FOX "Fox News Sunday" - Transcript

Interview

Copyright ©2009 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Carina Nyberg at cnyberg@fednews.com or call 1-202-216-2706.

MR. WALLACE: I'm Chris Wallace, and this is "FOX News Sunday." (Intro music plays.)

With the House approving an $800 billion stimulus plan, now the Senate takes its shot at jump-starting the economy. Can Democrats and Republicans reach a compromise? We'll find out from two Senate leaders: Democrat Dick Durbin and Republican Jon Kyl.

Then, Republicans begin the long climb back from election defeat and try to re-brand the GOP. We'll get a read on the Party's future when we're joined by the new Republican chairman, Michael Steele.

Plus, from meetings on the Hill to parties at the White House, President Obama goes all-out in the name of bipartisanship. Is it possible Washington will get more collegial? We'll ask our Sunday Regulars -- Brit Hume, Mara Liasson, Bill Kristol, and Juan Williams. All right now on "FOX News Sunday." (Intro music ends.)

And hello again from FOX News in Washington. With the news about the economy bad and getting worse, all eyes will be on the Senate this week as it debates that $800 billion-plus economic stimulus plan.

Will Democrats change the package, and will any Republicans vote for it?

For answers, we bring in two Senate leaders: Democrat Dick Durbin, who comes to us from Chicago, and Republican Jon Kyl, who joins us from Phoenix.

Gentlemen, you are the whips, the chief vote-counters for your parties in the Senate, so let's start there.

Senator Kyl, as the Senate begins debate on the economic stimulus plan Monday, how many Republican votes, at this point, do you count for the Democratic package as it stands right now?

SEN. KYL: Chris, we haven't begun our counting yet, but I can tell you that I see support for this legislation eroding. I think the more people around the country see it, the angrier they get.

Because it's very wasteful; it spends way too much money. By the way, if you throw in the interest, it's over a trillion -- it's about $1.3 trillion.

And it's ineffective. I think the theory of it is if you throw enough money, somehow or other it'll trickle down to people and that will help stimulate the economy. But the economists that we've talked to said that's not going to work.

I think the people understand that, and so I see support in the Senate actually eroding.

MR. WALLACE: Senator Durbin, I don't know how much of a count you've done, but how many Republican votes, at this point, do you see for the package? And picking up on what Senator Kyl just said, do you see any Democratic defections?

SEN. DURBIN: Well, of course we're working to make sure the Democrats are supporting it, and some of them have concerns. We'll offer amendments, and I believe some of those amendments will be adopted.

I've talked to some Republicans on the other side of the aisle. We've said to them we're open about this. Come to us with your ideas. If you want to make changes and offer amendments, let's move forward.

Now, four Republicans in the Appropriations Committee supported the bill initially -- and I'll stress "initially," because they said they said they wanted to see the final product -- and one Republican in the Finance Committee. But -- we still have work to do.

But let me just -- commenting in general terms, I want to put this in perspective. This is not another bill. This is not another political debate. This isn't something that we can just dismiss at the end of the week and say well, let's move on and do something else if this doesn't work.

We are facing one of the most serious economic crises in our nation's history. The numbers that come in every day are absolutely devastating. To think that our gross domestic product is shrinking more than it has in 25 years, that the unemployment rate is now higher than it's been in 16 years and getting worse, we all sense this is a crisis.

We cannot delay this. We can't engage in the old political rhetoric of saying well, maybe it could be a little bit better here and a little bit better there. We've got to pull together. I think the American people are really counting on us.

And President Obama has reached out in an unprecedented way to the other side of the aisle to try to engage them and ask them, get beyond any specific, small issues and let's look at the bigger picture here.

America is counting on us.

MR. WALLACE: Well, I'm sure that Senator Kyl would say they're looking at the big picture too.

Since you guys both agree that you need to make some changes, let's see if we can work out a deal right here on "FOX News Sunday." (Mild laughter.)

