Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Economic Stimulus Response

Aired January 07, 2003 - 13:45   ET

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

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


LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Let's go now to White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux, who is traveling with the president -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, it really struck me. This could be a preview for the State of the Union Address for President Bush later this month. Really, he outlined a broad plan for international and domestic agenda. The economy is a top priority for the Bush administration, not only for the good of the American people, but this is also a White House that is very much aware, very cognizant that if Bush wants to be successful for an election in 2004, that he's going to have to perform in the next six months, the next nine months to get this economy turned around.

It is widely believed it was Bush senior, despite the success of the Gulf War, that struggled with the recession, and this is a White House that is determined not to make that mistake.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: To deliver the tax rate reductions is now, when they can do the most good for the American businesses.

(APPLAUSE)

For the sake of economic vitality, I'm asking Congress to make all the tax rate reductions effective this year.

(APPLAUSE)

And the tax cuts should be retroactive to January 1st.

(APPLAUSE)

Upon passage, I'll order the Treasury Department to immediately adjust the amount of money withheld for income taxes, so that Americans will keep more of their paychecks right away.

(APPLAUSE)

By speeding up the income tax cuts, we will speed up economic recovery in the pace of job creation. If tax relief is good enough for Americans three years from now, it is good enough for Americans today.

(END VIDEO CLIP) MALVEAUX: Now, Lou, expect in the weeks to come robust debate on the Hill. This is really considered a critical test for both the president and Congress, to test the president's clout now that Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress, and also a test for the Democrats as well, to see just how aggressive they are going to be in taking on the president and his domestic agenda.

But make no mistake, the White House really pushing for a very bold plan, but also expecting that perhaps there will be some room for compromise. They are confident they'll have the support of the House. It's going to be a bit more difficult in the Senate. They'll not only going to have to keep the support of moderate Republicans, but also win some Democrats over as well -- Lou.

DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much. Suzanne Malveaux from Chicago, traveling with the president.

Let's turn now to two gentlemen who will be taking a critical examination from their political perspectives, Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala in Washington.

Let me begin, if I may, with you, Paul. I have to guess that you embrace wholeheartedly what the president laid out today.

PAUL BEGALA, "CROSSFIRE" CO-HOST: Not even halfheartedly. That won't surprise you. I was sort of amused at the Orwellian backdrop they had there, the attempted mind control, where they put up the chart that says jobs, growth, opportunity. And you look at many respected conservatives, economists who have said, gee, it just won't do much to generate jobs or to spur growth. It is opportunism of a sort to pay back a certain class of wealthy investors that President Bush has always relied on for support.

It seems to be the debate is this question: Is the economy driven primarily by wealthy investors or by middle class consumers? Today, President Bush staked his claim to the argument that wealthy investors need help in the elimination of the dividend tax.

Senator Edwards responding there in the interview with Judy made a pretty good case for the Democrats that consumers drive the economy, and that we could do a whole lot more good for a whole lot less money.

TUCKER CARLSON, "CROSSFIRE" CO-HOST: Actually, If I can just correct one of the many misstatements of fact in Paul's statement. It's the Democratic Party that has the support of the rich. Al Gore won the over-100,000 category. It really is the rich-guy party.

I think it's going to be pretty hard to attack this speech. A valid attack might be that maybe nothing a president can do can stimulate the economy. But I think Bush did a great job in making the point that cutting the double taxation on dividends is the fair thing to do.

The fact is rich people, you can hate them all you want, but they pay most of the taxes in this country. The top 5 percent in income pay something like 57 percent of the income tax. So there is a fairness issue, it's almost a moral issue in this, and I think the president was right to highlight it.

BEGALA: Amen. Let us begin, Lou. Let me join Tucker Carlson in saying that fairness should be at the center of our economic strategy, of our economic policy in America. That's the biggest bunch of bunk. The president said it today. He used the words, not fair, double taxation of dividends, not fair.

