MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript: How President Obama Should Deal with Income Inequality

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

SCHULTZ: Joining me tonight, Congressman John Garamendi of California. John, good to have you with us tonight.

It`s almost comical the number of people that the Republicans are going to be rolling out to respond to the president`s State Of The Union Address tonight. What does that say? It didn`t say much about unity, does it? There`s a lot of factions that have to speak up tonight. Your thoughts on that.

REP. JOHN GARAMENDI, (D) CALIFORNIA: My thought is I want to talk to that Manatee because the Republicans are not going to make much sense tonight.

It`s really, I think, a symptom of the disunity and the kind of problems that we`ve been faced with the last two to three years here in the Republican caucus. It is badly divided. And the result is we`ve not seen any real policy come out of the House of Representatives controlled by the Republicans that would actually create jobs.

SCHULTZ: Well, it`s pretty clear they`re trying to be all things to all people. They`ve got an identity crisis. They don`t know where to go.

They`ve had no agenda. In fact, tonight, the president`s whole theme is going to be about this chart that we have made famous, the Vulture chart, the income inequality in this country, what has happened to the middle classers, the flat liners, the blue liners right there, and where the top 2 percent has gone in this country.

In an age of obstruction, how is the president going to bring these two lines closer together and get some economic fairness in the system? Your thoughts on that.

GARAMENDI: Well, first of all, he has to make the case. He`s been working towards that. He`s been following your lead, Ed. And he has been working towards making that case. He needs a full-throated argument tonight about income inequality, about the fact that the working men and women have -- who got to work everyday are not making it in America, in part, because American manufacturing isn`t here anymore. We need to bring that back, another issue that you`ve made over these many, many months.

But he needs to make out argument. We need to follow up with pieces of legislation, continue to hammer away on the theme that the middle class needs its time in America. The vultures, those who are at the top of the heap, they`ve had their share. Now, it`s time for the rest of America to share in the great wealth and the great opportunity that this nation does continue to have.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Garamendi, Boehner and the Republicans are saying that they`re putting all options on the table in response to the president`s use of his executive authority. How do you take that?

GARAMENDI: Well, I take that`s what`s happened over the last three years. And that is to take the options off the table to literally do nothing to create jobs. The president put a jobs bill before the congress two years ago. It was simply rejected, not even heard in any committee. It was a bill that would call for infrastructure investment, education investment, research, rebuilding the manufacturing sector in America.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

GARAMENDI: All the things that we know we must do and Republican Congress has simply refused to do it.

SCHULTZ: But could this use of the executive authority walk the country into a big impeachment conversation. I think that`s where -- that`s what`s being implied by some members on the right. I mean, how does that hit you? How does that strike you?

GARAMENDI: Well, that`s again foolishness. The president cannot do anything that`s not allowed by law.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

GARAMENDI: His action today dealing with the minimum wage in contract, that`s -- excuse me Ed. There was just a big downfall.

SCHULTZ: Sure.

GARAMENDI: The -- it was all authority that he has under law to set the standards for federal contracting. That`s what he did.

SCHULTZ: Sure.

GARAMENDI: He cannot do anything that is not allowed by law.

SCHULTZ: OK. And finally congressman, what about the tone tonight? Does this have to be someone of a little different President Obama? Does he have to be somewhat more pointed, more direct, more dogmatic, or what would be the term you would use? What would be -- what are you looking for tonight? Aggressiveness, where is it?

GARAMENDI: Well, I think he needs to be as he has been in the past, very hopeful about this nation, very optimistic about what we can become if we undertake certain policies. I`m sure he`s going to layout those policies, the policies of economic growth for the working men and women where the great wealth that we generate in this nation is available to the men and women that go to work, eight hours a day, 12 hours a day. And I think he`s going to do that.

He doesn`t have to be aggressive. It doesn`t have to be compensational, but it needs to be strong, it needs to be clear and he needs to make that argument very forcefully, but not in an aggressive or ill-mannered way to the American people.

SCHULTZ: Never has been that way. I`m just -- I`m thinking in a sense that this is a turning point to say that we`re leaving Republicans behind. We`re going to run the country. They`ve been in the way too much.

Congressman John Garamendi, great to have you with us tonight. And with that, I don`t really think that there is any kind of a downside if the president does that.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source