MSNBC "Hardball with Chris Matthews" - Transcript

Interview

MR. MATTHEWS: California Republican Darrell Issa voted against the bill, and New York Democrat Gregory Meeks voted for it.

Congressman Issa, is this bill dead now?

REP. ISSA: Well, certainly House Republicans, after really studying the options that were available to the Bush administration, determined that, in fact, they weren't using the tools they had and that this was a bad deal for the American taxpayers; perhaps a good deal for a select group of Wall Street.

That's what caused democracy to work the right way. We voted this down. This is not a defeat for politics or anything else. This was a way of saying, in no uncertain terms, there are other options you've not allowed to be considered. Therefore we'll vote it down until you allow these to be used and/or considered.

MR. MATTHEWS: What about John McCain? If he had voted for it like he said he would, would that have made him one of the bad guys in your eyes?

REP. ISSA: Look, John McCain called for the firing of Chris Cox. One of the best reasons to fire Chris Cox is the refusal to deal with the problem of mark to market on these illiquid assets. You do that and you put trillions of dollars back into the lending pool.

Right now that's one of the biggest problems. It's a tool that's available to, if you will, our management group of the SEC, the Fed, the FDIC and the Treasury secretary, and they're not using it. They have other tools they're not using.

We educated Republicans as to those tools, some of them dating back to the Reagan era, that are not being used. As a matter of fact, one of the tools was passed back in the Jimmy Carter era and helped bail out the banks of that era, and it's still available. It's not being used.

MR. MATTHEWS: Well, I'm still a little confused here. We thought that the vote was going to be about a 50-50 heavy lift for both parties, with each party contributing about half their caucuses. We looked at the tally board today and the Democrats contributed 140 votes, the Republicans only 65, about a third of your caucus. Was there a deal to go 50-50 on this or not?

REP. ISSA: Chris, I was no on this vote a week ago and I helped educate my members for why we needed to vote no. Quite frankly, the heavy lift was voting no. It's easy to throw the taxpayers' money at a problem, knowing it won't hurt. Seven hundred billion dollars would not have hurt this problem. It also would not have fixed this problem. So the heavy lift was protecting the taxpayers, not looking good and caring on the House floor and then going home.

MR. MATTHEWS: So this bill is going to hurt you at home for voting against it, you're saying.

REP. ISSA: This bill, followed by --

MR. MATTHEWS: You said it was harder to vote against it.

REP. ISSA: Of course it was.

MR. MATTHEWS: You mean this is going to hurt you at home?

REP. ISSA: First of all --

MR. MATTHEWS: This is going to hurt you at home for voting against this thing?

REP. ISSA: Of course; 777 points down on the Dow, perhaps more tomorrow, everyone saying that everything is Congress's fault rather than the mismanagement by the Fed and the Treasury for now countless months and years. We created this market problem at the administration level. Congress is saying it needs to be fixed. We know of tools they're not using, and we want them to use it.

You know, in fairness to Hank Paulson, I don't know him well, but I do know enough to know he's not a banker. He's comparatively a day trader. We need him to get bankers to say how you stabilize long-term assets and stop treating it like it's Goldman Sachs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Well, here's John McCain, the Republican nominee for president, before the vote, voicing a message very clear that he thought this thing was going to pass and he was proud that he helped get it passed -- a different note than you're striking right now, Congressman Issa. Here's John McCain before the vote today.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ, Republican presidential nominee): (From videotape.) Senator Obama took a very different approach to the crisis our country faced. (Chorus of boos.) At first he didn't want to get involved, and then he was "monitoring the situation." (Laughter.) That's not leadership. That's watching from the sidelines.

MR. MATTHEWS: John McCain seemed to signal from the Hill that the cavalry was charging and the House Republicans should join with the charge. You guys ran the other way, went the other way. What role did John McCain play in this decision today by you? Did he encourage you to vote against this bill? Did he in any way signal that he wouldn't have voted for the bill?

REP. ISSA: Well, first of all, I didn't talk to John McCain. I was proud when he called for the firing of the SEC chairman for a good and valid reason of a problem that could be fixed that wasn't being fixed. Had I had five minutes with him -- and I realize his schedule is so busy -- and the leadership said, "The fix is in; we'll take care of it; you don't need to talk to the rank and file," including those who had publicly said they were voting against it, but the fact is I would have explained to him why the Reagan era solutions, why the 1981 through '85 or '86 earn-outs of both savings banks and regular FDIC- insured banks was part of the solution that wasn't being used.

He already understood the problem of mark to market and called for that to be changed. One more tool and he would have been able to say, "Do that first and come to us or we'll give you this authority only if you agree to do the others." He wasn't given that opportunity by leadership. Certainly the administration is saying there are no options when, in fact, there are options.

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay, thank you very much for joining us tonight, Congressman Darrell Issa, Republican of California.

REP. ISSA: Thank you, Chris.

MR. MATTHEWS: Let's go to a Democrat right now. Who have we got? Gregory Meeks.

Congressman, thank you very much for joining us tonight. You voted for the bill?

REP. MEEKS: Yes, I did. I voted for the bill.

MR. MATTHEWS: Congressman Issa says it was a profile in courage, basically, to vote against this bill. What do you think?

REP. MEEKS: Well, no, it's just the opposite. If you look and listen to what was taking place on the Democratic side, that the overwhelming majority of calls, at least that people say were coming in, was not to vote for it because they didn't understand what it was and what it meant. But the correct thing to do was to vote for it, because though none of us appreciated the way that we got here -- there was a lot of blame to go here -- but, you know, we had a car wreck, and it was probably done by a drunk driver, and it was in the middle of the highway.

