During an interview on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer today, Seventh District Congressman Roy Blunt said the continued presence in Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic presidential race has helped GOP candidate Sen. John McCain.
The transcript of the appearance is featured below:
BLITZER: Coming up in our next hour, the second part of my interview with Democratic presidential frontrunner Barack Obama. He talks about how he'd handle the war in Iraq, other international issues as well. But right now, we're talking politics and policy with two top U.S. congressmen. Joining us, the man in charge of rounding up Republican votes in the House of Representatives, the No. 2 Republican, the minority whip, Roy Blunt of Missouri, and the man in charge of increasing Congress's Democratic majority, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. Congressmen, both of you, thanks very much for coming in.
Congressman Van Hollen, is it already a done deal, Obama versus McCain?
VAN HOLLEN: Well, it's only a done deal when one of our nominees either decides not to get out...
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: But effectively speaking?
VAN HOLLEN: Look, Obama is clearly the frontrunner here. But until it's finally over, it's not over. And we'll just have to see how this plays out. But clearly, he's the frontrunner.
We need as the Democratic Party to begin to focus on the differences between the Democratic position on issues and John McCain, who represents a third Bush term. And the sooner we can get there, the better. The key right now...
BLITZER: It sounds like you're... VAN HOLLEN: ... is to have a positive tone -- is to have a positive tone between the two Democratic candidates going into the next couple of weeks.
BLITZER: You haven't endorsed anybody, but is it time for Hillary Clinton to read the handwriting on the wall?
VAN HOLLEN: That's a decision for her to make. And, you know, we'll have to see how this goes forward. Again, obviously Obama has a lot of momentum right now. But until you have a majority of the delegates, it's not over.
BLITZER: What do you think? Are you already assuming it's going to be McCain versus Obama?
BLUNT: I am assuming it's McCain versus Obama. Now, you know, I'm glad to see Mrs. Clinton stay in this race and keep that discussion going. I think that discussion, frankly, has been helpful for us. And what McCain is going to bring to the fall is somebody who really is arguably the candidate who can bring change to Washington. He's the one person from inside this town who nobody believes...
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: You just heard Congressman Van Hollen say that he represents a third Bush term. You know how unpopular the job approval numbers are right now.
BLUNT: I don't think anybody believes that. I think everybody does believe from his record that here is somebody who has always been willing to complain about the way business was done in Washington. And, frankly, people want to see that...
BLITZER: When it comes to domestic economic issues, what is the major difference between President Bush's policies, what he wants to do, and what John McCain would do if he were president?
BLUNT: Well, I think what John McCain wants to do is continue these pro-growth tax policies that our friends on the other side have been talking...
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: But that's what President Bush wants to do too.
BLUNT: And there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with that.
BLITZER: So it would be in effect a third Bush term when it came to pro-growth tax policies?
BLUNT: It would be. I think it would be. And I think that's a good thing. You can't go out in the country anywhere and find people who believe that doubling the capital gains rate is a good thing, that raising the highest rate on every small business in America is a good thing, that eliminating those bottom brackets, that mean that people at the lower levels of tax pay less taxes than they would otherwise. In fact, I think one of the reasons that the economy has slowed down the way it has is the fact that there's great uncertainty about how those tax policies move forward.
BLITZER: Do you want to respond to that?
VAN HOLLEN: Sure. Look, I mean, the Bush economic policies have helped drive this economy into a ditch. The economy has lost $260,000 in the first four months of this year. And John McCain...
BLITZER: 260,000 jobs.
VAN HOLLEN: Jobs in the first four months. And John McCain does represent a continuation of the Bush economic policy, as Roy just acknowledged. And the fact of the matter is, people are hurting. The one thing this president doesn't understand and John McCain doesn't understand is the economic squeeze the families around the country are feeling.
And when it comes to Iraq, again, this is a continuation of the Bush policy.
So on the two biggest issues on the agenda today, the war in Iraq and the economy, he represents a continuation of George Bush.
BLITZER: Do you want to say anything? Before we move on, do you want to respond to that?
BLUNT: I think what Americans are tired of is business as usual in Washington. They see John McCain as somebody who wants to change that. He has shown that as a member of the Senate. He's shown that as a leader in the country. And he'll be a positive force for change.
