CNBC Kudlow & Cramer - Transcript

CNBC News Transcripts

SHOW: Kudlow & Cramer (5:00 PM ET) - CNBC

HEADLINE: Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, discusses Porter Goss' nomination to head the CIA

ANCHORS: LARRY KUDLOW; JIM CRAMER

BODY:
LARRY KUDLOW, co-host:

Our first guest now faces the daunting task of overhauling the country's counterterrorism and intelligence operations amid considerable adversity. We spoke earlier with Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and chairwoman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee. I asked Senator Collins if she thinks Porter Goss, President Bush's nominee to head the CIA, is the right man for the job.

Senator SUSAN COLLINS (Republican, Maine; Government Affairs Chair): He surely is. I think the president's made a terrific choice. Porter will be able to hit the ground running. He has extensive background in the intelligence community, and he spent 10 years as a clandestine officer in the CIA. That's exactly the background that we need for the new director.

JIM CRAMER, co-host:

Senator Collins, will the Democrats give him a hard time in that he is not a pure administrator? Will he be viewed as a political appointment in a position that, after the 9/11 report, clearly cries out for someone not political?

Sen. COLLINS: I think that is going to be a theme of the Democrats. But I think you have to look at Porter's career in its entirety. He spent time in the Army intelligence, in the CIA, chairing the committee that oversees the intelligence community. I can't think of an individual who brings a better blend of experience and knowledge than he does to this important job.

KUDLOW: Senator Collins, Senator Chuck Schumer has said he can support Goss, provided that Goss is in favor of the 9/11 reforms, meaning the alleged new national intelligence director. Do you believe there should be a quid pro quo conditionality?

Sen. COLLINS: No, I don't because, frankly, that's not going to be Porter's call. It's going to be the president's and Congress' call. I'm committed to the creation of a national intelligence director, but that's not the position that's been created. He's being appointed to be-or nominated to be head of the CIA, and I think he's eminently well-qualified. I also have to tell you that I think if the president had chosen someone with no background in intelligence, that you'd be hearing a lot of opposition.

CRAMER: All right. Senator Collins, I know in that excellent profile of you in The New York Times the other day, it talked about how you are reading the footnotes in the 9-11 Commission. I'm presuming you have. I've been reading the-I downloaded it and reading it. Weren't you kind of amazed-and it really is very non-partisan-but how, let's use the word 'naive,' both the Democrats and the Republicans involved in our foreign policy were vis-a-vis the terrorists; that we felt that we could make deals with them, that we felt that maybe trade would solve our problem with the Taliban? Doesn't it wreak of naivete?

Sen. COLLINS: I think it shows that we severely underestimated the threat and that that underestimation spanned administrations. It was not the fault of any one particular individual. And we paid the price, and that's why it is important that we build on the reforms that have already been implemented by the president and press forward with the creation of a national intelligence director.

KUDLOW: Well, speaking of a more sophisticated approach, Porter Goss is in favor of more human intelligence, more covert agents on the ground. Will Congress remove some of the restrictions, even the so-called associations with unsavory characters? I mean, will Congress let the CIA do whatever it takes to get people in the right rooms to get information?

Sen. COLLINS: There's no question that the cutback on human assets that occurred in the '80s and '90s undermined our ability to penetrate terrorist groups like al-Qaida, and we paid a heavy price for that. I think Porter's exactly right in the emphasis that he puts on building the human assets. We became entranced with the idea that we could do everything electronically, with spy satellites, and we underestimated the need to have the spies on the ground, if you will. So, yes, I think we need to build that back up and look at whether the restrictions that were imposed are unnecessarily hindering our ability to penetrate some of these terrorist groups.

CRAMER: All right. Senator Collins, does it matter if it's a Cabinet position or not? I felt that this is such a high-profile thing. Wouldn't it-isn't there room at the inn, at the table, for the CIA man?

Sen. COLLINS: You know, initially my thought was that the person should be a member of the Cabinet because he or she needs sufficient clout and stature to deal with the secretary of Defense, secretary of State. And I thought it would be helpful to have a peer relationship. As I look further into this, I'm not so sure that that matters as long as the person has the authority that he needs to do the job. What we need to avoid is creating another drug czar, a symbolically important position but one with virtually no clout.

KUDLOW: Senator Collins, unfortunately, we're going to lose our satellite. We appreciate your coming on very much, on short notice, and look forward to your hearings on the whole new structure of a national intelligence director.

CRAMER: Thank you.

Sen. COLLINS: Thanks so much.