Senator Kyl, recognizing, as you must, that your side lost the election and the Democrats won, what is the minimum that you would need to see in changes in this package to get significant Republican support?

And is there a possibility that if you don't get that, that Republicans will try to filibuster to block this bill?

SEN. KYL: Well, first of all, of course, Dick Durbin is right. There is a crisis in this country. Republicans fully appreciate that; people are hurting.

And that's why we don't want to see this opportunity wasted. We're not talking about little things at the margins. We're talking about over a trillion dollars here, and it would be a shame to waste that money.

In the first place, we don't have it. So there would be major structural changes that would have to occur.

The centerpiece of this is a $500 rebate to folks, about 27 percent of whom don't even pay federal income tax. That didn't work last year; it's not going to work this year. And so that's -- that's not a good place to start.

It creates 34 new government programs. It sends $84 billion to the states, when about $10 billion would satisfy the so-called FMAP needs that they have.

It wastes a ton of money. I mean, there are so many different things that you can make fun of in this bill. Let me just mention one.

Millions of dollars to World War II Filipino veterans in the Philippines. Now, that may be a good thing to spend money on, but not in a stimulus bill. It doesn't stimulate anything.

So I think you have to start from scratch and reconstruct this to -- start with the problem that created the entire cascade of events that have occurred here: the housing collapse.

And Republicans, I think, will come forward with ideas to start with housing first, let people keep more of their own money, and in that way really provide some stimulus and a better hope for the future.

MR. WALLACE: Briefly, Senator Kyl, I want to pick up on one thing you just said and then re-press my question.

Start from scratch? I mean, you're really talking about rewriting this whole bill? And secondly, if you don't get those major changes you're talking about, will Republicans filibuster to try to block this bill?

SEN. KYL: I think that we would all agree that there will be a 60-vote requirement for the bill. That's the end result of a filibuster.

Our effort is not to delay the bill at all. We understand the urgency of the situation.

And when I say start from scratch, what I mean is that the basic approach of this bill, we believe, it wrong. It may be that there could be some huge amendments that would redirect it, that would be adopted by our friends on the Democratic side.

But every amendment in the Finance Committee was defeated. Every amendment we put forth in the Appropriations Committee was defeated. I don't think there's a real effort here.

As Speaker Pelosi said, we won the election; we wrote the bill. And I suspect that's pretty much the way it's going to end up.

MR. WALLACE: Senator Durbin, let's take a look at the bill and where the money goes. On the spending side, $15 billion for college scholarships, $1 billion for problems with the Census, which doesn't take place until next year, 2010; $400 million to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted disease.

And on the tax side, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says that only 22 percent of the House plan is tax breaks, not the 40 percent that Mr. Obama promised.

Now, even Democratic experts like Alice Rivlin said as it now stands, a lot of this money is going to be wasted. So does Jon Kyl have a point that you need major changes in this bill to actually do what it's supposed to do, an emergency economic stimulus?

SEN. DURBIN: Let me correct a few things. Jon may not have been aware, but the biggest amendment in terms of dollar volume that was added in the Senate Finance Committee was sponsored by Senator Grassley and Senator Menendez. It added about $80 billion for the alternative minimum tax fix.

So that amendment was bipartisan, and it was adopted in the Committee, and it's the largest single addition to tax cuts. With that AMT, 36 percent of this bill goes for tax cuts.

Jon's first criticism was about tax cuts. That used to be the credo of the Republican Party -- cut taxes for working people and others. But now it appears that he has a different point of view.

I would tell you, I think that we should be helping working families. We should reduce their tax burden so that they can meet some of the expenses they're facing in this terrible economic situation.

And let me say, about the overall cost of it, it is around 800 (billion dollars) to 900 billion (dollars), since we've added in this new bipartisan amendment, and that represents about 6.5 percent of the gross domestic product of America.

We have to put enough water on this fire to put it out. Throwing a teacup of water at it means it will return tomorrow, to face it again.

