MSNBC "The Rachel Maddow Show" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Pramila Jayapal

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

VELSHI: This is what Democrats in Washington are struggling with right now. What`s the best way to shrink the president`s agenda to a size that will get these holdout senators on board? You shrink the entire plan funding all the programs but at a lower rate? Do you cut certain investments entirely? Do you lower the total cost by shortening the amount of time that the programs are funded for and hope they become so popular that a Congress a few years down the road will renew them?

These are the questions I`ve got about this and I`ve got just the person to ask. Joining us is Washington Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Congresswoman, thank you for being with us.

I don`t know -- that was the best effort we could get to at conveying what has been going on at Congress. But you`re actually in those meetings. You`re in the room where it happened. So, how much of what I just told the audience is accurate?

REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): Ali, it`s good to see you. Thanks very having me on.

Look, there`s some things that are accurate in that we are trying to get to a set of priorities that will be transformational, that will change people`s lives, that will take on climate change, that will provide paid leave, 12 weeks of paid leave to people, that will provide child care, pre- K, community college, health care, Medicare expansion, immigration, take on immigration issues. These are our priorities in the congressional progressive caucus that are in the president`s build back agenda.

This is actually the president`s agenda, just to be clear. But what is true is that we do have to get 50 senators on board. We have 96 percent of Democrats in the House and the Senate on board, but we don`t have 4 percent. And our margins are so thin that we have to get every single person on board.

So, we are in the negotiation process. We thought that 3.5 was the -- was actually the compromise negotiation position. And it came from these priorities. It was not a number that was picked out of the air. But at the end of the day, what we`re thinking about is if we have to trim a little -- and I`m saying a little -- then what we would like to do is have our priorities represented. And those are child care -- or really the care economy. They are -- it is Medicare expansive. It is immigration. It is housing and climate change.

Those five priorities that we need to include but perhaps for shorter number of years because I don`t think we can choose and pick between child care and climate change. I don`t think we can choose between pre-k and housing. These are all essential priorities. And that`s the process we`re in right now. So, let`s see where this goes. I will say that we are pushing to make sure that these -- that we think about it from the perspective of priorities. But at the end of the day when you talk about the number, let`s be clear that this is all paid for by taxes on the wealthiest corporations and wealthiest individuals so it does not add to the deficit. But it does make transformational investments in people`s lives.

VELSHI: So, that`s really the way to look at this, right? I think any government spending has to be looked at as what`s the return on the investment. I prefer we talk about these priorities, then we talk about the numbers. We do have reporting that the president said he could get the holdouts somewhere between 1.9 trillion and 2.2 trillion.

[21:15:03]

And we have reporting that you have said that you might be able to manage $2.5 trillion to $2.9 trillion. So, notwithstanding the fact that neither of us want to talk about the numbers, is there accuracy in that reporting?

JAYAPAL: Well, all I can say is that we are thinking -- it`s really different. Let`s just say we settle on $2.9 trillion. It`s going to be a different conversation if that $2.9 trillion includes our priorities versus doesn`t. It`s a different conversation if we are saying we`re going to means test a whole bunch of this, which we are opposed to, and put income caps that prevent two schoolteachers, for example, in Seattle from being able to get child care and qualify for that benefit.

So, we have to look at the details, and that`s why we don`t want to settle on the number because it is really dependent on how we structure it and how we implement it.

VELSHI: Right. So, $2.5 trillion to $2.9 trillion could be completely different things. We put up a list on the screen that talk about the priorities. On that list of priorities and some estimates that we got of what they could pay -- what they could cost, you are underscoring the fact that there`s less to negotiate on climate, less on housing, less on child care, less on Medicaid expansion. These are major priorities, so how you form whatever number you get to is important.

JAYAPAL: That`s right. And we still think that, you know, the 3.5 number was the number that we thought was negotiated. So, as close as we can get to that number, recognizing we`ve got to get all 50 senators on board.

VELSHI: So, I want to go a little further with the priorities you`ve got and the concept of return on investment. You`re calling it transformational investment. The way I look at it is if you put a dollar into the economy, you get more than a dollar back.

Climate change is just one of those examples, right? The gross cost of the $3.5 trillion plan, 1.5 percent of the U.S. GDP over the next ten years, the net cost of failing to hit the Paris climate agreement benchmarks, 8.6 percent of additional U.S. GDP in perpetuity until the year 2100. Little bits of math like that become compelling in this discussion.

JAYAPAL: That`s right, Ali. And that is such a beautiful example of what we`re calling these investments in the future. We are going to pay far more not just in terms of dollars but in term of opportunity, in terms of lives lost, in terms of, you know, lack of security for our country and for the world if we do not take on climate change in reality.

Now, the president is going to go to COP 26 in just a couple weeks, and he is -- needs to be able to say that the United States is going to lead on the issue of climate change. We are going to cut carbon emissions. And in order to do that, we have to have clean electricity performance standards in here. We have tax credits, clean energy tax credits, that sort of carrot and stick.

And if we do all of that, it will bring us enormous dollars back down the road, your concept of investment from a business perspective but also, hello, it will save the planet. So, we`ve got to do this and we`ve got to show leadership.

VELSHI: Yes, economic aside, we actually have a planet that`s burning out of control.

Congresswoman, it`s good to talk to you. Thank you for giving us a peek into what`s actually going on. Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal is the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source