BLITZER: Here's what Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker Republican wrote in Human Events, a conservative publication on Tuesday. "No Republican should kid themselves. It's time to face up to a stark choice. Without change, we could face a catastrophic election this fall. Without change, the Republican Party in the House could revert to the permanent minority status it had from 1930 to 1994". That is a pretty gloomy assessment from Newt Gingrich.
BLUNT: It would be, if that was the assessment. I think Newt is absolutely right in the idea that real change requires real change. We're going to be talking in the next few weeks about the things we want to do to bring change to the country.
BLITZER: But it sounds like on the two biggest issues, the economy and the war in Iraq, McCain wants to continue the Bush policy.
BLUNT: You know, I think McCain will make the argument that he argued against policies that the Defense Department pursued, the Rumsfeld policies that have not produced the kind of results maybe that the Petraeus policies have. Americans clearly are tired of what they saw happening in Iraq. But they don't want to lose. They don't want to leave there with a worse situation in the world than we would have if we leave there with a stable Iraq. I think John McCain is going to be able to advance his position there in a way that the American people say, you know, that's exactly the kind of result I want to see happen in Iraq.
BLITZER: He was critical of the way the Rumsfeld Pentagon conducted a large part of this war.
VAN HOLLEN: Look, this is one of the few times I agree with Newt Gingrich. The Republican Party has become the party of no, veto and the status quo. And now they're going to try to run as a party of change. We just saw on the House floor this week exactly why they're in so much trouble. We had a bill to try and finally deal with the housing crisis that Americans are experiencing. The Bush administration rushed to bail out Bear Stearns, a Wall Street firm. They worked around the clock over a weekend. Yet, they're opposing legislation that helps stabilize the housing market. When it comes to the war in Iraq, they spent $700 billion to date and they're unwilling to spend a little bit to help our GIs, men and women fighting the war on education issues. This is the problem they've got.
BLITZER: Stand by. We're going to pick up those points and let you respond, Congressman Blunt. Hold on for a second. We'll take a quick break. When we come back, we'll discuss what can Congress do to help the struggling U.S. economy right now? LATE EDITION continues right after this.
BLITZER: We were talking about the economy, what the House of Representatives right now could do to help a lot of ailing Americans out there. In our latest CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, we asked whether the tax rebate policy, the stimulus package that was quickly approved by the president and Congress, the checks that are going out right now to millions of Americans is enough. Thirteen percent says that policy does enough, 3 percent say it does too much, 82 percent though, 82 percent of the American people say it's not enough. They want more. What else are you willing to do?
BLUNT: Well the single big issue is gas prices right now. We need to do something about gas prices.
BLITZER: Like, what do you want to do?
BLUNT: Well, what I'd like to do is see us do something about both the strategic petroleum reserve, filling that --
BLITZER: Stop filling it?
BLUNT: I think we should stop filling it. The White House doesn't agree with that position. But that's one thing that would have impact at the pump.
BLITZER: Because it would empty supply and presumably reduce price.
BLUNT: And really are three things the federal government can do to have gas impact right now. One is the SPRO. Two is either some kind of a gas tax rebate or a gas tax holiday. We're proposing that that be funded with whatever money would have been spent on congressional earmark this is year, that that money goes into highway trust fund to replace that. And three, is the effort that the Treasury Department is now making to stabilize the dollar. A lot of the speculation in oil, the decline of the dollar, those things have an impact on gas prices.
That's the biggest single thing Americans care about. We've been asking the majority for three weeks now to bring some legislation to the floor that would do something about gas prices. Two years ago, April 2006, Nancy Pelosi said put -- if the Democrats are given the majority control in the Congress, we have a common sense plan to do something about gas prices.
BLITZER: You're the majority. You're in the leadership, go ahead.
BLUNT: And that's $1.35 ago. VAN HOLLEN: We do have a common sense plan. First of all, we agree with Roy with respect to the strategic petroleum reserve. That's exactly what we should do. The president has been blocking that. But we lay out a very clear tact early on with legislation that says we need to reduce our reliance on oil and gas going forward.
BLITZER: But that's a long-term solution. Right now we're talking about -- what can be done immediately to help those Americans who are in trouble?
