CBS "Face the Nation" - Transcript

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BOB SCHIEFFER: The question is, will the protests spread to other states where similar proposals to cut spending are also being contemplated?
And what impact will it have on efforts here in Washington to reduce spending where Republicans push through sixty-one billion dollars in cuts early Saturday morning. Is there sustainable? Is there any way the Senate is going to go along? And if not, does that mean the government will have to shut down? Congressman Paul Ryan, the head of the Budget Committee, is back home this morning in Wisconsin. You were one of the engineers of these
cuts, Congressman. But I can't find anyone who believes the Senate is going to go along with cuts this deep. So what happens now?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN (R-Wisconsin/Chairman, Budget Committee): Well, I think you're right. I don't think that Senate will pass these cuts. We will have to negotiate. Look, we're not looking for a government shutdown. But at the same time, we're also not looking at rubber stamping these really high elevated spending levels that Congress blew through the joint two years ago. You know, they increased spending by twenty-four percent on domestic discretionary two years ago, eighty-four percent when you add the stimulus. And they want to keep that status quo locked in place. So we want some real spending cuts. We don't want to accept these extremely high levels of spending, while we negotiate how to continue funding the government.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, how then, senator, get-- I mean, congressman, give me the starting point. Where do you think would be a good port-- place to start talking about how to get together with the Senate on-- on something more realistic?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN: Well, our goal is to bring spending back down to pre-bailout, pre-stimulus spending levels--2008 levels. My guess is, we'll probably have some short-term extensions while we negotiate these things with spending cuts. We don't want to accept this--these extremely high elevated levels and so we're going to have to start negotiating on these
things not just with the Senate but also with the President as well. You know, I'm not going to go through negotiating through the media with all due respect, but we are not going to accept these extremely high levels of spending. We're not looking for a government shutdown. And I think
we'll have some negotiations with short-term extensions with spending cuts in the interim is my guess.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. You got these big demonstrations going on. This is your home state, Wisconsin--

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN: Mm-Hm.

BOB SCHIEFFER: --where, I-- I think that seventy thousand people turned out yesterday. There are also reports that this could spread to at least nine other states where similar proposals are--are being talked about among state governments. Is-- Is Madison, Wisconsin, congressman, the
Tunisia of American politics now? Are-- are we going to see the kinds of demonstrations, not the kinds of demonstrations we saw and are seeing across the Arab part of the world, but--

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN (overlapping): No, no, no.

BOB SCHIEFFER: --is this something that's going to spread here?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN: Well, look, this is an example of the kinds of fiscal and budget pressures all levels of government are experiencing. So, yes, I think Ohio, you already have this kind of activity going on right now. But we have a proud tradition in Wisconsin of people going out to the streets and expressing themselves. That's a good thing. But we've got a
huge budget shortfall here in Madison. What our governor is trying to do is address this in a structural way to ask for modest shared sacrifice among pub-- public employees and to give local governments the tools to do the same. These are the things that governors all around the states are looking at. And again, it just shows the point. All levels of government have been
making empty promises to people. And these governors are telling people the truth. We need to do the same thing in Washington. It just goes to show that we can't keep borrowing, can't keep--can't keep spending and making empty promises to people. We got to tell the truth. And we got to fix these problems. And the sooner we do this the better off everybody is going to be.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. You're a ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee--Chris Van Hollen of Maryland is here in the studio with us. How do you, congressman, gauge the chances right now for a government shutdown? Congressman Ryan says they don't want one, but it looks like the two sides are awfully far apart here to me.

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-Maryland/Ranking Budget Committee): Well, Bob I hope they won't push it to that. Look, everybody agrees we need to get the deficit under control and that spending cuts has to be a big part of it. That's why the President's budget includes four hundred billion dollars in cuts to domestic discretionary spending. The question we've posed is, are you going to be reckless about this, or you are going to be responsible about this? And the bipartisan commission on-- on fiscal responsibility specifically warned against deep, immediate cuts in the year 2011, why, because, it would hurt a fragile economy and put people out of work. In fact, there are estimates that about eight hundred thousand
Americans would lose their jobs if you do this in a reckless manner. The speaker of the House the other day when he was posed the question about some people who would lose their jobs said, so be it. We think that's the wrong approach to this. We think--

BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): Well, the--

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: We need to get the economy fully in gear, put together a plan now for-- for cuts. And frankly, we need to look at the revenue piece. We need to close some of the tax loopholes for special interests like the oil companies, forty billion dollars worth of loopholes. I hope our Republican friends will join us in closing some of those.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, let-- let me ask you about that number because these groups that are aligned with the White House sir, or put out a press release yesterday saying that eight hundred thousand jobs might be lost if these cuts go through. Do you take that as a serious figure or is that a little bit overdrawn?

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: I do take it as a serious figure. If you just look at the cuts to some of the investments that would be made in some of the infrastructure programs, you know, state water revolving funds, a-- a lot of the other transportation programs, you're talking about cuts in construction areas at a time, you've got twenty percent unemployment in that sector. Look, I don't think anybody knows exactly what number it would be. But I can assure you one thing. This will not create one job. And, in fact, it will cost jobs. And, again, when the speaker of the House was confronted with that fact, his response was quite callous. It was you know, so be it. You know, our-- our view is put together a plan now for serious deficit reduction,
including serious spending cuts. But don't risk the fragile recovery. And the bipartisan commission had the same advice.

BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): Well, let--

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (overlapping): Don't do something irresponsible and reckless now.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Let's ask Chairman Ryan. Are you in the, so be it crowd? And do you really think that if these cuts go through, it would cost eight hundred thousand jobs?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN: First of all, as a member of the bipartisan commission that point Chris just made is definitely in dispute. The President does not cut four hundred billion dollars in spending. His plan locks in the high spending levels we have. His plan disavows the commission's recommendations. His plan spends about four hundred billion dollars more in discretionary spending than the commission recommended. This is the same economic methodology that was used to say that if we pass the stimulus bill we would keep unemployment from hitting eight percent. Well, it went up to about ten percent. So the problem is, these high deficits today mean high tax increases and interest rate increases tomorrow--high deficits, uncontrolled debt means job creation goes away today. If you actually get this deficit and debt under control, you can help jobs today. Our goal is to cut spending and grow the economy and get prosperity in a lasting way back in place in America--taxing, borrowing and spending, which has what has been going on for a long time. If it worked we wouldn't have these economic problems we have today. It won't work. The President is actually asking for much more spending than even the commission recommends. And we know that if we keep going down this same path of borrowing more money and spending more money and taxing, it not going to produce new results because we've already seen what it does. The President's propose a 1.6-trillion-dollar tax increase. He's proposing 8.7 trillion dollars in new spending. And he's proposing to add thirteen trillion dollars to our new debt. So he is not even meeting the test that Chris Van Hollen is saying, which is we need to put a spending cut plan, a deficit and debt reduction plan in place. And the President doesn't do that. He's actually failed to lead on these issues. And we intend to pick up where he left off and lead. And actually show the country the path to prosperity, a path to job creation, a path to get our budget and debt and deficit under control, because the sooner we do that, the better off everybody is going to be--seniors, people looking for work and the better we can get this economy growing and that's exactly what we intend on doing.

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, it's-- it's interesting to see-- hear Paul talk about the fact that the President didn't embrace more of the commission's recommendations as part of-- of this budget. All three of the House Republicans on the bipartisan commission voted against the commission recommendations. When Paul talks about the revenue components, in the President's bill, it includes efforts to shut down tax payer subsidies to oil companies. It also says that we can no longer afford to provide the folks at the very top, the top two percent of Americans, with the big tax cuts. It says for them we're going to take those tax rates down to the
same level they were during the Clinton administration, when we had unprecedented job growth and economic growth. So that's about a trillion dollars of what Paul is talking about is the President's follow through on the commitment to say our kids are no longer going to pay the bill for tax cuts for the folks at the very top. Now the President's budget reduces the deficit in a steady manner. And, in fact, he gets to the point where we're no longer adding to the debt faster than plans that Paul has put on the table and the Republicans have put on the table. So--

BOB SCHIEFFER (overlapping): But-- but you know, congressman, let me ask you this. How can you really say that the-- the President is serious about this, when his budget does not mention Social Security or Medicare--the two biggest items in the budget. Aren't you going to--Democrats eventually had to come to the table and say we're really ready to talk about serious restructuring of those two programs, if you're going to, in fact, get anything done?

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Let-- let's take each of those separately. Social Security, we're willing and ready to come to the table with-- with Republicans as Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan did, but to strengthen Social Security. Social Security is not a driver of these deficits and-- and debt. And we're not going to balance the budget on the backs of Social Security beneficiaries. It is solvent a hundred percent until the year 2037. After that, you've got about a-- a twenty percent gap. Yes, we need to work together to close it but we not going to balance the budget now. Medicare, I want to say something because the health care reform bill that we just passed included significant Medicare reform. For example, we've reduced the overpayments to Medicare advantage. What was the response of our Republican colleagues? They ran ads against Democratic members of Congress in districts around the country saying that they were cutting Medicare. It was Medi-Scare Ads. And now they're turning around and saying President Obama just after we ran these ads for some of the Medicare reforms you guys did in health care reform why don't you put some more on the table.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right.

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Yes, we should come together to talk about these things, but what just happened in the last election was a clear indication that they-- they-- they're not serious.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Congressman Ryan?

REPRESENTATIVE PAUL RYAN: Look, we had a huge fiscal problem. It's primarily being driven by our entitlements. Presidents are elected to lead. They're elected to see big problems on the horizon and stop them from getting out of control. This President has punted in the words of the Washington Post. He chose not to lead. And if we wait for the other party to go first to propose reforms, then nothing will ever get done. That's the problem we've had in Washington all along. We're going to lead. Where the President has fallen, we're going to lead. And we're going to propose solutions to these problems to the drivers of our debt because the sooner we
do that, the better off everybody is going to be. The better off these programs themselves will be made more solvent and our economy can grow today. So look, the President punted on these issues. He seems to be complicit with an out-of-control debt because that's what his budget produces, and we just don't see it that way. We are going to offer the country a choice, an alternative, a different vision--one of a debt free nation, one of economic growth and prosperity today by living within our means, by getting these programs under control. And I would simply say, if you keep kicking the can down the road, it's going to be pain and austerity for everybody. We don't have much more road to keep kicking the can down the road. And we got to get serious about this. So we're going to lead and we're going to propose serious solutions to this country's problems so we can get growing again.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, gentlemen, I want to thank both of you for an interesting discussion this morning.

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Thank you, Bob.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But I don't see how you're very close at all, to resolving this problem. We'll all be watching.

REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, Paul and I agree on more than you might think on some of these issues, but--

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, I hope we see that.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source