Well, how much of his economic policy is not fair? My goodness, Tucker cites statistics of the income tax, which of course, 37 percent of us don't pay. The richest two-thirds of Americans pay it. Why not cut the payroll tax which every worker pays? Bill Gates pays, even Tucker Carlson pays it, but so does the maid who made up the bed in the hotel rooms that the president and his staff stay in when they are in Chicago.

CARLSON: Oh, come on.

BEGALA: Why not cut taxes for everybody? But I love this notion that fairness now, fairness by the president's own admission, is now our goal in economic policy. Let's begin.

CARLSON: Well, look, if we're going to get specific in our critique of the rival plans here, the Democratic plan, the core of it, the single largest part of it consists of -- and I'm not making this up, though it sounds like I am -- sending $300 checks to everybody in America, 300 bucks per family. This is what's going to get the economy going? It's ludicrous, and it's also pandering of the most vulgar kind.

DOBBS: Tucker, it may be pandering. But I just was struck by a certain symmetry. The Democrats have come up with $300 per person. Wasn't that precisely the amount of the 2001 rebates under the president's plan?

BEGALA: It was, and that was because of an amendment Joe Lieberman, a Democrat, put in.

CARLSON: It is.

BEGALA: I prefer a payroll tax holiday, because I think it would be more to create jobs. It would be better for small business.

DOBBS: But, Paul, isn't that payroll tax, the holiday that you seek from that, isn't it also the Social Security payroll tax?

BEGALA: Yes, it is.

We can get into the mechanics. There's a lot of smart button issues. You can rebate it out of the general revenue and the federal income tax, and then rebate the money that you'd lose from cutting the FICA tax, the payroll tax.

The bottom line is this -- everybody pays taxes, but not everybody gets a tax cut from Bush, only people who pay estate tax, which is the wealthiest 2 percent of us, only people who pay income tax, only people who pay the dividend tax -- these are all the rich men's taxes -- does Bush cut. He does not cut the payroll tax or the excise tax. He doesn't do anything for sales tax. He does nothing for the taxes that middle class people pay.

CARLSON: If I can just congratulate you, Lou, on a brilliant question, pointing out that Paul would like to raid the Social Security lockbox, is a very, very deep point you bring up. But, truly...

DOBBS: But, Tucker, you didn't compliment me for pointing out that that paltry $300 we were talking about in this Democratic proposal was the same amount as you were cheering...

CARLSON: No, I didn't, because that undercut my argument, so I didn't want to call attention to it. But the point here is that the maid laboring away, as Paul mentioned, deserves tax relief, as everyone does, but the point is that maid, as valid as her struggles are, isn't employing anybody. So in the end, if you want to help the economy, you have got to help people who are actually creating jobs, even if they're part of the dreaded 1 percent, even if they're evil rich people. In the end, they sort of control the economy. That's a fact.

BEGALA: That's the heart of the debate. I appreciate Tucker's honesty in raising that. I believe that if you put more money into people's pockets, particularly middle-income people, lower-income people, they tend to spend it more. We could have a consumer-driven recovery that would make rich people all the more richer. I mean, I'm all for people getting richer, but the question is, which works better? It turns out the policy that is both more fair and little "d" democrat egalitarian, is also better economics.

You know, we've tried both of these in the past. We tried Clinton's plan, cutting taxes for middle class folks, and cutting the deficit and raising taxes on the rich. It did great. We tried Bush's plan for two year now. It struck me, he began the speech again trying to blame President Clinton, saying, when I took office, the signs of recession were real. Well, we know from Martin Feldstein (ph), Reagan's chairman of economic adviser, the recession started under Bush.

CARLSON: Let me make one final point, and that is that the goal posts keep changing here. You hear Democrats say, it's really about jobs; it's about the employment number. So the president gets up and say, oh, they're pretty good. All of a sudden it's about consumer spending. I can't keep track.

BEGALA: If consumer spending will create jobs, that's why we need to stimulate consumer spending.

CARLSON: OK, it's all unified here.

DOBBS: Gentlemen, we appreciate it, Tucker Carlson, Paul Begala, CNN's veritable emblems of fairness and honesty. We won't tell you which is which, but we thank you both as always.