MR. MATTHEWS: Was it an easier vote for you -- would it have been easier for you to vote against this bill?

REP. MEEKS: Well, yes, it's the easier way to vote to say that we're not going to -- we're denying $700 billion to go to the market.

MR. MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you about the role that John McCain played in this. No, let me ask you about your candidate. Let me ask you about Barack Obama. Was he a positive force in trying to get this bill passed, or did he stand on the sidelines monitoring the situation, as it was described by John McCain, his rival?

REP. MEEKS: No, Barack Obama has said from the beginning that what we needed to do was to make sure Democrats and Republicans sit down and resolve this issue. And it was an important thing to do, and that we needed to get past this car wreck. He talked about bipartisanship. He talked about the need to get it done. It was clear where he was on the bill, unlike John McCain, who really didn't ever say where he was on the bill or how he would have voted until the moment just before he thought it was going to be voted on one way and he came out and -- (inaudible) -- and tried to take credit for it.

It was John McCain who made this a political issue. Barack Obama was not making this a political issue, because it shouldn't have been a political issue. It was an issue that we should have focused on for the benefit of the people of this great country, and not try to say, "I'm suspending my campaign and I'm coming to Washington," and do that, and then what happened was the talks broke down. He left. McCain left. Then talks resumed.

And then, when he thought that there was a deal from the outside, McCain then says, "Oh, you know, it was a good thing to do that's about to happen." That's not leadership. That's jumping on the bandwagon after it's happened. Barack Obama is the one that has shown leadership.

MR. MATTHEWS: Let's take a look at Senator Obama today after the vote. He spoke after the vote went down.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL, Democratic presidential nominee): (From videotape.) I read the other day that Senator McCain likes to gamble. He likes to roll those dice. And that's okay. I enjoy -- I'm making a confession here. I enjoy a little friendly game of poker myself once in a while.

But the one thing I know is this. We can't afford to gamble on four more years of the same disastrous economic policies that we've had the last eight. We can't afford to gamble on more of the same trickle-down philosophy that showers tax breaks on big corporations and the wealthiest few. We've tried that. It doesn't work.

MR. MATTHEWS: Congressman Issa, one of your leaders -- I think it was Congressman Boehner, John Boehner of Iowa -- said today that it's up to the Democratic leadership to pass this bill. In other words, it wasn't a 50-50 proposition. He said they had to come up with most of the votes. Do you think that's fair?

REP. ISSA: Well, I think what's fair is that the Republican base, rightfully so, said that this was not a Republican free market solution. It was taking of assets, something we don't normally do. It was not an earn-out but, in fact, a payoff to Wall Street.

And, by the way, this is not a profile in courage, but remember, our leadership told us that our future, our stake, and quite frankly, in many cases, our leadership positions were based on us voting with the leadership. And many of us said, "Look, we appreciate the opportunity to have been in leadership. We understand we may not be in these positions as a result of this."

But this was the right thing to do. Yes, it was also a populist thing to do, but I certainly am not a populist. I care about the business-like activities. I care about getting the banking system running properly again. I believe we can do that. And, you know, I listened to Barack Obama just there talking -- trying to tie in the failed policies, the failed policies. This was an opportunity to say to the administration, "Your policy in real time today, the one you're proposing, is wrong, and we're going to give you the right policy."

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay. The --

REP. ISSA: That's what Republicans did is we said, "This solution is not the right solution, and we're proposing alternatives that you do."

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay --

REP. MEEKS: The truth --

MR. MATTHEWS: This is ironic. You're a Republican congressman dumping on a Republican secretary of the treasury and saying you're not going to vote for his measure, and that's why this thing went down.

REP. ISSA: You'd better believe it.

MR. MATTHEWS: That's why this thing went down.

REP. ISSA: Look, John --

MR. MATTHEWS: The Republican Party is in disarray right now.

REP. ISSA: Chris, you're absolutely right. We're not in disarray. We're united. The fact is that our president and our Treasury secretary is wrong on this issue, and we're saying he's wrong. And the old John McCain, who I think is still John McCain, has fought this administration from time to time and has been right.

We're fighting this administration right now saying, "You have tools you're not using. You have alternate ways to do it. We're not going to accept a bad deal for the American taxpayer if there's a better way to do it." And you know what? We're very united on it. You did get two to one Republicans, over the objections of a deal cut by leadership. Leadership has a reason to do the kind of deal they did.

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay. That's an amazing --

REP. ISSA: We have a reason to represent the voters.

MR. MATTHEWS: That's an amazing definition of unity when, two to one, you vote against your leadership, you vote against your administration, and call that unity. How can you call that unity when you brought the bill down today?

REP. ISSA: Chris, I've watched you since long before I came to Congress. You know, when you want to talk about the revolt of those freshman Republicans in 1995, what did we say? Those guys came in, and they came in believing in the people that put them there more than they believed in their own leadership.

I will tell you, we believe in our leadership. But if our leadership is wrong, including the president, including his Cabinet, we're going to say so. We took the time to listen to experts. We took the time to fly experts in of our own choosing. We reached a different decision. We came united to the floor, educated, and voted against them.

MR. MATTHEWS: Okay, strongly put, Congressman Darrell Issa of California. Thank you, Congressman Gregory Meeks, both of you.

Source