank you so much. Congressman Speier, thank you so much. Great conversation, spirited, lively. Let's hope we can get some agreement in the hours ahead. Thank you, guys, so much.
Always a difficult issue to talk about. Up next, a brave woman we met last night, Amy Tersigni, a young army wife and mother, whose family could be a casualty of a government shutdown. She's back and she's not giving up without a fight.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: Last night we spoke to Amy Tersigni, the 21-year-old wife of army private Kevin Tersigni. Amy told us how tough it is going to be if Kevin's pay is cut off, a struggle just to buy groceries and diapers for her two children. Remember, these families are putting their lives on the line for this country. Just listen to this goodbye message Kevin recorded for their son Grayson the night before he left for Iraq.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEVIN TERSIGNI, ARMY PRIVATE: Hi, Gray. Hi, buddy. It is your daddy. If you're watching this, I'm probably in Iraq and I'm missing you a lot, you and your mom. I can't wait to get back. I miss you, buddy. Only 364 days left. I love you so much.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SPITZER: All right, I think John Boehner would cry if he saw that, no doubt. That's what he should be crying about, those army families not getting paid. That's what we're talking about, folks, cutting off the pay for military families trying to make ends meet here at home.
Amy joins me again now from south field, Michigan. Amy, how are you holding up with all this unbelievable uncertainty about what is happening in Washington?
AMY TERSIGNI, MILITARY WIFE: We're just trying to do the best we can. It is getting more and more scary as every hour counts down the stress levels go up. It is not -- it is not something you can prepare yourself for. We haven't been --
SPITZER: Did you have a chance to speak to Kevin today? Have you been keeping him up to date on what is going on in Washington or what's not going on in Washington? TERSIGNI: Yes, I talked to him a little bit ago, actually. They all out there are extremely frustrated and downright pissed off. They're out there risking their lives and defending our country, and they're not going to be paid.
SPITZER: But you do know the members of Congress are going to get paid. Did you tell Kevin that, even though they're not doing their job, they're getting paid?
TERSIGNI: Yep. They're pretty ticked off.
SPITZER: Now, I understand your three-year-old daughter Lucy has some special needs. What does that mean in terms of your budget? Quickly, I hate to put you on the spot in front of the nation, tell us how tight is your budget and what will it mean if you don't get a paycheck.
TERSIGNI: My daughter has -- she needs a special formula because she has digestive issues and not quite sure exactly yet. Money is tight, no matter what. When you add extra expenses because your daughter needs formula that costs $250 a month, where does it come from? When your paycheck doesn't come, where does your -- how do you buy formula? How do you buy diapers? How do you feed your family? How do you pay your rent? How do you pay your bills?
SPITZER: Do you have any savings that you've been able to build up on the military salary that you can look to draw down if you don't get a paycheck for the next couple of weeks?
TERSIGNI: No. You don't make enough in the military. For the amount that these people put on the line, their lives, sacrificing their families, being with them, you don't -- you don't make enough to save. You don't. You don't have reserves. You're just stuck.
SPITZER: I don't want to ask you an embarrassing question. What does Kevin get paid?
TERSIGNI: What does he what?
SPITZER: Get paid? How much do you get in each paycheck every other week?
TERSIGNI: Every other week, in total in a month we make about just over two grand.
SPITZER: Per month?
TERSIGNI: So not much.
SPITZER: That's $24,000 a year. Would it bother you to know that these members of Congress, I think I may be off a little bit, I think they make $150,000 a year for not doing their job?
TERSIGNI: Yes, it kind of ticks me off. But obviously they're better off than I am and then many other families in my same situation are. And they can sit in their offices and still not come to an agreement knowing that so many of us are going to be affected, so many of us that don't make the kind of money they make, that don't have the reserve and the bank accounts and the saved up money that they do.
SPITZER: Is there a particular message you would like to send to the senators and the congressmen and the folks in the White House including the president about what you want to see them do right now?