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







Aired January 7, 2003 - 13:45   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Let's go now to White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux, who is traveling with the president -- Suzanne.
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, it really struck me. This could be a preview for the State of the Union Address for President Bush later this month. Really, he outlined a broad plan for international and domestic agenda. The economy is a top priority for the Bush administration, not only for the good of the American people, but this is also a White House that is very much aware, very cognizant that if Bush wants to be successful for an election in 2004, that he's going to have to perform in the next six months, the next nine months to get this economy turned around.

It is widely believed it was Bush senior, despite the success of the Gulf War, that struggled with the recession, and this is a White House that is determined not to make that mistake.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: To deliver the tax rate reductions is now, when they can do the most good for the American businesses.

(APPLAUSE)

For the sake of economic vitality, I'm asking Congress to make all the tax rate reductions effective this year.

(APPLAUSE)

And the tax cuts should be retroactive to January 1st.

(APPLAUSE)

Upon passage, I'll order the Treasury Department to immediately adjust the amount of money withheld for income taxes, so that Americans will keep more of their paychecks right away.

(APPLAUSE)

By speeding up the income tax cuts, we will speed up economic recovery in the pace of job creation. If tax relief is good enough for Americans three years from now, it is good enough for Americans today.

(END VIDEO CLIP) MALVEAUX: Now, Lou, expect in the weeks to come robust debate on the Hill. This is really considered a critical test for both the president and Congress, to test the president's clout now that Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress, and also a test for the Democrats as well, to see just how aggressive they are going to be in taking on the president and his domestic agenda.

But make no mistake, the White House really pushing for a very bold plan, but also expecting that perhaps there will be some room for compromise. They are confident they'll have the support of the House. It's going to be a bit more difficult in the Senate. They'll not only going to have to keep the support of moderate Republicans, but also win some Democrats over as well -- Lou.

DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much. Suzanne Malveaux from Chicago, traveling with the president.

Let's turn now to two gentlemen who will be taking a critical examination from their political perspectives, Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala in Washington.

Let me begin, if I may, with you, Paul. I have to guess that you embrace wholeheartedly what the president laid out today.

PAUL BEGALA, "CROSSFIRE" CO-HOST: Not even halfheartedly. That won't surprise you. I was sort of amused at the Orwellian backdrop they had there, the attempted mind control, where they put up the chart that says jobs, growth, opportunity. And you look at many respected conservatives, economists who have said, gee, it just won't do much to generate jobs or to spur growth. It is opportunism of a sort to pay back a certain class of wealthy investors that President Bush has always relied on for support.

It seems to be the debate is this question: Is the economy driven primarily by wealthy investors or by middle class consumers? Today, President Bush staked his claim to the argument that wealthy investors need help in the elimination of the dividend tax.

Senator Edwards responding there in the interview with Judy made a pretty good case for the Democrats that consumers drive the economy, and that we could do a whole lot more good for a whole lot less money.

TUCKER CARLSON, "CROSSFIRE" CO-HOST: Actually, If I can just correct one of the many misstatements of fact in Paul's statement. It's the Democratic Party that has the support of the rich. Al Gore won the over-100,000 category. It really is the rich-guy party.

I think it's going to be pretty hard to attack this speech. A valid attack might be that maybe nothing a president can do can stimulate the economy. But I think Bush did a great job in making the point that cutting the double taxation on dividends is the fair thing to do.

The fact is rich people, you can hate them all you want, but they pay most of the taxes in this country. The top 5 percent in income pay something like 57 percent of the income tax. So there is a fairness issue, it's almost a moral issue in this, and I think the president was right to highlight it.

BEGALA: Amen. Let us begin, Lou. Let me join Tucker Carlson in saying that fairness should be at the center of our economic strategy, of our economic policy in America. That's the biggest bunch of bunk. The president said it today. He used the words, not fair, double taxation of dividends, not fair.

