MSNBC "The Rachel Maddow Show" - Transcript
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY (D), ILLINOIS: Thank you, Chris. Good to be with you.
HAYES: So, I guess--is it surprising the speed and alacrity with which they are walking back these promises?
SCHAKOWSKY: Well, let"s look at those promises anyway. The big promise when they talk about spending cuts is that they"re going to reduce the deficit. They"re going to cut the debt. What they did in their rules package makes a parity of fiscal responsibility.
They"re talking about spending cuts--and from my point of view, the less they do of spending cuts, because you know what they"re going to go after. From a progressive"s point of view, we don"t want them going after education and job training and investments and infrastructure. These are good things that we want. So, all the better that they reduce--
HAYES: You are applauding.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHAKOWSKY: Yes, I"m glad to hear it. But the reality is they"re adding--they"re prepared to add trillions of dollars to the deficit because their rules say the only thing that counts is spending, reduce taxes all you want, eliminate taxes. Give more tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. They are for that and are willing to add trillions of dollars to the deficit.
HAYES: Right. So, they--my understanding is they replaced what had been the operating rules for the Democratic House which is called PAYGO, which is that you had to have pay-fors, that you have to essentially balance out expenditures, right? With this new thing called CUTGO, right? Is CUTGO going to work or is CUTGO going to deliver us?
What"s different about CUTGO from PAYGO?
SCHAKOWSKY: Well, what they"re saying is that if you want to spend a dime on anything, this could be the most wonderful thing for us, like investing in education--then you have to offset that not with an increase in revenue but with a cut somewhere else. Well, there just isn"t that much fat, particularly because they have put defense cuts off the table.
Now, let"s remember that the secretary of defense said there"s plenty to cut within the defense budget. But, no, they didn"t want to touch that. So, we"re really talking about those programs that help the middle class, they are talking about further shredding the safety net for Americans and I really don"t think that"s their mandate.
HAYES: You know, Paul Ryan, who is talking this morning, and it"s not just defense, right? They also want--it"s veterans, homeland security--
SCHAKOWSKY: Exactly.
HAYES: -- defense, and then they also--they say they"re not going to touch Social Security and Medicare. So, they are now--they"re kind of slicing down, down, down.
Paul Ryan said this morning on "The Today Show," I can"t tell you the answer to that one when he asked what they were going to reduce. He basically said, we"re going to reduce all domestic discretionary spending.
What does that look like in real it terms? I mean, do you think that"s going to--that is something that is going to come out of the House and is going to find a willing partner in the Senate?
SCHAKOWSKY: First of all, let me tell you, you could eliminate all of the rest of discretionary spending and I wouldn"t be close to budget balance. Paul Ryan knows better. I was on the deficit commission, the fiscal responsibility commission with Paul Ryan. The difference there is everything was on the table and we considered tax cuts the same as we do spending.
HAYES: Because they show up the same.
SCHAKOWSKY: Exactly.
HAYES: I want to ask you this: I think that there"s a conception people have that the Republicans, or they are the guarantors of the fiscal nation"s fiscal probity, right? That they are sort of going to return us to this era of virtue.
And not only that, they are going to rein in spending. What is the history say about a Republican Congress say about that? I mean, you mentioned Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan himself, if I"m not mistaken, cast the deciding vote for Medicare Part D, isn"t that correct?
SCHAKOWSKY: That is correct. That was a major program, actually a very unnecessarily complicated program that put seniors into a spin on their prescription drugs, unpaid for. In other words, put on credit cards.
It is--you know, we have such short memories as Americans.
HAYES: Yes.
SCHAKOWSKY: It was really just a decade ago that there was a surplus in the budget as far as the eye could see--that was when George Bush took over. The fiscal responsibility was through the Clinton administration. And you come to the George Bush administration and you find record deficits created.
Why they continued to be allowed to wear the jacket of fiscal responsibility eludes me altogether. And now, they really want to make it worse. This is really about Wall Street versus Main Street. Who are they going to cut? Who are they going to benefit? Who pays?
We have the biggest disparity right now between the rich and everyone else. The richest Americans control 34 percent of the wealth -- 90 percent of Americans control only 29 percent, you know? I mean, this is not good for a democracy, not good for our economy. And they"re going to make it worse.
HAYES: Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky of the great state of Illinois--
I appreciate it. Thanks.
SCHAKOWSKY: Thank you. Thanks, Chris.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source