TERSIGNI: We would like them to make a decision. They need to come to an agreement and they need to realize how many people are going to be affected and how affected we're going to be. If they want to take on my rent Bill and my food bills and pay for my daughter's formula and all the other families in my same situation, shut it down. Until then --
SPITZER: You know, Amy, all you're doing is asking them to pay for the work your husband is doing defending this nation in Iraq, putting his life on the line while they sit in Washington doing nothing. Sounds like a pretty straightforward request to me.
Amy, all I can say is I hope folks are watching, listening to you. There is no more powerful voice than yours right now. Thank you so much for joining us.
TERSIGNI: Thank you.
And let's hope we get the right outcome here. We'll be right back.
TERSIGNI: Thanks.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: All right, let's turn now to one of the most wise people in Washington, one of the voices I most enjoy listening to, CNN's senior political analyst David Gergen. He's seen everything through the prism of the White House, serving I think four different presidents of different parties, and that wisdom comes through every time we talk to him.
David, you're assimilating all these different conflicting reports. What do you think is going to happen? And who do you think comes out looking good or poorly as a result of all this?
DAVID GERGEN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, Eliot, I think they're going to reach some sort of agreement tonight, at least keep the government open. And I think we're not far away from a final deal. It sounds to me all the parties at the top want to get this done, and we have a number of conservatives, as John King said earlier tonight, a number of prominent conservatives now encouraging the House to vote on -- vote yes on this and move forward.
I don't think anybody comes out of this looking good. Frankly, it is a national embarrassment that we have come to the brink over such a small amount of money. You thought earlier that the president would come out of this looking good. I don't see it that way. He deserves credit for having jumped in, but, you know, he's been rather passive observer most of this. I don't think he's going to come out with great laurels, and I don't think the House or the Senate comes out with great laurels.
I was at an international gathering today, Eliot, with leading Europeans and Asians along with Americans, and it was just a sense among the foreigners, how in the world could a great nation like this be run in this fashion? And I have to say, it was hard to defend.
SPITZER: You know, David, I think you may be saying what is perhaps most important about this. Forget Democrats, Republicans, White House, legislature, the nation vis-a-vis the rest of the world is being looked at and people are saying, as you said, this is no way to run a nation. And I think the luster of it has attached to our government, being diminished day by day by this.
I also agree with you. The president has been way to passive not defined the issues. He's been playing on a turf defined by John Boehner. The Republicans have defined the parameters of this debate. But oddly, am I right that John Boehner may have seized a defeat from the jaws of victory? He had basically won on the cuts and now he's given a fair bit back by turning this into a debate about abortion.
GERGEN: Well, I certainly agree with you that the -- I think the Democrats have been very clever in the way they have been so united in making the argument that this has come down to the abortion issue. And Planned Parenthood is extremely important and popular with a great number of women. Jessica Yellin has been saying that as many as one out of five American women have turned to Planned Parenthood for help along the way with a variety of issues. Not just about abortion, but a whole variety of health issues.
And the amount of money that's involved here, according to CNN reporting, if you look at the total amount of money will actually be saved if you just zeroed out Planned Parenthood, because of a chunk of what goes to Planned Parenthood goes for Medicaid, that the amount of money would actually be saved is $100 million a year. That's sort of irrelevant, as you know, within the scope of things. So I think that the Republicans have done -- I think they have been harmed on this question of Planned Parenthood and the abortion having that so central to the debate. But, Eliot, at the same time, I do hope you will also agree that if it comes down to who's more disciplined about spending and trying to control the budget, that the Republican Party, which lost its way during the Bush years on spending, I think has now reclaimed some of the mantle of being sort of, you know, trying to fight for spending discipline. And I think on that issue they have come out ahead of the Democrats on this fight.