VAN HOLLEN: Absolutely. One is the strategic petroleum reserve. Another thing we can do and we have done is finally give the FTC the ability to enforce price manipulation in the oil and gas market. They've been sitting on their hands. They've not been moving. We have also got legislation, our Republican colleagues will have an opportunity to vote on it dealing with OPEC, finally being able to deal with OPEC price manipulation as a cartel from a leader perspective. So there are a couple of things we can do right now.
BLITZER: What about eliminating the federal gas tax between Memorial Day and Labor Day? That's -- Hillary Clinton says it's a good idea. John McCain says it's a good idea. They disagree on how to fund that $10 or $12 billion, whatever it might cost. But Barack Obama says it's a stupid idea.
VAN HOLLEN: Right. We in the House don't think that that's a good idea. It is too short termy. It is a gimmick type of approach. The problem is it would mean that right now funds that would go into the transportation program to help build bridges, infrastructure, roads, would be reduced. This is a time we need to be increasing our investment and our national infrastructure. It is long overdue and it would also help boost the economy.
BLITZER: Let's let Congressman Blunt respond. Go ahead and respond.
BLUNT: Everything we have come up and the country comes up with is either too short term for the majority or too long term for the majority. We need a short-term fix right now. We need the long-term things we need to do to encourage a shift in where that petroleum comes from. Jay Leno said I think one night last week that House Democrats today said that drilling in the Anwar wouldn't produce any fuel for 10 years. Then he paused and said that's exactly what they said 10 years ago. We need some long-term things going on. We also need some short-term relief right now. A gas tax holiday replaced with money that otherwise would have gone into congressional earmarks, a bill that I co-sponsored last week with Paul Ryan and John Boehner and others would do that. Those two things are going to impact this summer.
VAN HOLLEN: It's the Democrats who on the first day of the new Congress finally adopted reforms to earmark policy making this transparent and accountable. We're more than willing to explore ways --
BLITZER: Viewers may not know, the earmarks are what's called these pork barrel spending, money specifically designed to help one particular group or area.
VAN HOLLEN: That's right. But with respect to the long term, there are millions of acres of federal land that are open to leasing right now where the oil companies are not drilling for gas. And in terms of the long-term, we have said that we should eliminate the subsidies, the taxpayer giveaways for the oil and gas --
BLITZER: That's a new tax, a windfall profits tax on the Exxon Mobil and other big oil companies, you support that?
VAN HOLLEN: No, what I've been talking about is getting rid of the subsidies for the oil and gas industry.
BLITZER: But that is in effect an increase in taxes.
VAN HOLLEN: Well, that's right. We don't think they should be getting tax breaks at a time when they're making record profits.
BLITZER: You think they should?
BLUNT: In 2005, we passed legislation that did actually encourage people to look at these public lands, drill in a nonintrusive way to find the gas and oil that we believe -- and the experts in the field believe we have more unfound reserves in this country of gas and oil than we have known reserves of gas and oil.
We passed legislation in the House that would have allowed deep ocean drilling, 100 miles off-coast, where the Chinese and others are drilling right now.
And every bill that's been reported out of the House Resources Committee since the new majority took over discouraged that kind of effort going forward.
Every single bill minimized the use of those very lands that Chris and I agree, apparently, have resources we ought to be looking at.
VAN HOLLEN: Many of them...
BLITZER: All right. Very quickly...
VAN HOLLEN: Many of them are already open to drilling. And you guys are opposed to getting rid of subsidies for the oil and gas industry and investing those funds instead in renewable energy and energy efficiency.
BLITZER: All right. Hold on.
BLUNT: Those two arguments don't even go together.
If they're open to drilling, getting rid of subsidies for the oil and gas companies to drill in this country has nothing to do with whether you encourage people to open the drilling...
VAN HOLLEN: What I'm saying -- there are already lands that are open to drilling. They're not taking advantage of them.
BLUNT: Every bill the Resources Committee has reported out on this topic has discouraged that policy that we put in place in 2000.
(CROSSTALK)
VAN HOLLEN: ... profits are a big incentive for... (CROSSTALK) BLITZER: We've got to leave it here, unfortunately, Congressmen. But thanks to both of you for joining us. Let's continue this conversation down the road.
VAN HOLLEN: You bet.
BLUNT: Thanks, Wolf.
No comments:
Post a Comment