MSNBC "Morning Joe" - Transcript
Interview
Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, today appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe and NewsNation to discuss the ongoing debt ceiling negotiations. Both transcripts are below.
MORNING JOE - Video
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Representative Chris Van Hollen. Good to have you back on the show, Chris.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Good to see you Chris.
REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Nice to be with all of you. Good to see you.
SCARBOROUGH: The President talked about Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, talked about entitlements. We, of course, have been saying that the Republicans need to do what has to be done on closing tax loopholes and getting revenues in there. What do Democrats need to do to reform? What does that mean? Reforming entitlements? What is the President talking about?
VAN HOLLEN: Well, with respect to Social Security, the President made the point yesterday that Social Security is not the driver of the deficit. So what we've said is we're not going to balance the budget on the backs of Social Security beneficiaries. We're not going to give corporate jet owners additional tax breaks. But what the President said is we're willing to look at ways to strengthen Social Security as a way of extending the solvency of Social Security. We talked in the past of lifting the payroll tax cap. The President has some other ideas. We're willing to give him the space to talk about various ideas if the focus is on strengthening Social Security; he says that's what he wants the focus to be on. On Medicare - we talked about ways to strengthen the Medicare system, building on some of the reforms from the Affordable Care Act. We said Medicare should be able to bargain for prescription drug prices just like the Veterans Administration can. That would mean tens of billions of dollars of additional funds for Medicare. So the key, Joe and others, is the President and the Democrats have said, look, we're willing to talk about these things. And at the end of the day, the Republicans said we're not going to close one corporate loophole for the purposes of deficit reduction.
SCARBOROUGH: But listening to you, it sounds like what you're saying is you're not going to touch the benefits, you'll raise taxes, you'll raise Social Security taxes but you're not going to do anything like tell anybody 50 or younger that they're not going to get Social Security until - Is that something Democrats would consider - having recipients get Social Security and Medicare at 67, 68, 70 if they're in their 40s or 30s?
VAN HOLLEN: We're willing to look at a number of things and we're willing to give the President some space to talk about these things as part of a grand bargain to reduce the deficit and put the economy on the long-term track. With respect to the age and Social Security - here's my issue with that. You, I, everybody around the table here make a living doing talking. We're not - we're not lifting heavy things. There are ways to say --
SCARBOROUGH: Now wait a minute, Barnicle and I work on the docks so speak for yourself.
VAN HOLLEN: Well, fair enough. So I don't think you should take away the choice of people retiring early. But if they make that choice, you can say they don't get the same benefits over a period of time. That's already part of the design of Social Security. You can build on that. And that's a way of saving funds for Social Security. So we're willing to be part of this conversation. As you heard, our Republican colleagues, they walked away from that
SCARBOROUGH: I'm sorry, what's happened with John Boehner and Eric Cantor.
VAN HOLLEN: I don't want to get the Speaker in trouble. But clearly he was willing to make some tough decisions, some compromises, which is what's going to be necessary in order to get the deficit and debt under control and get the economy moving again. He clearly had his legs cut out from under him by members of his own caucus. We're going to have to leave those politics to their caucus. But it's a huge missed opportunity. I hope they will reconsider. The President made clear that he's willing to meet them more than half way. This is a time for them to step up and demonstrate some leadership because, as you said, what's going to happen on August 2 is not a scare tactic. It's very real.
SCARBOROUGH: It's reality.
VAN HOLLEN: It will have a direct impact on Americans.
SCARBOROUGH: Harold Ford Jr. is with us. Harold?
HAROLD FORD, JR.: Chris, good to see you this morning. I interpreted his remarks yesterday slightly different than yours. And I agree with him on Social Security and Medicare. He sounded as if he was talking about more than a conversation, as if he was willing to make some benefit changes and even some age changes. He didn't say specifically, but I interpret that and I think probably others, at least commentators have, that Democrats and the President are willing to take some heat and do some big things, courageous things, and compromise. And Republicans are not. But, you seem to be suggesting that maybe - maybe that's not the case - that you're just willing to talk about it.
VAN HOLLEN: Nope
FORD: What does that exactly mean? I think we win the independent vote, put the vote aside, we do the right thing for the country and politically it benefits us. So what do you mean by - Social Security and Medicare - you're willing to have a conversation and perhaps not make benefit changes.
VAN HOLLEN: Harold, on Medicare, for example, as you know, in the Affordable Care Act we began to change the incentives. We put a lot of ideas on the table to say that we need to change and modernize Medicare so that we focus on the value of care rather than the volume of care - because we need to modernize that program. And what we're also saying is we're willing to give the President the space to have this larger conversation. And what we've seen on the Republican side and, look, Gene Robinson said in his column today - they're not willing to move one inch on this. They're not going to take one penny from eliminating corporate tax breaks for the purposes of deficit reduction. Everyone that's looked at this -- yourself, others on the panel, the bipartisan commission - said we need a balanced approach. And while I don't agree with every detail in Simpson-Bowles, I agree with the overall framework in terms of approach. We've put lots of cuts on the table. You know that. And what we're saying is there has to be some revenue in the mix. It's not just our opinion; it's the opinion of every bipartisan group that's looked at this.
BRZEZINSKI: Yeah. Gene, having said all that, isn't it fair to say also that the President and Democrats who are not there yet, who are not as far along as the President in terms of what they want to give, they could come to the table a lot earlier with this if they were dead serious about it, and if it wasn't all political as well?
EUGENE ROBINSON: Well, sure. We could have talked about this five years ago and we wouldn't be in the shape we're in now
BRZEZINSKI: No, I mean, not two days ago.
ROBINSON: Well, yeah. Of course, the President kind of caved in and Speaker Boehner just kind of came up with the grand bargain. But, yes, your point is well taken that, sure, the Democrats could have talked earlier about entitlements. And, you know, could we have gotten anything done? I'm not sure. I have a question for the Congressman, though. What is Plan B? At this point, what - what's Plan B if Plan A continues to run in to the brick wall of Republican opposition? We've got to do something on August 2.
VAN HOLLEN: Well Gene that's a good question. Because, you know, what the Republicans have said is let's go back to the Biden talks. Let's remember that the Republicans walked out of the Biden talks with the - for the same reason. They weren't prepared to do anything with respect to corporate tax breaks and the revenue side. So it's very hard to know what Plan B is. As the President said yesterday, we don't want to do something really short term because then we're going to be right back in the same position six months from now as we are today. In fact, it will be harder because we would have already made some of the cuts. And that's why he's right when he says, doing a - a big deficit reduction deal is something that will really help the economy, both in the short term and he has the payroll tax holiday idea, but also getting the deficit under control in the long term. In many ways, that could be easier than trying to do something small because you face the same issues. And our Republican colleagues are just refusing to budge on this - this point of ideological total rigidity. But either way you need to have some revenue in the mix in the long run here.
BRZEZINSKI: Alright Congressman Chris Van Hollen, thank you so much, it's good to see you.
VAN HOLLEN: It's good to see you.
Source