MR. WALLACE: Senator Durbin --

SEN. DURBIN: Just last year -- one thing I want to add -- just last year, when President Bush came to us and asked for $150 billion tax cuts from a Democratic Congress and said this is the way to turn the economy around, we gave him the 150 billion (dollars).

Sadly, it didn't create the turnaround. It might have helped some families a little bit.

MR. WALLACE: So very briefly, Senator Durbin, then I want to move on to another subject. How far are Democrats willing to go to try to get some Republican buy-in as we go forward, over the next week?

SEN. DURBIN: We're very open. Very open to this.

For instance, some of the Republicans have been saying to us, put more money in infrastructure; invest in the roads and highways and bridges. Make sure that we create good-paying jobs here in America that we can see, whether we're dealing with mass transit or local infrastructure or wastewater treatment.

You're going to see an amendment that does exactly that, and I think some of the Republicans who feel strongly about that aspect may be drawn to us. And we are open.

Some of the things -- you went through your litany there, Chris, and I added it up. It is a trifle, compared to the overall cost of this bill. But each of those things deserves to be looked at carefully.

Keep in mind the bottom line: This stimulus package ultimately is going to have an oversight board to watch carefully that we don't make the same mistakes we did with the TARP program, where $350 billion was expended and there wasn't the oversight to protect taxpayers' dollars.

MR. WALLACE: Okay. Let's move on. And, in fact, you took me where I wanted to go, Senator Durbin, and that is the TARP program, the financial bailout for Wall Street.

The administration is working on how to spend the $350 billion that's left in the program. And this last week, the president blasted Wall Street for giving out huge bonuses at the same time that the government -- or, rather, the banks -- are asking for government bailouts. Let's watch.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: (From videotape.) That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful.

MR. WALLACE: But, Senator Kyl, there are reports now that the administration may not impose tough new restrictions because of concerns that if they do, some of the banks that most need the money won't end up accepting them. Is that a mistake?

SEN. KYL: Well, you do have to be careful about the kind of restrictions you put on there. They need to make sense. Nobody supports this -- the kind of bonuses that were given, and so on.

But I do think we have to be careful that we don't try to create some kind of a devil out of the business community here. We're not going to create new jobs unless we have businesses. And so let's be careful about suggesting that all business folks are bad and they shouldn't make very much money.

The president seemed to suggest that it's wrong for them to make a profit in these days. Well, businesses won't stay in business; they won't create jobs, they won't hire people unless they think they can make a profit.

Only 2.3 percent of the Senate bill actually provides tax relief to businesses in the hope that they can create jobs. That's anemic. That doesn't do any good.

And the tax relief that Dick Durbin talked about last year that President Bush asked for, well, it was a combination of Democrats and Republicans. It didn't do any good. He's right.

And the same thing is not going to do any good in this legislation.

MR. WALLACE: Senator Durbin, very briefly, because I want to move on to another subject.

How do you feel about the idea of putting, as part of the TARP financial bailout, tough restrictions on executive compensation?

SEN. DURBIN: I agree with that, and I think that should be the bottom line. It is sickening, when families across America are making sacrifices and facing economic uncertainty, that it's business as usual on Wall Street, even at firms that are losing money, that without a taxpayer subsidy wouldn't be in business.

And here they turn around and issue billions of dollars of bonuses to their people. Where is the spirit of sacrifice and unity? We're in this together, and you have to ask those captains of industry at the highest level to really pull with the rest of America to get us out of this crisis.

MR. WALLACE: A couple of political issues I want to get to with both of you, and Senator Kyl, let me start with you.

It now turns out that former Senator Majority Leader Tom Daschle failed to pay about $128,000 in taxes over three years until he was nominated for secretary of Health and Human Services.

Senator Kyl, how much trouble is his nomination in?

SEN. KYL: Well, we'll have to see. I just got the report -- I'm on the Finance Committee, and I just got the report late Friday afternoon. So we'll have to question former Senator Daschle and understand his explanation, and then have a conversation about it and see where it goes.

