Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

$87 Billion Request in Congress

Aired October 15, 2003 - 07:36   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.


BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Now to that $87 billion request in Congress. A number of votes taken in the Senate yesterday, while the House might be close to finishing its business. A full debate scheduled for today on the president's request. And how in the end will that look?
John Spratt, a Democrat from South Carolina, is with us. Duncan Hunter, a Republican from the State of California.

Gentlemen, welcome to both of you here on AMERICAN MORNING.

REP. DUNCAN HUNTER (R), CALIFORNIA: Thank you.

REP. JOHN SPRATT (D), SOUTH CAROLINA: Good morning to you.

HEMMER: We want to go to the Republican side first. Representative Hunter, what is it so important, do your Republican colleagues believe right now, to grant this money to Iraq as opposed to loaning it? In other words, giving it as opposed to getting it back eventually some day.

HUNTER: Well, I think first, we need to keep the wheels turning or start the wheels turning in Iraq with respect to the economy and basic infrastructure like electricity, water, the police force, the military, so we can hand this country off to a government that's going to be enduring and is going to have some credibility. And the faster we get Iraq up and running, so to speak, the faster American troops are going to be able to leave that area.

Now, one thing that I think is...

HEMMER: Now, why punish taxpayers with not getting the money back, then?

HUNTER: Well, one thing I think is important for us to remember is this. It's very difficult, if you have this fledgling government in place, who's going to sign a loan, the loan guarantee to the U.S. government? And, secondly, if you do that, you're going to have to place the contracting authority with this small fledgling government in Iraq. That means that American contractors and American workers who are putting up this money initially are not going to be able to get the benefit of it. And one thing we've received assurance of is that American workers and American businesses, including small businesses, are going to be able to do this.

And I think it, I think there's a clear equity here that if American taxpayers are going to pay for the defense of the free world, we should be able to participate in the construction of that security apparatus.

HEMMER: Congressman Spratt, what's your response to that? Can Iraq truly get a good, firm foundation if it's buried beneath piles and piles of debt?

SPRATT: Well, here's our frustration in the House on the Democratic side. We probably won't even get a vote on this issue because of the way the bill is constructed and comes to the floor. There will be a rule, a death rule will even make, and ought to, an explicit amendment as to whether or not some or part of the money provided for Iraq in this bill will be, can be made in the form of a loan.

Iraq does have a huge external debt and down the road, one of our objectives, I'm sure, will be to go to the Gulf State and the Kuwaitis and others and say to them you've got to relax and forgive and forget some of this debt if we're going to get this country back on its feet, stable, a functioning economy.

If we're also taking debt and insisting that it be repaid, our position in trying to negotiate downward other external debt with other countries will be weakened.

HEMMER: You sound like you're in agreement, then, with your Republican colleague.

SPRATT: Well, I think we should at least have a debate on it. And I might vote for some small part of this to be a loan, at least on an experimental basis, that some of this be loaned and the rest, the rest of it be granted. But at least we should have the debate. This ought to be a free and open discussion.

HEMMER: I want both of you to take a look at these poll numbers that came out just this past week. When asked, "Should Congress authorize the $87 billion for Iraq?," 57 percent say no.

Representative Hunter, how do you explain that to your voters back in California?

HUNTER: Well, I think it's -- I think very clearly when you put out a question as to whether or not American taxpayers, who are already fairly heavily burdened, want to spend more money, their first reaction is to say no. But, on the other hand, if rebuilding this country in the sense of getting their electricity hooked up, getting their water hooked up, getting police on the street and getting the hospitals and schools going, if that enables us to hand this country off to a government that's not going to be intent on hurting the United States and getting our troops back into the United States, then I think you have a totally different answer to that poll question.

HEMMER: Quickly here, gentlemen, do you both believe this will pass in the House?

SPRATT: I think it will pass.

HUNTER: Yes, I think it's going to pass with a substantial margin.

HEMMER: And you'll both vote for it, right?

HUNTER: Yes.

SPRATT: Well, I would like to see some things provided. I'd like to take this package and do more for the troops, for example. Our troops are over there pulling some hard duty and I'd like to put title one of this package a quality of life package for our troops -- more imminent danger pay, more family separation pay, more assistance for Reservists and Guard who have been called up and have businesses back home that are faltering right now.

I think we ought to, out of $87 billion, ought to be able to find something to do some good, some help for our own troops, more than this bill now provides.

HUNTER: One thing we have in this bill, though, is we do provide for an extension of imminent danger pay, increased, and family separation pay increased up through next year.

HEMMER: Thank you both.

We'll watch the debate today in the House.

John Spratt, Duncan Hunter, California and South Carolina, with us today in D.C.