ELIOT SPITZER, HOST: You know, David, I agree with you entirely. I think that there's a one level of very harsh reality for the Democratic Party, which is they have ceded the contours and really the defining issues over the budget to the Republican Party. It is Paul Ryan's deficit plan, agree with it or disagree with it, as I do, that is now defining the context of the debate. You have Bowles-Simpson with Alan Simpson and massive cuts. Again, that is the Republican agenda. There is no Democratic agenda discernible in this context. And so I think you're exactly right, the Republicans have dominated the playing field and that's why it was a little surprising at the end to see them fumble the ball to continue a bad metaphor and sort of cede back some of this on the Planned Parenthood issue, which makes me think there is really a civil war within the Republican Party, or at least some faction there. The Tea Party is maybe the tail wagging the dog, really saying to John Boehner, hey, you can't seize this victory. We're going to pull you back into a fight that he probably doesn't want.
GERGEN: Well, let's wait and see. There is reporting tonight that -- from various CNN sources, reporters, correspondents like Dana Bash who are saying, basically that that issue of Planned Parenthood has now been solved and really back to some spending questions. But I want to come back, Eliot, if I might, before we leave about this, the international implications of this.
As you well know, we've become so dependent on foreigners to buy our treasury bonds on a regular basis that this kind of fight over such a small amount of money, when it's so hard to get the deficit under control and to get agreement. One of the fears we have to have is that it undermines the confidence and the international financial community and the ability of this country to run its finances well. And that could add extra pressure on the bond market, exactly what we don't need. I think it's going to be really incumbent upon the White House and the Congress now in coming months to work hard on this -- on the question of controlling the deficits so that we don't rattle the bond markets and we don't find a spike in interest rates. It really would be destructive to the middle class.
SPITZER: David, that is so important and such a critical point. And just in the past day or two, there have begun to be signs, certainly over Europe. The European Central Banks are raising interest rates. If interest rates here begin to creep up, the costs to our government of borrowing these enormous sums of money will grow exponentially and we have been benefiting from very, very low interest rates. If those interest rates climb, the deficits will get that much worse and we're going to be in deep trouble.
GERGEN: Right now, the -- we borrow -- the United States government is borrowing, as you know, on treasuries at a two percent rate. That's a very low rate. Historically, the United States government has had to pay out six percent a year on its treasuries. If that -- if the interest rates get spiked up to six percent, the cost to us is, for the United States government, the deficits we're looking at right now are going to just explode even further. They're going to be extraordinarily expensive to pay just the interest on the national debt.
SPITZER: Yes. David, you're exactly right. Let's keep our fingers crossed that doesn't happen.
David, always enjoy to be chatting with you. Thanks so much.
GERGEN: Thanks so much, Eliot. SPITZER: We'll be getting more of your wisdom later on.
GERGEN: Thank you.
SPITZER: All right. Now, let's go to John King for breaking news.
John, what do you have for us?
JOHN KING, HOST, "JOHN KING USA": Well, Eliot, we are told that they are getting close, emphasis on getting close to what we are told to expect to be a one-week temporary spending measure. They call it a continuing resolution, a one-week essentially band-aid to continue the talks. But why would they do that?
Everybody including the president of the United States says he doesn't want another temporary program. The Republicans said they would only take it temporary if you have six-month funding for the troops. But it appears they are close, very close, I'm told, to a one-week band-aid budget, keep the government running because they will agree to that one week because they believe they are very close now to the bigger deal to fund the government for the next six months.
Now, I want to be careful here because we have gotten close to an agreement before to have it collapse. But I have two good sources telling me they believe they will have an agreement on a one-week temporary extension this evening. They are working on the details right now, but as you know full well, when you get this close, everybody tries to get one more card on the table, one more piece of the negotiation. So from both a Democrat and Republican, I am told, they believe they are on the verge of an agreement to fund the government for one more week and they will do that and express confidence that they are close to resolving the other issues to get us for six months. So an air of confidence, an air of optimism, Eliot, but we don't have a deal on paper yet. I want to be very careful in saying that.
