MSNBC "Hardball with Chris Matthews" - Transcript

Interview

MR. MATTHEWS: We begin with the dueling plans to rescue our economy.

U.S. Congresswoman Janice Schakowsky is an Illinois Democrat, and Congressman Dan Lungren is a California Republican.

Congresswoman, I want to tell you, what faith do you have in Barack Obama to fix this difficult and dangerous economy we face right now?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, I have all the faith in the world, because I think his philosophy, that the economy is really driven from the bottom up and not from the top down, as John McCain believes, the kind of trickle-down theory that never has worked.

And so I think Barack Obama is focusing on middle-class people, a moratorium on foreclosures, helping businesses through tax credits, to actually create jobs -- there's not a whit of job creation in the McCain plan, and that's what Barack focuses on is putting people back to work, extending unemployment benefits and not taxing them on a temporary basis. These are all things that are going to put us in the right direction.

MR. MATTHEWS: Congressman, what's your response to that, the charge that Barack Obama offers a chance to put people back to work and that McCain doesn't?

MR. LUNGREN: Well, Barack Obama's response is the typical government-knows-best response, that somehow we're going to stimulate the economy by more government spending or government jobs. I mean, look, the idea that you would raise taxes in the midst of a downturn in the economy is nuts. And John McCain has spoken out against that for a long period of time.

When you look at the plan that he just proposed, one of the things he recognizes is that some of these tax policies actually work counter to having an economy that is on the upbeat. For instance, he suggests that right now, if you reach 70 years and a half, you're obligated to start selling some of the stocks you've put away for your retirement. To require people to do that in the midst of a downturn, when the value of their stocks are really down, just doesn't make sense. John's taken practical steps to try and address this problem.

MR. MATTHEWS: Well, it seems to me, Congressman --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: You know --

MR. MATTHEWS: Let me go back to your point here about the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, Congressman Lungren. You make a point that was sound a couple of weeks ago, that the Democrats are for a larger role for the public sector, the Republicans for a smaller role. But under this administration, we've had huge deficits; huge, unimaginable growth in the national debt. We've got now a plan on the table as of today from the president for a $250 billion purchase of equity in the big banks of this country. How more socialist can you get than the Republicans?

MR. LUNGREN: Well, come on, Chris. I mean, let's look at what we're talking about. We're talking about John McCain, who has an absolute record of criticizing Republicans and Democrats for spending too much. He knows what he's talking about in terms of cutting spending.

Look at what we've got from Barack Obama -- billions upon billions upon billions of dollars in new spending. And then you've got Nancy Pelosi saying they're going to bring us back right after the election so that we can inject another amount of huge spending.

Look, no one likes the idea that we have to intervene now in these financial markets. But on a bipartisan basis, we came forward and said, under these extreme circumstances, we should. But if you look at the president's plan, if you look at what Paulson said today, if you look at what everybody has said today about this new iteration of the plan inside of what we authorized two weeks ago -- it's not in addition to; it's inside of it -- you will see they're looking for the shortest term that we have of the government intervening.

You're looking at preferred stocks; that is, stocks with a non- voting ownership. That is different than what they've done in some other countries when you're talking about nationalizing these particular industries or nationalizing even parts of the industries.

So there's a big difference between what you just said, Chris, and what's being proposed, and a big difference between what John McCain would do and what Barack Obama would do, based on their records. I'm not just talking about what they're saying. Look at their records.

MR. MATTHEWS: Well, Congresswoman, let me ask you to respond to this --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Yes.

MR. MATTHEWS: -- because it seems like the government is intervening in a way we couldn't have imagined a couple of weeks ago. And both parties are going along with it. You say the Democrats are different because you're bottom up rather than top down. But all the Democrats have joined on more votes by the Democrats for this package, which includes now the $250 billion in purchases of, as the congressman makes the point, preferred stock rather than common stock, but it's equity in these big banks.

What's the difference between the two parties if you're both on board these giant bailouts?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, first of all, Congressman Lungren had said that Barack Obama is for tax increases. They can say it all they want, but the Obama plan would actually reduce taxes for 95 percent of Americans. And John McCain's plan would leave 101 million American families without any kind of tax relief; 97 percent of the senior citizens.

But actually, I think that, had Henry Paulson weeks ago decided to do what ideologically he found it so hard to do, to inject liquidity into the markets by actually putting some equity stake into the banks, we may have avoided some of the tremendous downturns that we saw in the economy.