I think it's too early to tell.

MR. WALLACE: Are you troubled by it?

SEN. KYL: Well, sure. You have to be troubled by it.

I just have to note, you know, with the problems that now- Secretary Geithner had with his taxes, with these problems with former Senator Daschle, with the problems of Bill Richardson, the number two person brought into the Defense Department --

I know that President Obama wanted to have a very ethical administration starting out and so on, but I think he's seeing how hard it is to avoid these kind of problems.

And I just wonder if President Bush had nominated these people what folks would be saying about that.

MR. WALLACE: Senator Durbin, one of the top Republicans in the House said listen, no wonder the Democrats don't mind raising people's taxes, because they don't end up paying them themselves.

(Laughter.)

SEN. DURBIN: Well, that was a little joke, and I read it in the papers myself. But let me say this:

If all you knew about Tom Daschle was that he used to be a senator and he made a mistake and had to pay over $100,000 in back taxes, you have a right to be skeptical, even cynical.

But if you know Tom Daschle, you know better. This is a man who gave 20 years of his life to public service -- even more; 20 years in Congress. And when he ended up losing an election, he didn't cash in and leave. He lost an election, ending his public career. His net worth was less than a million dollars at that point.

And here he went out in the private sector and now he's finding himself, having made a mistake and admitted to it, he took the steps necessary to start paying the taxes, make sure they are paid. Now, that's the right thing to do.

I believe Tom Daschle's one of the most honest people I've ever known or worked with in public life, and I really want to commend Senator Kyl for showing some reserve here, when asked the question.

I think he knows Senator Daschle, and he wants to be fair, as I do. The bottom line --

MR. WALLACE: Okay, we've got --

SEN. DURBIN: -- this administration has made more progress in appointments, in filling these positions to the Cabinet than most other previous presidents.

MR. WALLACE: Gentlemen, we've got less than a minute left, and I want to ask you about one last issue.

Senator Kyl, your colleague, your trusted colleague, Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, apparently is Barack Obama's top choice for Commerce secretary. But if he takes that job, then Republicans would lose their ability to mount a party-line filibuster. They wouldn't have 41 votes.

First question: Is Judd Gregg leaving?

SEN. KYL: I don't know, but I expect there may be an announcement on Monday. I will say this, that it shows a great deal of perspicacity on the part of President Obama to select a guy like Judd Gregg, who is just a phenomenal senator. Very bright. He's our ranking member on the Budget Committee, gives sage advice to us.

And if he did go to Commerce, I would miss him greatly. On the other hand, he could make a significant contribution to the Obama administration.

MR. WALLACE: How -- and briefly, Senator Kyl, how troubled are you at the idea that you would lose your 41st vote, and are you putting any pressure on him to stay in the Senate?

SEN. KYL: I'm not sure that we would. I think that's been thought through. I suspect that Senator Gregg has thought that through very carefully and would not leave his Republican colleagues in the lurch.

MR. WALLACE: Are -- you're suggesting that there might be a deal in which the Democratic governor of New Hampshire would appoint a Republican?

SEN. KYL: No deal. No, I'm not suggesting a deal at all. I'm just suggesting that Senator Gregg clearly has thought this through. And if it does turn out that he's the Commerce secretary, that events may unfold in a way that don't cause us the problem that you suggested.

MR. WALLACE: All right. (Chuckles.) We'll have to read between the lines there.

Senator Kyl, Senator Durbin, I want to thank you both so much. Thank you for coming in.

SEN. DURBIN: Thank you.

SEN. KYL: Thank you, Chris.

MR. WALLACE: And please come back, gentlemen, both of you.

SEN. KYL: And go, Cardinals!

MR. WALLACE: (Laughs.

) I knew you were going to get that in.

SEN. DURBIN: Go Steelers!

MR. WALLACE: Do you have anything you want to say, Senator Durbin?

SEN. DURBIN: Go, Steelers! Go, Steelers!

MR. WALLACE: Okay, there you go.