SPITZER: All right. John, you are so right. There is always somebody who pops in at the last minute and says, aha, I got leverage, I'm going to get that last piece that I want. You can balance up the whole thing. But do you know, has anybody told you what would be the agreement be on this terribly emotional and compelling issue of funding a Planned Parenthood? What would they do either for the week or the six months? Have they indicated that to you?
KING: One of the sources I spoke to a short time ago said that was quote/unquote, "essentially resolved pending agreement on the specifics on the spending cuts," meaning how much are we going to cut and where would those cuts come from?
Now, there are others who then pretty quickly disputed that source's account. This source has been a steady source through the negotiations. Information has been correct. However, again, until there's a final deal, nobody wants to sign off because John Boehner, you've been talking about John Boehner, you've been talking about John Boehner and the pressures on his conference, he wants to sell this once. He doesn't want to sell, here's where I almost am, here's where we're going, here's what we get. And it's the same for the Democrats because if they give any ground, they'll have that as well.
I am told that they are quote/unquote, "essentially resolved." Now if you get a one-week extension, that "essentially resolved" will become part of the next negotiation and an "essentially resolved" can become a back at the bargaining table. So we need to see how that plays out.
SPITZER: All right, John. Don't burn that source. They're critically important. And you're telling me we're going to be talking about this for another week. I don't know if I can deal with that.
All right. I hear Dana Bash up on Capitol Hill has more information to add.
Dana, you still hanging out near Speaker Boehner's office?
DANA BASH, CNN SR. CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I wish I was hanging out in Speaker Boehner's office. I would have a lot more information to give you. We'll tell you that members of his leadership team just literally raced down this hallway into his office and they are meeting with him now down there to discuss whatever it is that could be pending. As John said, that he is hearing that they could be ready to continue to fund the government for one more week.
There's some disputing people saying different things on that, but the bottom line is that I'm hearing what John is hearing is that there definitely is -- they're close to figuring something out and, you know what, they don't have a choice. Because look at the clock, I mean, we have three hours left before the government at least parts of the government will shut down. And I've also been e-mailing with sources on the Democratic side, they're huddling as well. It sounds as though that there is paper moving, if you will, and they just need people to cross T's, dot I's. Whether it is on this long-term or just doing this for a short-term, that's what we're not sure of yet.
SPITZER: All right, Dana. We will keep coming back to you for more information. For all we know with these guys, they could be running down the hall to figure out what to order for dinner. You never know what Congress --
BASH: They already ate dinner.
SPITZER: All right.
BASH: I actually can report that.
SPITZER: All right. Well, that's important. Hey, with these guys, you got to interpret every little sign you get. All right. Dana, thanks so much.
We'll be coming right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) SPITZER: Donald Trump, whether he's a flash in the pan or a serious presidential contender, he's been quite clear, he wants to kick President Obama out of office. And he wants to use the president's birth certificate to do it.
Our own Candy Crowley, host of CNN's "STATE OF THE UNION" has just interviewed Trump and the two had a rather, shall we say, heated debate. Candy joins me now. Welcome.
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Thanks, Eliot. I can tell you I'm sure you know Donald Trump. It is a little bit like standing in front of a Mac (ph) truck trying to get it to stop and it plows right through. I mean, he has taken this issue of whether the president was born in the United States or not, and really pounded it home on -- across the networks for a couple of weeks.
We have seen, and I don't know that this is coincidental, over time, that his ratings, which were always quite good for "The Apprentice" have gone up steadily over the same three-week period. So is this a showman looking to pump up his show? Is this a businessman looking, in fact, to perhaps get into the presidential race? Is this someone trying to appeal to the base of the Republican Party, which still has real doubts about where the president was born, despite proof after proof after proof that he was, in fact, born in Hawaii. So that's where we had to start.