So what really drove his going from one plan to another was really ideology. And that's that ideology that says that we want to always privatize gain and only nationalize risk. And this way, this plan does minimize the risk, as long as the taxpayers get their money's worth from the equity, their ownership of those banks. And that's what Barack Obama has called for.

MR. MATTHEWS: Let's listen now to the governor of Alaska --

MR. LUNGREN: Hey, wait a second --

MR. MATTHEWS: We have to go -- Congressman, we have to go to the governor of Alaska. She made an important statement today on Rush Limbaugh. Let's look at what she said about her commentary about Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for president.

(Begin audiotaped segment.)

RUSH LIMBAUGH (radio talk show host): It seems that you are the more forceful in speaking out against Obama and his campaign ideas. Are they giving you pretty much free rein to attack this campaign as you wish?

ALASKA GOV. SARAH PALIN (Republican vice presidential nominee): Well, you know, there just aren't enough hours in the day, I think, to get out there. And (as I say ?), I've got nothing to lose in this. And I think America has everything to gain by understanding the differences, the contrasts here between Obama and McCain.

So, you know, I'm going out there and I'm just simply speaking; so be it that I'm a simple talker. But I'm just going out there and letting people know the differences and how absolutely paramount it is that voters are paying attention and that voters are understanding candidates' records.

(End audiotaped segment.

)

MR. MATTHEWS: Congressman, are you confident in having that person we just heard from as one of the two top people running this country in these complicated economic times, the person you just heard from?

MR. LUNGREN: Oh, come on, Chris. Now, look, you let the congresswoman get away with a statement that's the same sort of prattle that we heard from Nancy Pelosi when we were trying to do a bipartisan approach to respond to this problem. On the floor of the House, she went and attacked Republicans, went into this right-wing rhetoric that they always talk about. The congresswoman's done the same thing, talking about ideology.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: No, you accused -- no, but --

MR. LUNGREN: Here we are, trying to solve a particular problem on a bipartisan basis. I didn't make any comments with respect to the approach that's being used that was a bipartisan basis.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Yes, you did. You said Barack --

MR. LUNGREN: Now, if you want to talk about --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: -- Obama wants to raise taxes.

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay, we have --

MR. LUNGREN: Look at the record of people.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: You said Barack Obama wants to raise taxes.

MR. LUNGREN: Look at -- (inaudible) -- people. Look at how they voted.

MR. MATTHEWS: You know what I'm concerned about is the election of our president and vice president, Congressman.

MR. LUNGREN: Look at how they voted. That's what the people ought to look at.

MR. MATTHEWS: We're picking two people to run the country, the president and --

MR. LUNGREN: Okay, if you want to talk about --

MR. MATTHEWS: Are you confident in Governor Palin's ability to help lead this country in complicated times, the person you just heard from, in one of the rare moments we've had where she spoke without notes, without a script?

MR. LUNGREN: You want to talk about my friend Joe Biden, who made at least 10 misstatements in the last debate? I mean, the fact that you've been around Washington a long time doesn't mean that necessarily you're going to provide the leadership.

Look what she did. She took on the Republican and Democratic old-boy establishment in Alaska. She turned that place upside down. She met the challenges. She didn't take the conventional wisdom and accept it. She won when people didn't think she could win.

MR. MATTHEWS: Right.

MR. LUNGREN: She dealt with energy issues that are very difficult to deal with. And now you're saying, because she interviewed with somebody, well, she shouldn't be capable of the job.

MR. MATTHEWS: No, I'm asking you, sir.

MR. LUNGREN: I think she is capable.

MR. MATTHEWS: Congressman Lungren, I've got great respect for you. I want to know if you respect her intellectual ability to help lead this country? Do you actually believe that she has the capacity to help lead this country in very complicated times? Do you?

MR. LUNGREN: Yes --

MR. MATTHEWS: This person we just heard from.

MR. LUNGREN: Yes, I do, Chris, based -- Chris, yes, I do, based on this -- her experience in government in Alaska. We're not talking about a state the size of Delaware. We're not talking about a state that doesn't have true, serious issues dealing with the economy, dealing with (everything ?).

MR. MATTHEWS: Well, you have more constituents than the governor --

MR. LUNGREN: We're talking about someone who's taken those on.

