Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Sunday Morning

Interview With Nancy Skinner, Nick Gillespie

Aired January 12, 2003 - 07:34   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.


HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: The ads are controversial, to say the least. Opponents say they're free to drive whatever vehicle they choose, and shouldn't be bullied out of driving their SUVs.
Let's talk about it with both sides now. Joining our discussion from Cincinnati is Nick Gillespie. He's editor in chief of "Reason" magazine. He says there's nothing unpatriotic about driving an SUV.

Hello to you, Nick.

NICK GILLESPIE, "REASON" MAGAZINE: Hi, thanks for having me.

COLLINS: And -- you bet. And in Boston, syndicated radio host Nancy Skinner supports the ad campaign. Thanks for being here, Nancy as well.

NANCY SKINNER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: You bet, good morning.

COLLINS: Let's go ahead and start with Nick. Nick, you say that you have a really hard time with millionaires telling you what to drive. What do you mean when you say that?

GILLESPIE: Well, Arianna Huffington, who's really the brains, if you can call it that, behind this operation is a multimillionaire. She owns a couple of homes. She used to own an SUV. Recently, got rid of it. And now with the zeal of a convert is practicing what I think we could fairly call automotive McCarthyism, which is charging people for being unpatriotic for driving certain kinds of cars.

What's interesting to me is that the logic of the ads actually lead you to conclude that we should be cutting off foreign oil supplies and foreign oil imports into the U.S. and ratcheting up domestic oil production in Texas or Alaska or wherever. But that's not where the ads end up. Where the ads end up is demonizing SUV owners, which are not even the only type of light truck which has the same kind of lower standard mileage, miles per gallon requirement. We also have pickup trucks and mini vans. But it strikes me as peculiar that only SUVs get singled out, even though they're in the same category of light trucks as pickups and minivans.

And what this all points to to me is a new kind of sumptuary law, or an attack on what some people consider conspicuous consumption.

COLLINS: Nancy...

GILLESPIE: SUV owners are somehow driving what's been called anti social vehicles. It just strikes me as absurd.

COLLINS: Nancy, you do say that we need to be independent from this Gulf oil within 10 years. Do you think that's realistic?

GILLESPIE: No, I don't....

COLLINS: I'm sorry, Nick. Nancy, can I hear a response on that?

SKINNER: Yes, absolutely. You know what? I mean, what we're debating now, and see, this is where the focus have gotten off track here. SUVs are not the new axles of evil, if you will. And the new evildoers are not the soccer moms who just want to safely get their kids to school, Heidi.

What we're saying, what these commercials are trying to do is put the pressure on Washington, D.C., our politicians who take campaign contributions from the oil companies and gas companies, and they refuse to provider leadership to get us off foreign Gulf oil. Now...

GILLESPIE: No, no, no...

SKINNER: ...we gave no -- Nick, I let you speak. Let me speak.

GILLESPIE: Okay, Nancy, go ahead.

SKINNER: Okay, $6 billion was found that we have given to Saddam Hussein. We know that the Saudis fund terrorism. That is a proven fact. We buy the oil, they buy the weapons, and then we go to war to fight them. So what we are suggesting, or these ads are suggesting is somebody's got to step forward and say we have three percent proven oil reserves. They have 70 percent proven oil reserves. We have to find new technology, like fuel cell technology, and improve our mileage in the meantime, so that our national security is not jeopardized by this. It's not about the soccer moms. It's about leadership for the future.

And we could do this within 10 years if we weren't hooked on the campaign contributions from the oil companies.

GILLESPIE: No, well, it isn't -- you know, I agree that no corporation should get special tax breaks. And no -- the government shouldn't be in the business of social engineering through the tax code. Although most liberals don't agree with that actually. That's a libertarian position, not a liberal position.

But the fact is, is that we started ratcheting up cars today, compared to 1975 are far more fuel efficient. What has happened? In 1975, 30 percent of our oil came from imports. Now it's over 50 percent, even as cars got more fuel efficient. When you're talking about a global economy, prices ultimately, you know, sources and imports go to the places where -- who can produce oil more cheaply. And that's going to be the Middle East.

And if you're going to say that all of Saudi Arabia, you know, funds terrorism, you know, let's go pick at the guy who runs the Exxon station down at the corner. You can just as easily say that by giving humanitarian aid to Iraq, we're propping up Saddam Hussein. So we ought to stop giving medicine and food, and allowing him to sell any oil in order to feed any children there.

I mean this -- it's a ludicrous debate...

SKINNER: You know, it's a simple debate.

GILLESPIE: And something, you know...

SKINNER: Nick, it is a very simple debate. They have the oil and we do not. We could blast the purple mountains majesty and mine the fruited plains until kingdom come, they have oil and we don't. And from a national security standpoint...

GILLESPIE: Yes, so what's your point?

SKINNER: ...from a global warming standpoint, from a National Security standpoint. Well, listen, this is what I want to see, Nick, technology.

GILLESPIE: Yes, okay.