I went to talk about other things when I said let's get this out of the way. And as you know, what he is hung up on and what so many people say is there is no birth certificate. There is what they call a proof of birth, which in Hawaii, and for the State Department, proves to them, as far as they are concerned, that you are a citizen of the United States. We started out talking about that. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY: It's good enough for the state of Hawaii and the State Department. The U.S. State Department recognizes these as legitimately --
DONALD TRUMP, REAL ESTATE AGENT: Well, it's not a birth certificate, Candy. And people are trying to figure out why isn't he giving his birth certificate. It's not a birth certificate, a certificate of live birth. And you can see that one that you have, and the one that I brought you, because that's the one that's on the Internet and all over the place, it doesn't even have a serial number. It doesn't have a signature. It doesn't have a signature. One that I saw on television has a stamp, but that's not a signature.
CROWLEY: Right. But that's how they --
TRUMP: Excuse me, but that's not the one that they were showing to everybody. And I just say very simply, why doesn't he show his birth certificate? Why has he spent over $2 million in legal fees to keep this quiet and to keep this silent? When I listened today to the tape of the grandmother and she was saying he was born essentially in Kenya and then all of a sudden, don't forget this is when Barack Obama was hot as a pistol because it looked like he was going to get the nomination and had a lot of people, a lot of handlers in there, and all of a sudden you hear people all over the room, no, no, no, he was born in Hawaii, he was born in Hawaii. But she didn't say that.
CROWLEY: But they say it was misinterpretation.
TRUMP: They drowned her out. She was like, there were a lot of people in that room and she said, Kenya, he was born right -- and then they started saying, screaming, no, no, no, you mean Hawaii, you mean Hawaii. There's a lot of claims -- look, I don't like to talk about this issue too much because I really would rather talk about China. I would really rather talk about what OPEC is doing to destroy us. I would really rather talk about other things. But I'll be honest with you, I started this and I heard the question for the first time four weeks ago. And I assumed, although I have heard about it for years, I assumed that he was born in the United States, meaning in Hawaii. I assumed that. The more I go into it, the more suspect it is.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY: Two quick things here, Eliot. One is that there is a certificate of live birth that has the stamp of the state of Hawaii and a signature on it that is out there. A number of people have gone there, checked it out. The tape recording he's talking about, an interview with Barack Obama's grandmother on his father's side, where she, according to those in the room, mistakenly misunderstood what was going on in the interpretation. A lot of people say, listen, you know, she didn't understand, he was born in Hawaii. Others say, no, she said the truth. So it is a kind of thing I said to him, this is going to go on for -- it's a conspiracy theory. This is going to go on for 20 years. And he said, but it shouldn't. So this is -- he's found this issue, he's certainly is riding it.
We talked about a lot of other things, Libya and the economy, but this is something that he has grabbed on to, has made him quite popular among those within the Republican Party who believe this. And he is not to be deterred no matter how much evidence you put out there. He thinks there is more to this, despite, you know, sort of paper after paper that you show him.
SPITZER: You know, Candy, you are so right when you say it is actually built a little bit of a foundation for his -- the notion that he could run and become the president of the United States. In a poll of Republicans these days, he came in second. He's behind Mitt Romney, but then Donald -- Romney at 21. He had 17. Sarah Palin is down at 10. So clearly, Donald Trump has name.
Look, one thing you've got to say about Donald Trump, he has been magnificent over the last 30 years at building a brand, getting his name out there --
CROWLEY: Yes. SPITZER: -- developing a large base in the population that respects him. Now whether that can withstand the rigors of a presidential or any political cam is a whole campaign, is a whole different matter. But I got to tell you, I'm a little surprised he would take this birth certificate issue. I think in an odd way it diminishes Donald Trump because here is somebody who had elevated himself and spoken only about energy policy, or Libya or economic development, would have had a certain mystique about him. Talking about birth certificates, I don't know, it just doesn't seem to be the right way to go.