MR. MATTHEWS: But you have more constituents than the governor of Alaska, sir, don't you?

MR. LUNGREN: (Laughs.) Do you want me to be vice president, Chris? That's the first time I've heard you say that. (Laughs.)

MR. MATTHEWS: No, I'm just asking -- I'm asking you to stand behind this person we just heard from who has a strange way of --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Chris --

MR. LUNGREN: I know --

MR. MATTHEWS: I'm not going to get into it. What do you think? I'm asking the question.

MR. LUNGREN: Well, wait a second --

MR. MATTHEWS: Congresswoman, this woman was put up there as kind of a response --

MR. LUNGREN: Chris, she does not send a tingle up my leg like Barack Obama does to you --

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay, fine. That's a nice line.

MR. LUNGREN: -- if that's what you want to (say ?).

MR. MATTHEWS: That's cute.

Let me just ask you, Congresswoman, she was put on that ticket because she was a she, clearly, because Hillary Clinton got unfair treatment and maybe she got too tough treatment, and I admit it, even from me occasionally. But the fact of the matter is the comparison between her and Hillary Clinton is the comparison between an igloo and the Empire State Building. There is no comparison from the person we just heard from.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, you know --

MR. MATTHEWS: Your thoughts on the capability of Governor Palin to lead us through this complicated economic time. I'm just asking your view, because the congressman on the other side of the aisle seems to be hesitant to give me his own personal take on Governor Palin and her ability.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Let me tell you two things that really concern me about what Governor Palin is doing. One, I think she's running a campaign against smart; that somehow that is a negative when someone is a really bright and well-informed person.

MR. MATTHEWS: Right.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: And I think that, you know, that's part. The other thing is, I think that when she says that "Barack Obama doesn't see the world the way you and I, the way we see it," that she's trying to "otherize" him in a way that -- who's "we"? The United States of America is a very diverse place. And I think she has unleashed something that is really not wholesome for our country.

MR. MATTHEWS: Do you think she's trying to de-Americanize him?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: I do think that. I think they're trying to make people very uncomfortable, even fearful of Barack Obama, who is representative of someone who has lived out the American dream. And I really resent that part of the strategy of the campaign.

MR. MATTHEWS: What do you think, Congressman, of her statement today on Rush Limbaugh --

MR. LUNGREN: Well, Chris, can I respond to that?

MR. MATTHEWS: -- that, quote, "I have nothing to lose saying what I do about Barack Obama"? Is that a competent statement to say? Is that, well, a responsible statement to say, "I have nothing to lose going after Barack Obama"?

MR. LUNGREN: Oh, come on. Come on, Chris. What are you trying to make out of this? The fact of the matter is, she is not part of the inside-the-Beltway gang, nor is she part of the tight-knit Chicago political Democratic machine. And somehow you're suggesting that if she had done what Barack Obama did, which is attach himself to some of the most radical aspects of the Chicago political machine, that would qualify her to be president of the United States or vice president of the United States.

We come from different experiences, different backgrounds. And frankly, those of us in the West and people in Alaska are tired of folks in other parts of the country suggesting that somehow we're incapable of dealing with issues on a national and international basis. That dog just won't hunt, Chris.

MR. MATTHEWS: Would you be confident, Congressman, of having her in a room that had to decide our economic destiny? That's all I'm asking. Would you be confident of her role in that small room, in that tight-knit room, as you describe it, in that inner circle, to use your phrases, that decides our economic destiny?

MR. LUNGREN: I would be confident that she has shown the judgment in the past to be able to sift through the nonsense and the substantial and come to a proper decision. That's what she did in the state of Alaska, overturning the good-old-boy network that existed for 30 years and --

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay.

MR. LUNGREN: One second -- overturning the conventional wisdom that you had to go along with exactly what the legislature had done in the cozy relationship with the oil companies when she went a different way in terms of building that new pipeline. I mean, that is a specific example of her dealing with an issue and not just accepting the conventional wisdom. Now, that's a test, Chris. She passed that test.

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay, it's great having you on, Congressman Dan Lungren of California, who thinks I'm engaged in regionalism, which I'm not. (Laughs.) Thank you very much, Congressman Lungren. I don't think I've been accused of being anti-western. That's a new one on me. But I've been accused of things before.

Congresswoman Janice Schakowsky of Chicago, thanks for joining us.

Source