(Cross talk.)

SEN. DURBIN: (Inaudible) -- the Steelers.

MR. WALLACE: Well, the Bears aren't in it, so I guess the Steelers are close by.

SEN. DURBIN: That's right.

MR. WALLACE: Gentlemen, thank you both.

SEN. KYL: Thank you.

MR. WALLACE: Up next, Republicans pick a new and historic party leader. How will Chairman Michael Steele give a new brand to the Grand Old Party? We'll ask him, in a Sunday exclusive, after this quick break.

(Announcements.)

On Friday, Republicans elected their first black national chairman. That is big news for a party that has traditionally been seen as failing to reach out to minorities.

Joining us now to tell us how he plans to turn around GOP fortunes is the new head of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele.

Chairman Steele, congratulations --

MR. STEELE: Thank you, Chris. Thank you.

MR. WALLACE: -- and welcome back to "FOX News Sunday."

MR. STEELE: It's good to be back. Yeah.

MR. WALLACE: I want to start with something that you said in your victory statement on Friday, just after you were elected by the RNC. And here it is:

MR. STEELE: (From videotape.) We want you to work with us. And for those of you who wish to obstruct, get ready to get knocked over. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. WALLACE: Who were you talking about? Who are you thinking may want to obstruct?

MR. STEELE: I'm thinking both inside and outside the Party. I think it's an opportunity for us now to move this Party forward on the ideas that matter to the voters.

And so I'm not in the mood to have people stand in the way and say we can't, we've always done it this way, it's impossible to do.

I mean, I was told that in making this run, and I was told that when I decided to run for lieutenant governor of Maryland.

So the idea that the opportunity presents itself and you fail to rise to it because someone is standing in your way, to me, just doesn't sit well.

So I wanted to make it very clear from the very beginning: my goal is to move this Party forward. We're in the business of winning elections. And so I'm expecting my grassroots, my state parties, the national organization to get on board, to get on the page that is a winning page, and move forward.

And for those Democrats and others who want to put up roadblocks and do the crazy, typical play that they normally do -- the name- calling and the obfuscation and the sleight-of-hand -- I don't have time for it.

Because there are important issues that we have to face in the economy, the war, and issues that affect the poor. And I want to have this Party in a position to move on those issues.

MR. WALLACE: All right, well, let's talk about how you reach out. And that's part of the key to this.

MR. STEELE: Sure.

MR. WALLACE: Because at this point, some Republicans, if you look at the last election, are a minority party.

Let's talk about how you reach out to some of the groups that may feel alienated from the Republican Party?

In November, John McCain got 31 percent of the Hispanic vote. Four years ago, President Bush did 13 points better.

Does the GOP need to change its position on immigration reform -- guest worker, path to citizenship -- to reach out and say to Hispanics, you have a home in the Republican Party?

MR. STEELE: No. Well, I think the GOP's position on immigration is very much the position of many, many Hispanics who are in this country.

(Cross talk.)

MR. WALLACE: Well, wait a minute. Is the GOP -- is the GOP position the position of George Bush and John McCain, which is for immigration reform, or is it the position that was -- (cross talk) -- of the past?

MR. STEELE: The GOP's position is secure our borders first. Let us know, and let us make sure the American people know, that we've taken care of the important business of dealing with the illegal immigration into this country.

You cannot begin to address the concerns of the people who are already here unless and until you have made certain that no more are coming in behind them.

MR. WALLACE: So no change in the position of the Party?

MR. STEELE: No change in the position on the Party on that.

MR. WALLACE: You are one of the --

MR. STEELE: But how we message that is where we messed up the last time. We were pegged as being insensitive, anti-immigrant. And nothing could be further from the truth.

Because you talk to those leaders in the Hispanic community, they will tell you the same thing. They understand the importance of making sure the United States borders are secure.

MR. WALLACE: You are one of the co-founders of something called the Republican Leadership Council --

MR. STEELE: Yup.