SKINNER: You're with "Reason" magazine...

GILLESPIE: Okay, fuel cells are coming.

SKINNER: Okay, you guys are troglodytes.

GILLESPIE: Yes, right.

SKINNER: What we need to do is we need to...

GILLESPIE: Thanks, Nancy.

SKINNER: ...spend -- take these -- take the billions of dollars we're going to give to the wealthiest five percent, and say we're going to get the fuel cell vehicle up and running. We're going to get the infrastructure up and running. It's a zero polluting engine, Heidi...

GILLESPIE: Right.

SKINNER: The by-product of water, H20.

GILLESPIE: Nancy...

SKINNER: ...is the only polluting effect. We have plentiful hydrogen. Why don't we embark on this?

GILLESPIE: Because the technology isn't there, Nancy.

SKINNER: That's not true.

GILLESPIE: No, it is true.

SKINNER: Absolutely. COLLINS: Nick, let me interrupt for a minute. Nancy, do you think that Washington, not the consumer, because you say that you are not trying to blame the consumer for the oil consumption. You are trying to get the attention of Washington. Do you think you're getting their attention? What have you heard?

SKINNER: Well, that's the way it works. You have to increase knowledge out there and pressure on the politicians. And when, I mean, with any issue, like we saw yesterday with the death penalty. I'm from Chicago. I saw that whole issue mature over the years. Once the people understood the problems and made the connection between our dependence on foreign oil, the fact that SUVs have a loophole. They are supposed to be -- the loophole is they don't have to go by the same cafe standards as cars because they are business vehicles used for utility. Well now, that's not true. And there is -- the technology is there to improve the efficiency today for those vehicles. It's about....

COLLINS: Nick, I'm going to give you the last word.

GILLESPIE: Yes, okay.

COLLINS: Nick, the last word quickly.

GILLESPIE: She's living in a dream world where there are no tradeoffs. You can have lighter cars that get more gas mileage that aren't quite as safe, and don't fit as many people. You know, people are driving the market for SUVs, not tax breaks and not oil companies. We shouldn't be afraid of imports or a global economy, wherever the goods are coming from. And to assert that, oh, we have fuel cell technology that will work perfectly today is a pipe dream. It's coming, but it takes time to develop. And I -- you know, the first...

COLLINS: All right, guys, I'm going to have to end it there. I do appreciate your very animated discussion.

SKINNER: You bet.

GILLESPIE: I'm going back to sleep.

COLLINS: Nick Gillespie with "Reason" magazine and radio host Nancy Skinner. Thanks, guys.

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 12, 2003 - 07:34   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: The ads are controversial, to say the least. Opponents say they're free to drive whatever vehicle they choose, and shouldn't be bullied out of driving their SUVs.
Let's talk about it with both sides now. Joining our discussion from Cincinnati is Nick Gillespie. He's editor in chief of "Reason" magazine. He says there's nothing unpatriotic about driving an SUV.

Hello to you, Nick.

NICK GILLESPIE, "REASON" MAGAZINE: Hi, thanks for having me.

COLLINS: And -- you bet. And in Boston, syndicated radio host Nancy Skinner supports the ad campaign. Thanks for being here, Nancy as well.

NANCY SKINNER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: You bet, good morning.

COLLINS: Let's go ahead and start with Nick. Nick, you say that you have a really hard time with millionaires telling you what to drive. What do you mean when you say that?

GILLESPIE: Well, Arianna Huffington, who's really the brains, if you can call it that, behind this operation is a multimillionaire. She owns a couple of homes. She used to own an SUV. Recently, got rid of it. And now with the zeal of a convert is practicing what I think we could fairly call automotive McCarthyism, which is charging people for being unpatriotic for driving certain kinds of cars.

What's interesting to me is that the logic of the ads actually lead you to conclude that we should be cutting off foreign oil supplies and foreign oil imports into the U.S. and ratcheting up domestic oil production in Texas or Alaska or wherever. But that's not where the ads end up. Where the ads end up is demonizing SUV owners, which are not even the only type of light truck which has the same kind of lower standard mileage, miles per gallon requirement. We also have pickup trucks and mini vans. But it strikes me as peculiar that only SUVs get singled out, even though they're in the same category of light trucks as pickups and minivans.

And what this all points to to me is a new kind of sumptuary law, or an attack on what some people consider conspicuous consumption.

COLLINS: Nancy...

GILLESPIE: SUV owners are somehow driving what's been called anti social vehicles. It just strikes me as absurd.

COLLINS: Nancy, you do say that we need to be independent from this Gulf oil within 10 years. Do you think that's realistic?

GILLESPIE: No, I don't....

COLLINS: I'm sorry, Nick. Nancy, can I hear a response on that?

SKINNER: Yes, absolutely. You know what? I mean, what we're debating now, and see, this is where the focus have gotten off track here. SUVs are not the new axles of evil, if you will. And the new evildoers are not the soccer moms who just want to safely get their kids to school, Heidi.