Well, how much of his economic policy is not fair? My goodness, Tucker cites statistics of the income tax, which of course, 37 percent of us don't pay. The richest two-thirds of Americans pay it. Why not cut the payroll tax which every worker pays? Bill Gates pays, even Tucker Carlson pays it, but so does the maid who made up the bed in the hotel rooms that the president and his staff stay in when they are in Chicago.

CARLSON: Oh, come on.

BEGALA: Why not cut taxes for everybody? But I love this notion that fairness now, fairness by the president's own admission, is now our goal in economic policy. Let's begin.

CARLSON: Well, look, if we're going to get specific in our critique of the rival plans here, the Democratic plan, the core of it, the single largest part of it consists of -- and I'm not making this up, though it sounds like I am -- sending $300 checks to everybody in America, 300 bucks per family. This is what's going to get the economy going? It's ludicrous, and it's also pandering of the most vulgar kind.

DOBBS: Tucker, it may be pandering. But I just was struck by a certain symmetry. The Democrats have come up with $300 per person. Wasn't that precisely the amount of the 2001 rebates under the president's plan?

BEGALA: It was, and that was because of an amendment Joe Lieberman, a Democrat, put in.

CARLSON: It is.

BEGALA: I prefer a payroll tax holiday, because I think it would be more to create jobs. It would be better for small business.

DOBBS: But, Paul, isn't that payroll tax, the holiday that you seek from that, isn't it also the Social Security payroll tax?

BEGALA: Yes, it is.

We can get into the mechanics. There's a lot of smart button issues. You can rebate it out of the general revenue and the federal income tax, and then rebate the money that you'd lose from cutting the FICA tax, the payroll tax.

The bottom line is this -- everybody pays taxes, but not everybody gets a tax cut from Bush, only people who pay estate tax, which is the wealthiest 2 percent of us, only people who pay income tax, only people who pay the dividend tax -- these are all the rich men's taxes -- does Bush cut. He does not cut the payroll tax or the excise tax. He doesn't do anything for sales tax. He does nothing for the taxes that middle class people pay.

CARLSON: If I can just congratulate you, Lou, on a brilliant question, pointing out that Paul would like to raid the Social Security lockbox, is a very, very deep point you bring up. But, truly...

DOBBS: But, Tucker, you didn't compliment me for pointing out that that paltry $300 we were talking about in this Democratic proposal was the same amount as you were cheering...

CARLSON: No, I didn't, because that undercut my argument, so I didn't want to call attention to it. But the point here is that the maid laboring away, as Paul mentioned, deserves tax relief, as everyone does, but the point is that maid, as valid as her struggles are, isn't employing anybody. So in the end, if you want to help the economy, you have got to help people who are actually creating jobs, even if they're part of the dreaded 1 percent, even if they're evil rich people. In the end, they sort of control the economy. That's a fact.

BEGALA: That's the heart of the debate. I appreciate Tucker's honesty in raising that. I believe that if you put more money into people's pockets, particularly middle-income people, lower-income people, they tend to spend it more. We could have a consumer-driven recovery that would make rich people all the more richer. I mean, I'm all for people getting richer, but the question is, which works better? It turns out the policy that is both more fair and little "d" democrat egalitarian, is also better economics.

You know, we've tried both of these in the past. We tried Clinton's plan, cutting taxes for middle class folks, and cutting the deficit and raising taxes on the rich. It did great. We tried Bush's plan for two year now. It struck me, he began the speech again trying to blame President Clinton, saying, when I took office, the signs of recession were real. Well, we know from Martin Feldstein (ph), Reagan's chairman of economic adviser, the recession started under Bush.

CARLSON: Let me make one final point, and that is that the goal posts keep changing here. You hear Democrats say, it's really about jobs; it's about the employment number. So the president gets up and say, oh, they're pretty good. All of a sudden it's about consumer spending. I can't keep track.

BEGALA: If consumer spending will create jobs, that's why we need to stimulate consumer spending.

CARLSON: OK, it's all unified here.

DOBBS: Gentlemen, we appreciate it, Tucker Carlson, Paul Begala, CNN's veritable emblems of fairness and honesty. We won't tell you which is which, but we thank you both as always.

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