MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

SCHULTZ: All right.

Now, we should point out that the last time the Republican voted for anything that the president put on the table was this stimulus package. They got three Republican votes. And, of course, Arlen Specter went to the Democrats.

Joining me now is California Congressman Darrell Issa, a ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Congressman, good to have you with us.

You"re a successful entrepreneur. You know what it"s like to make a dollar and hire people. I"ve got to ask you about this stimulus package.

Do you believe, had we had not done the stimulus package, that the economy would be better off today than it would had we had not passed it?

REP. DARRELL ISSA ®, CALIFORNIA: Well, Ed, I"m going to give credit where it is due. The nearly $300 billion that"s been spent has allowed a number of people to keep their jobs, to be paid for another year. The vast majority are schoolteachers, federal, state and local workers. No question, government workers have kept their jobs.

The answer to your question, though, is if we took the remaining $400-plus billion and began investing in things which create permanent jobs, we"d be far better off. This is a classic example where, quite frankly, you can pay somebody, you can employ somebody with money, or you can leverage money to create permanent new jobs.

So far, we"re not doing that in any part of the stimulus. And I think that"s the fundamental problem in the stimulus.

No matter where you go, what you see is we"re spending money and people are keeping jobs for a time. The American people though want to know what"s going to get a job at a factory and some employment that will be permanent started in their community, and that"s something Republicans and Democrats should be working on together.

SCHULTZ: Congressman, let"s you and I find the middle of the road here and let"s be fair about this. And I think you"re an honest broker about this, and most people that are in private business know what it"s like to meet payroll and know how tough it is.

The Republicans, do you believe that they will be honest brokers from this point on? Now, you just mentioned that there are some things that have happened that are good, but don"t the Republicans just have to make the case, President Obama, this is where you"ve got to go, instead of having an obstructionist attitude?

Do you think the Republicans can be honest brokers from this point on? Isn"t it better to create jobs than to score cheap political points? What do you think?

ISSA: Well, it"s certainly better to create jobs. We do have a fundamental difference of opinion about whether you put money out to employ people for a day or you find ways to leverage that for permanent new jobs. Permanent being at least they continue beyond when the federal dollars run out.

Right now, there"s a difference where there"s a lot of Democrats--and a lot of them have talked to me about, you know, when this money is gone, are we just going to spend another $800 billion? How do we make it go on longer, particularly if this recession is somewhat difficult to break?

So, do I think there are honest brokers? Yes. In both parties there are honest brokers.

What I would suggest is that as we get closer to the election, it gets harder to break through the election clutter. So, if the president is going to start reallocating funds from the existing stimulus, come back to us for what is out of favor a little bit, but what used to be called investment tax credits, specific requirements that somebody invest in something that creates long-term new jobs, then I think he"ll be received well whether it"s new money or old money. But if we simply continue spending money on government jobs, that"s just a soft landing for government, it"s not what the people that are listening to your show and watching tonight would care about.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

Congressman Darrell Issa, good to have you with us tonight. I appreciate your take on this.

ISSA: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: You bet.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source