CROWLEY: Well, you know, I tell you, any number of Republicans have publicly said get off of this. You know, this is, A, not a winning issue for Republicans. And I asked him that. I said, listen, there are people out there, Republicans who really -- who wanted to have conspiracy theories, who say, first of all, this is just to talk to the voters, the conservative voters in the primary process. But second of all, there are those who have said to me, you know what, I think he's actually trying to boost Obama because every time he goes out there and does this, it sorts of paints Republicans, they believe, as the sort of people who are hung up on something that other people have proven or, you know, beyond a lot of people's reasonable doubt, that is untrue. And I asked him about it and he said, you know, I started out like that, but I don't believe that. And he said everybody is dismissed as being, you know, stupid and they don't know anything if they bring this up. I agree with you and he's very good on other subjects.
We talked about OPEC and China and Libya and other things. He's a very -- and this surprised me, he's a very populist voice. I can see his message about, you know, why are we fighting wars for other countries? That's also a big theme of his. You know, and I can see it taking hold. So it's interesting, but he -- if his -- if the idea was I want to reach those conservative voters who might look at me askance otherwise, certainly the polls would indicate that he's done some of that, but you know polls, a lot of it is name recognition early on.
SPITZER: Absolutely.
CROWLEY: Yes.
SPITZER: And they bounce up and down as you say, name recognition early on. But you know what, Candy, it is good to know that if we ever settle this budget stuff, we'll be diving right into that 2012 presidential campaign.
CROWLEY: I know.
SPITZER: No shortage of things to keep us busy. All right.
CROWLEY: Absolutely.
SPITZER: Candy, thank you so much. Fascinating interview. We'll be talking more with you later. All right. Thanks.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SPITZER: With little more than three hours before the government shuts down, both Democrats and Republicans are stubbornly refusing to cross the budget line in the sand. And they have drawn that line in the sand.
Joining me right now are two members of Congress who stand on opposite sides of the line, Representative Loretta Sanchez, she's a Democrat from California. Representative Michael Grimm, a Republican from my home state of New York. All right, they join me from the Cannon Rotunda in Washington.
Let me start with you, Congressman Grimm. You know, you're from New York. You know how important Planned Parenthood is to so many people who get services. You heard David Gergen say a couple of moments ago on the show, probably one in five women in America has gotten some help on health issues from Planned Parenthood. Why now to raise this issue and close down the whole government over this?
REP. MICHAEL GRIMM (R), FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE: Well, I got to tell you something. I think there's some misinformation going on because I spoke personally with Speaker Boehner this afternoon, a little after noon. And he had assured me that it was not the social issues that were holding this up. It was not Planned Parenthood. It was the number. It was the spending cuts that was holding this up. So I think there's a lot of disinformation out there. The reality is it's about spending and that's what this whole thing has been about.
SPITZER: All right. Well, Congressman, look, I don't know. I'm not in the room with these folks, of course. So I don't know if it's the so-called riders about Planned Parenthood or not, or if it's the number. But it does seem to me that the Democrats have given basically two-thirds of what the Republicans asked in terms of the size of the cuts, over the course of the remainder of this fiscal year. And so, Congresswoman Sanchez, I mean, what's your view on this? Have the Democrats given too much and every time the Democratic Party gives a little bit, seems as though as somebody said we have a goal line on wheels that keeps moving in the other direction.
REP. LORETTA SANCHEZ (D), ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Absolutely. We do have a goal line on wheels. They keep -- you know, every time we get to the number, they keep pulling it the other direction. They keep pulling it the other direction. It's kind of like, you know, Lucy and Charlie Brown when Charlie Brown goes to kick the ball and then Lucy pulls it away. That's what it feels like here. And it has been ideological. It has been about Planned Parenthood.
