ABC "Top Line" - Transcript

Interview

Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, today appeared on ABC's "Top Line" to discuss the work of Vice President Biden's deficit reduction group. You can watch the interview here. Below is the transcript:

JONATHAN KARL: And now I'm joined by friend of the program, Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, top Democrat on the Budget Committee, and most importantly right now, part of those of the Vice President Biden talks on raising the debt ceiling.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: It's good to be with you John.

KARL: How's it going?

VAN HOLLEN: It's going well, as far as we've gone. In other words, the Vice President was very smart. He began by looking for areas of common ground, and then built on that. We're now getting down to some of the very, very tough issues. So, we're going to find out, I think by the end of this month, whether or not we are going to be able to bridge those differences and get an agreement in principle, or whether we're not going to be able to. So, this week we are going to be meeting possibly four times, maybe three hours a shot, to try and really bear down.

KARL: So you guys are really going line by line on this stuff. I mean big lines, Top Line numbers.

VAN HOLLEN: Well, we are digging down in different areas to, again, look for those areas where there is common ground. But the big issues remain out there and one of the big ones, of course, that you've heard about is: Republicans need to understand that if you're going to have a balanced approach to deficit reduction you've got to be getting rid of a lot of these special interest tax loopholes. I mean this is pork-barrel through the tax code, and we need to get at that.

KAREN TRAVERS: Congressman, you've said that, you know, the deadline being the end of this month, to bridge differences, and if you're not able to what happens then? What happens if you go home at the July 4th recess and you aren't able to get through some of these very sensitive issues that you say are on the table in the meetings this week?

VAN HOLLEN: Well Karen we are still very much focused on plan A, which is to get this done. So I really don't want to speculate beyond that, but as we know August 2nd is the date for the debt ceiling. If we go beyond that date the Secretary of the Treasury has said the credit markets will essentially get very nervous, you'll have very tough economic times, that according to Ben Bernanke the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, as well. So, we hope not to go up against that deadline. Our goal is to get agreement in principle by the end of this month. We'll have to see if we're able to meet that but let's focus on plan A before we even talk about plan B.

KARL: You saw Mitch McConnell say yesterday that if you can't get an agreement within these talks on dealing with the entitlements issue, then basically, it's not going to work and you'll be faced with a situation where we'll do maybe a short term debt limit increase to get you through a few months. Is that a possibility?

VAN HOLLEN: What's that, a short term extension?

KARL: Yes.

VAN HOLLEN: Well this goes to whether we're going to get something done by the end of this month. If we're not able to, obviously you have to think of alternative scenarios, but we're still very focused on trying to get it done.

KARL: But does that even work? A short term… a few months… it's not like passing a continuing resolution to fund the government. This is--

VAN HOLLEN: It's no way to run a railroad, let alone a country, to have short term extensions of a debt ceiling. It will just create greater uncertainty in the markets, which will hurt the economy. So, what we need here is more certainty and more predictability, which is why our goal has been at least a two-year extension, or to the end of next year.

KARL: Is a few months extension even a possibility? Is it even on the table?

VAN HOLLEN: No. No, we are not talking about that at all. We are talking about trying to get the longer extension. Again, if that doesn't work, people will have to look for alternatives, but that remains our goal.

TRAVERS: Congressman, even if you get that goal, and you reach your goal by the end of this month, you have some sort of agreement in principle by the July 4th recess, does that give enough time to get this completely through Congress by that August 2nd deadline? I mean, you had as John just mentioned Mitch McConnell kind of already looking past that as if it might not happen, but how can you guarantee that in one month then, this can get all wrapped up in time for the treasury deadline?

VAN HOLLEN: Well I think that if we're able to reach agreement in principle, in other words, coming together on major issues, then the question of making sure you translate that agreement into some legislative package and get it through the Congress will be up to, of course, the Speaker of the House, and the House, and it will be up to the leadership in the Senate and the White House, and we'll all be working together to get it done. I think the greatest impediment right now is getting that agreement. I believe if we're able to get an agreement, we'll be able to translate that into action, but it won't be easy. Even if the people in that room can agree, the seven of us, it's going to be necessary of course to get majorities in the House, majority in the Senate, and a Presidential signature. That is our focus and that remains our goal, again to get that agreement in principle by the end of the month, or recognize that we're not able to come together.

KARL: Do you think that the draw down in Afghanistan affects what you guys are doing? If you get to two trillion dollars in cuts or in deficit reduction, as you probably need to to get a two year extension, could you be looking at savings from drawing down significantly in Afghanistan as part of that scenario?

VAN HOLLEN: I don't know about specifically savings from the draw down in Afghanistan, but one of the things that the bipartisan commission have recommended, this is Simpson-Bowles, is that you achieve some significant savings in the defense agencies. You've got some of those agencies that have never passed a GAO audit, an independent audit. So there are savings to be had. I think it's unclear to what extent the savings from Afghanistan would translate into that, because what we really want to do is to make sure we do what the defense baseline, which is what conflicts may be going on at a particular time, we need to bend that curve on defense spending. And that was one of the recommendations of Simpson-Bowles. But I go to that fact that our goal, the Democratic goal in these talks, is to make sure we have a balanced budget plan that does two things. One: does no harm now. In other words, don't harm the very fragile economy. And two: it has to be balanced. You have to be cutting, yes. But you also need to be getting rid of these special interest loopholes. And the vote the other day in the Senate, to get rid of the ethanol subsidy was finally an example where some Republicans agreed to do that for the purpose of deficit reduction.

KARL: Alright, we're out of time. But just quickly, are you glad to do an entire interview where you weren't asked a single question about Anthony Weiner?

VAN HOLLEN: Amen to that! Alright!

KARL: Alright!

VAN HOLLEN: I'm glad that has passed. He made the right decision at the end.

KARL: Alright, thank you very much, Chris Van Hollen.

VAN HOLLEN: Thanks, John.

Source