MR. WALLACE: --which supports candidates who favor abortion and gay rights.

MR. STEELE: Yeah.

MR. WALLACE: Does the GOP need to do a better job of reaching out to people who hold those views?

MR. STEELE: I think that's an important opportunity for us, absolutely. Because within our party we do have those who have that view, as well as outside.

And my partnership with Christie Todd Whitman was an effort to, hopefully, build a bridge between moderates and conservatives in the Party.

I'm a pro-life Roman Catholic conservative. Always have been.

MR. WALLACE: You also support a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.

MR. STEELE: That's right, and -- and the reality of it is this, because I don't think we should muck around with the Constitution. We can deal with that at the state level, okay? That's my personal view.

But the reality of it is the Party has to recognize the diversity of opinion that's out there. And we're not going to get everyone to agree with it. Ronald Reagan said it best: If you agree with my 80 percent of the time, I think that's good enough. I mean, I think we can move forward on that 80 percent.

So there are some 80 percent issues out there that we can work with those, within our party and outside our party, and create a new bridge and a new opportunity. That was my involvement with the RLC, and I'm very happy about that.

MR. WALLACE: But just -- to press on this.

MR. STEELE: Yeah.

MR. WALLACE: If you believe, if someone believes in a woman's right to choose, if someone believes in gay civil rights, where's the 80 percent agreement with the Republican Party?

MR. STEELE: It could be on our -- on economics.

MR. WALLACE: No, but I'm talking about on those issues.

MR. STEELE: Well, you -- now, Chris, you've just defined the world in which there are issues. You've just narrowed my scope to two issues.

MR. WALLACE: No, I'm just saying, on those issues, are there an 80 percent agreement?

MR. STEELE: Well, if that's the 20 percent they disagree with us on, let's work on the 80 percent where they agree with us. That's my point.

I'm not going to allow anyone to define the issues for us and say, well, these are the only two issues that really matter.

There's a whole range of issues out there in which we can address -- the American people and the American people can come to our table.

MR. WALLACE: All right. On Saturday you spoke at a meeting of Republican congressmen, and you congratulated them on voting as a group against the House stimulus plan. In fact, as you put it, the goose egg you laid on the president's desk was just beautiful.

Mr. Obama has a 70 percent approval rating. Eighty percent of the country says they want Republicans to work -- not necessarily agree with, but to work with President Obama.

Are you saying the GOP should just ignore all that?

MR. STEELE: No. I'm saying -- well, I'm just -- I'm saying that the GOP did what the GOP had to do to protect the pocketbooks and the interests of the American people.

That's a bad bill. It's not a stimulus bill; it's a spending bill. Let's call it what it is. Don't tell me I'm going to give you a third tax cuts and then I'm going to spend two-thirds of that. It's crazy.

So I called it what it is. The Republican Congress did a great job in drawing the line. I hope the Senate will follow. I hope the Senate members will follow with the House leaders in making certain that we do not spend the American people, the money that's proposed, because it's not a good plan.

MR. WALLACE: But Chairman Steele --

MR. STEELE: Yes.

MR. WALLACE: -- if you end up with a bill that is passed by the House and the Senate and every House member, Republican House member, votes against it and every Senate Republican member votes against it, you don't think there's any danger that they're going to be seen as obstructing --

MR. STEELE: Why, if I think you've proposed something that is not in my best interests, why am I an obstructionist if I don't agree with it? Why should I agree with something just because you proposed it?

Why should I agree with it just because you have a 70 percent approval? You can still be wrong with a 70 percent approval rating, and that's the reality here.

MR. WALLACE: You're -- one thing that I think you will agree with me is that your party has had a couple of tough elections in 2006 and in 2008.

MR. STEELE: Yup.

MR. WALLACE: Let's take a look at the numbers. You've lost 14 seats in the Senate and, depending on Judd Gregg and Al Franken, possibly one or two more --there we go -- 54 seats in the House, seven governorships.

How much trouble is the GOP in?