This has been a stand by the conservatives who had been in here for a while in this Congress, who weren't able to get what they wanted, which it was to eliminate Planned Parenthood. Now together with the new freshmen, most of them Tea Partiers who are so bent to get to that $100 billion number, so between the two of them it really has been about this Planned Parenthood issue. And I believe, and I hope it's now off the table and that we'll get this signed tonight. We shouldn't even have to come for another week. We should just get this done, and then start on next year's budget. That's where our focus has to be because that's where the real savings will be.
GRIMM: If I can have a word, if I may. You know, it's so funny to hear that, that we just need to get this done. Last year, they had the House, the Senate and the presidency and they failed to pass a budget.
We wouldn't be here right now, mopping up their mess had they passed a budget. It's inexcusable. The bottom line is that we can no longer spend money that we don't have. We're bankrupting our country. The president abdicated his leadership with his budget proposal that he put out that will only accelerate the bankruptcy of the United States. If we want to really get serious about cutting spending, we passed HR-1 forty days ago.
SANCHEZ: Except --
GRIMM: What have the Democrats done in the last 40 some days.
SANCHEZ: Except that in that bill, they increased defense spending at a time when we should be getting out of Iraq and we should be getting out of Afghanistan. That costs us $3 billion a week. That's where the big bucks are. That's where we got to get our money back.
SPITZER: But Congresswoman --
SANCHEZ: That's where we got to structure --
GRIMM: But that's not true.
SPITZER: Congresswoman --
SANCHEZ: And that's in the United States. That's what we've got to do.
GRIMM: That's simply not true.
SPITZER: Congresswoman -- Congresswoman, I got to say, though, and I'm not -- you know me, I'm not with Congressman Grimm on a lot of these issues, most of them, but he's right. Why didn't the Democratic Party pass a budget last year? There's a Democratic president, a super majority in the Senate, majority in the House of Representatives, that was the moment that seems to me for the Democratic Party to put its imprint on this year's budget. Once after November that capacity disappeared, you know, that was the Democratic Party's fault. You just said the Democratic Party is like Charlie Brown. I mean, you're right, they're acting like Charlie Brown.
SANCHEZ: No. Eliot, you forget --
SPITZER: Why not?
SANCHEZ: When did Senator Kennedy die? When we lost Senator Kennedy, we lost that super majority. That meant that we had to bring on Republicans and Republicans were not willing to move because the Tea Party movement had gotten too strong. There were elections coming around, and people were very afraid. So it wasn't because of a super majority.
GRIMM: I guess that means --
SANCHEZ: It was because it was difficult to get Republicans to come over.
GRIMM: They passed something in the House?
I don't remember them passing a budget in the House even. Here's the reality. This is --
SANCHEZ: We passed our numbers in the House. We passed our appropriation bill in the House.
GRIMM: This is the same thing over and over again. The Democrats are not serious about cutting spending. The president came on, gave a speech about dealing with what -- it is not the military or the defense spending that's killing the country and putting us in debt. It's Medicare and Medicaid and the entitlements. The president even spoke about that. And he puts forward a budget that does not even mention Medicaid or Medicare. How can we take him serious about cutting spending if he doesn't want to address the biggest problem in our budget, and that's the entitlements?
SANCHEZ: Medicare --
SPITZER: Congressman Grimm, Congressman Grimm --
SANCHEZ: And Medicare and Medicaid --
SPITZER: Look, guys, let's do this --
SANCHEZ: -- and social security, these issues are policy issues. They're to be worked by the Congress. They don't come in the budget --
SPITZER: Guys, here's what we're going to do --
GRIMM: They're still bankrupting the country. I say they're still bankrupting the country.
SPITZER: Guys, look, you've proven a lot of things. First, there's a lot of passion behind this debate. Second, I think the public is seeing why we're not getting agreement. But third, this is a good substantive debate. We're going to get you back on the show sometime really soon when we're going to dig into all these issues. And I really mean that, because I appreciate you coming on, fighting it out in a reasonably civil way. Just get this thing done one way or another.