What we're saying, what these commercials are trying to do is put the pressure on Washington, D.C., our politicians who take campaign contributions from the oil companies and gas companies, and they refuse to provider leadership to get us off foreign Gulf oil. Now...

GILLESPIE: No, no, no...

SKINNER: ...we gave no -- Nick, I let you speak. Let me speak.

GILLESPIE: Okay, Nancy, go ahead.

SKINNER: Okay, $6 billion was found that we have given to Saddam Hussein. We know that the Saudis fund terrorism. That is a proven fact. We buy the oil, they buy the weapons, and then we go to war to fight them. So what we are suggesting, or these ads are suggesting is somebody's got to step forward and say we have three percent proven oil reserves. They have 70 percent proven oil reserves. We have to find new technology, like fuel cell technology, and improve our mileage in the meantime, so that our national security is not jeopardized by this. It's not about the soccer moms. It's about leadership for the future.

And we could do this within 10 years if we weren't hooked on the campaign contributions from the oil companies.

GILLESPIE: No, well, it isn't -- you know, I agree that no corporation should get special tax breaks. And no -- the government shouldn't be in the business of social engineering through the tax code. Although most liberals don't agree with that actually. That's a libertarian position, not a liberal position.

But the fact is, is that we started ratcheting up cars today, compared to 1975 are far more fuel efficient. What has happened? In 1975, 30 percent of our oil came from imports. Now it's over 50 percent, even as cars got more fuel efficient. When you're talking about a global economy, prices ultimately, you know, sources and imports go to the places where -- who can produce oil more cheaply. And that's going to be the Middle East.

And if you're going to say that all of Saudi Arabia, you know, funds terrorism, you know, let's go pick at the guy who runs the Exxon station down at the corner. You can just as easily say that by giving humanitarian aid to Iraq, we're propping up Saddam Hussein. So we ought to stop giving medicine and food, and allowing him to sell any oil in order to feed any children there.

I mean this -- it's a ludicrous debate...

SKINNER: You know, it's a simple debate.

GILLESPIE: And something, you know...

SKINNER: Nick, it is a very simple debate. They have the oil and we do not. We could blast the purple mountains majesty and mine the fruited plains until kingdom come, they have oil and we don't. And from a national security standpoint...

GILLESPIE: Yes, so what's your point?

SKINNER: ...from a global warming standpoint, from a National Security standpoint. Well, listen, this is what I want to see, Nick, technology.

GILLESPIE: Yes, okay.

SKINNER: You're with "Reason" magazine...

GILLESPIE: Okay, fuel cells are coming.

SKINNER: Okay, you guys are troglodytes.

GILLESPIE: Yes, right.

SKINNER: What we need to do is we need to...

GILLESPIE: Thanks, Nancy.

SKINNER: ...spend -- take these -- take the billions of dollars we're going to give to the wealthiest five percent, and say we're going to get the fuel cell vehicle up and running. We're going to get the infrastructure up and running. It's a zero polluting engine, Heidi...

GILLESPIE: Right.

SKINNER: The by-product of water, H20.

GILLESPIE: Nancy...

SKINNER: ...is the only polluting effect. We have plentiful hydrogen. Why don't we embark on this?

GILLESPIE: Because the technology isn't there, Nancy.

SKINNER: That's not true.

GILLESPIE: No, it is true.

SKINNER: Absolutely. COLLINS: Nick, let me interrupt for a minute. Nancy, do you think that Washington, not the consumer, because you say that you are not trying to blame the consumer for the oil consumption. You are trying to get the attention of Washington. Do you think you're getting their attention? What have you heard?

SKINNER: Well, that's the way it works. You have to increase knowledge out there and pressure on the politicians. And when, I mean, with any issue, like we saw yesterday with the death penalty. I'm from Chicago. I saw that whole issue mature over the years. Once the people understood the problems and made the connection between our dependence on foreign oil, the fact that SUVs have a loophole. They are supposed to be -- the loophole is they don't have to go by the same cafe standards as cars because they are business vehicles used for utility. Well now, that's not true. And there is -- the technology is there to improve the efficiency today for those vehicles. It's about....

COLLINS: Nick, I'm going to give you the last word.

GILLESPIE: Yes, okay.

COLLINS: Nick, the last word quickly.

GILLESPIE: She's living in a dream world where there are no tradeoffs. You can have lighter cars that get more gas mileage that aren't quite as safe, and don't fit as many people. You know, people are driving the market for SUVs, not tax breaks and not oil companies. We shouldn't be afraid of imports or a global economy, wherever the goods are coming from. And to assert that, oh, we have fuel cell technology that will work perfectly today is a pipe dream. It's coming, but it takes time to develop. And I -- you know, the first...

COLLINS: All right, guys, I'm going to have to end it there. I do appreciate your very animated discussion.

SKINNER: You bet.

GILLESPIE: I'm going back to sleep.

COLLINS: Nick Gillespie with "Reason" magazine and radio host Nancy Skinner. Thanks, guys.

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