MR. STEELE: That's ugly, isn't it? That's some ugly numbers. And now we have an opportunity to turn that around.

We've got a special election in the 20th Congressional District coming up in New York. We've got a Virginia gubernatorial race; we've got a New Jersey gubernatorial race.

We're going to be on the ground and engaged in all of those campaigns that are going to be important opportunities for us to reestablish the brand for the Party, number one.

But most especially reacquaint ourselves with the voters and help them appreciate exactly what we stand for and what we believe, putting good candidates in a position to win. That's my job, is to put good candidates in a position to win.

Now, we're not going to win all of them. But we're going to start to win again in important races that matter, and we've got three of them coming up this year.

MR. WALLACE: Here's where I'm a little bit confused. You say, and other Party leaders say look, we are going to stick with our conservative principles. And I think you could make the argument this is still a center-right country.

MR. STEELE: Absolutely, it is.

MR. WALLACE: But the fact is, for whatever reason, people have moved away from the Republican Party.

So is it a question of salesmanship or, without giving up your basic principles, do you have to change some of your policies?

MR. STEELE: You don't give up on your basic principles, number one. And keep in mind, the losses that you've just displayed there had nothing to do with our value for life, our value for a sound economy, the hard work that we --

MR. WALLACE: So what was it about?

MR. STEELE: It was about the fact that we failed to lead. We grew the size of government. When we were saying we believed in less government, we grew government. When we said we believe in less spending, we spent more.

We had a Contract with America, 1994, where the American people and the Party bound together in agreement that these would be some 10 principles that we would follow.

We moved away from that.

(Cross talk.)

MR. WALLACE: So are you saying going back to 1994?

MR. STEELE: No, I'm not saying we're gong to back to 1994, Chris. I'm saying that the principles that we espoused then are still true and good today.

MR. WALLACE: But do you need that --

MR. STEELE: And that's not what people moved away from us for. They moved away from us because we behaved badly.

We came to Washington and we became like the people we were sent here to replace, and they replaced us.

MR. WALLACE: But do you need to show Americans that you have new solutions --

MR. STEELE: Absolutely.

MR. WALLACE: -- to their daily, kitchen-table concerns?

MR. STEELE: Absolutely. Absolutely. It is taking those core principles of this Party and making them relevant in the 21st century. Making --

MR. WALLACE: Such as? Give me an example of a new idea.

MR. STEELE: A new idea would be let's focus on poverty. Let's focus on how we can take someone who is being poorly educated in an American public school, and how they are poorly trained for a job, and put in place those opportunities for them to get that education, give their parents choice in education, make it real for them.

We did it right here in my hometown of the District of Columbia. The president of the United States, when he was a U.S. senator, blocked three times -- tried to block three times -- legislation that would enable poor black children in this city to go to the high school that I graduated from, who they otherwise wouldn't be able to afford to do.

So create those opportunities. Put people on a pathway to earn a job, earn an education so they can empower themselves. I don't need the government to do that.

MR. WALLACE: And real quickly, we've got about 30 seconds left.

I don't mean this to be a complete list, but talk about the future of the Party. Give me three names of Republican leaders under the age of 50 as -- you see as new faces.

MR. STEELE: (Chuckles.) Well, since I'm at 50, I guess -- I don't know. But --

(Cross talk.)

MR. WALLACE: (Inaudible) -- include yourself anyway.

MR. STEELE: Oh, you'd let me -- (inaudible).

I'd say certainly Bobby Jindal, Sanford -- Governor Sanford. Pawlenty, Palin. We have a whole host of folks out there that are beginning to emerge on the scene, and will over the next couple of years, I think, redefine this Party in a way that will be very good for us, long term.

MR. WALLACE: Chairman Steele, thank you.

MR. STEELE: Thank you. It's great --

MR. WALLACE: I have a feeling you're going to be an assertive spokesman for the Republican Party. Good luck in your new job, sir.

MR. STEELE: Thank you, Chris.

Source