All right. Thanks to both of you for being with us tonight.
SANCHEZ: Thank you, Eliot. Always a pleasure. GRIMM: Thank you. Good night.
SPITZER: Our pleasure. All right.
Let's go back to Candy Crowley. Candy, any last thoughts? Not to Candy. We're going to Gloria Borger -- Gloria Borger, who is the best political reporter in Washington. All right. Gloria, take it away. What do you have for us?
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think, you know, you just made the point with these two members. I mean, they even disagree about what they disagree on. You know, we've heard all evening the Republicans say it's about spending. The Democrats say it's about social issues. And it's very interesting.
I spoke with a Democratic pollster tonight, who said to me, he's shocked that Republicans are talking about the social issues the way they are because he said, he was just out in the field with a poll, and Republicans are losing ground as a result of this budget shutdown fight with young voters, with suburban women, and independent voters in his poll oppose shutting off funding for Planned Parenthood by a two to one margin, Eliot. So, you know, that's a lot of ground they could be losing.
SPITZER: You know, Candy, I see you putting your ear piece in there. Gloria, excuse me.
BORGER: Gloria, sorry.
SPITZER: What we've seen here is the Republican Party over the last couple of days giving back a lot of the sort of wisdom that it had built up on the public's eye when they were the ones who were the grown up saying here's what we've got to cut. But now they're reducing this to an issue where I think they are going to lose a lot of ground with the public at large. And they seem minor and it seems as though and what you're hearing about this, the Tea Party is really calling the shots within the Republican Party and a small band there is able to force the hand of the speaker --
BORGER: Right.
SPITZER: -- rather than the speaker taking charge and saying to the public, here's what we believe in.
BORGER: Yes, they're playing, Eliot. They're playing a lot of base politics and that's going to work for them with their base. It doesn't work so much in a general election. But let me just say this, Republicans came to Washington to cut spending. What John Boehner is doing is making the point that he's trying to get every single dollar that he possibly can out of the Democratic Party. And so actually for their base voters and also for some independent voters, if this ends without a government shutdown, there'll be plenty of blame to go around, but Republicans will be able to say, particularly as they head into the next fight, which is raising the debt ceiling, that, you know, we made some progress with Democrats on the spending side, and we are going to continue. However, every new party in charge likes to overreach and what we're seeing now, I think, particularly with the Planned Parenthood issue coming into this is a little bit of overreach on the Republicans side.
SPITZER: You know, that's exactly right. And I wonder if there haven't been two fights that have been a bridge too far for the Republican Party. One at the state level out in Wisconsin, the effort to decertify the unions where that has become such a visceral debate.
BORGER: Right.
SPITZER: And there was a lot of the public that said, you know what, we don't like the fact that the unions are getting paid so much, but don't take away their rights. And here on the issue of choice and abortion, and funding of Planned Parenthood, again, one bridge too far that may be as you say, that little bit of overreaching that could have taken a clear victory and collapsed it down to something that is now a bit more muddy in terms of who comes out on top on this one.
BORGER: The last thing you want to do, Eliot, is overreach in your mandate. You know, Republicans had a mandate to cut spending. But they didn't have a mandate to -- for this kind of brinkmanship. And, you know, whenever you're newly in charge, you have a sense of, oh, the voters put us in and they're going to support whatever we do. The Republicans won because they're not the Democrats. And they have to keep that in mind as they go forward.
SPITZER: Yes, but you know what, Gloria, they don't want to see it that way. They want to think they won because of who they are, not who they're not.
Anyway, Gloria Borger, thank you.
BORGER: No, Boehner knows it. Boehner knows it.
SPITZER: All right. We'll have to continue this conversation next week. Thank you.
Thank you all for watching, joining us IN THE ARENA.
"PIERS MORGAN TONIGHT" starts right now. Wolf Blitzer is in for Piers.