Many thanks.

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 October 15, 2003 - 07:36   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Now to that $87 billion request in Congress. A number of votes taken in the Senate yesterday, while the House might be close to finishing its business. A full debate scheduled for today on the president's request. And how in the end will that look?
John Spratt, a Democrat from South Carolina, is with us. Duncan Hunter, a Republican from the State of California.

Gentlemen, welcome to both of you here on AMERICAN MORNING.

REP. DUNCAN HUNTER (R), CALIFORNIA: Thank you.

REP. JOHN SPRATT (D), SOUTH CAROLINA: Good morning to you.

HEMMER: We want to go to the Republican side first. Representative Hunter, what is it so important, do your Republican colleagues believe right now, to grant this money to Iraq as opposed to loaning it? In other words, giving it as opposed to getting it back eventually some day.

HUNTER: Well, I think first, we need to keep the wheels turning or start the wheels turning in Iraq with respect to the economy and basic infrastructure like electricity, water, the police force, the military, so we can hand this country off to a government that's going to be enduring and is going to have some credibility. And the faster we get Iraq up and running, so to speak, the faster American troops are going to be able to leave that area.

Now, one thing that I think is...

HEMMER: Now, why punish taxpayers with not getting the money back, then?

HUNTER: Well, one thing I think is important for us to remember is this. It's very difficult, if you have this fledgling government in place, who's going to sign a loan, the loan guarantee to the U.S. government? And, secondly, if you do that, you're going to have to place the contracting authority with this small fledgling government in Iraq. That means that American contractors and American workers who are putting up this money initially are not going to be able to get the benefit of it. And one thing we've received assurance of is that American workers and American businesses, including small businesses, are going to be able to do this.

And I think it, I think there's a clear equity here that if American taxpayers are going to pay for the defense of the free world, we should be able to participate in the construction of that security apparatus.

HEMMER: Congressman Spratt, what's your response to that? Can Iraq truly get a good, firm foundation if it's buried beneath piles and piles of debt?

SPRATT: Well, here's our frustration in the House on the Democratic side. We probably won't even get a vote on this issue because of the way the bill is constructed and comes to the floor. There will be a rule, a death rule will even make, and ought to, an explicit amendment as to whether or not some or part of the money provided for Iraq in this bill will be, can be made in the form of a loan.

Iraq does have a huge external debt and down the road, one of our objectives, I'm sure, will be to go to the Gulf State and the Kuwaitis and others and say to them you've got to relax and forgive and forget some of this debt if we're going to get this country back on its feet, stable, a functioning economy.

If we're also taking debt and insisting that it be repaid, our position in trying to negotiate downward other external debt with other countries will be weakened.

HEMMER: You sound like you're in agreement, then, with your Republican colleague.

SPRATT: Well, I think we should at least have a debate on it. And I might vote for some small part of this to be a loan, at least on an experimental basis, that some of this be loaned and the rest, the rest of it be granted. But at least we should have the debate. This ought to be a free and open discussion.

HEMMER: I want both of you to take a look at these poll numbers that came out just this past week. When asked, "Should Congress authorize the $87 billion for Iraq?," 57 percent say no.

Representative Hunter, how do you explain that to your voters back in California?

HUNTER: Well, I think it's -- I think very clearly when you put out a question as to whether or not American taxpayers, who are already fairly heavily burdened, want to spend more money, their first reaction is to say no. But, on the other hand, if rebuilding this country in the sense of getting their electricity hooked up, getting their water hooked up, getting police on the street and getting the hospitals and schools going, if that enables us to hand this country off to a government that's not going to be intent on hurting the United States and getting our troops back into the United States, then I think you have a totally different answer to that poll question.

HEMMER: Quickly here, gentlemen, do you both believe this will pass in the House?

SPRATT: I think it will pass.

HUNTER: Yes, I think it's going to pass with a substantial margin.

HEMMER: And you'll both vote for it, right?

HUNTER: Yes.

SPRATT: Well, I would like to see some things provided. I'd like to take this package and do more for the troops, for example. Our troops are over there pulling some hard duty and I'd like to put title one of this package a quality of life package for our troops -- more imminent danger pay, more family separation pay, more assistance for Reservists and Guard who have been called up and have businesses back home that are faltering right now.

I think we ought to, out of $87 billion, ought to be able to find something to do some good, some help for our own troops, more than this bill now provides.

HUNTER: One thing we have in this bill, though, is we do provide for an extension of imminent danger pay, increased, and family separation pay increased up through next year.

HEMMER: Thank you both.

We'll watch the debate today in the House.

John Spratt, Duncan Hunter, California and South Carolina, with us today in D.C.

Many thanks.

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