CNN Inside Politics - Transcript
CNN Inside Politics - Transcript
4/26/2005
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
WOODRUFF: Some happy doctors and some happy parents, the parents of five babies, who were born today to a surrogate mother-all the babies are healthy range inning weight from three pounds seven ounces to three pounds 15 ounces. It looks like mother, both mothers, and babies are doing very well. So, that's very good news.
Well, we're back now on INSIDE POLITICS and we're continuing our discussion of proposed changes to Social Security, what takes care of all of us at the other end of life.
I'm joined from Capitol Hill by Republican Senator Charles Grassley. He's the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which is where any changes to Social Security are going to originate. Senator Grassley, the president's proposal on private accounts, are those going to be part of the legislation coming out of your committee or not?
GRASSLEY: Well, I hope they will be and it's my intention that they will be, but obviously, if I don't have 11 votes for them, they won't be. But, let me assure you, whether they're in the bill that I bring out of committee or not, they're going to be in the bill that I present to the committee because I believe in personal accounts. I think they're very good things.
I also would say that that's only part of the package. The other part of the package is solvency, and dealing with the long-term needs of Social Security. But also, remember, that, even if a bill comes out of my committee without them, under the rules of the Senate, we're bound to deal with this issue on the Senate. So, there's no way personal accounts are not going to have a big discussion sometime this summer.
WOODRUFF: Senator, isn't the question of solvency a larger problem than this dispute over private accounts?
GRASSLEY: Well, for sure, it's easier to explain, and it's easier to understand. The people do understand that, and that's why they expect us to act on it. Personal accounts and how they work are much more difficult, plus the fact that there's just some reluctance to have any departure from the 70-year-old program, even though it has shortcomings.
WOODRUFF: You're going to have a much greater chance of reaching consensus, aren't you, Senator, if you don't have private accounts in there?
GRASSLEY: I believe so, yes, but I think I still have a responsibility to young people who do not feel ownership in Social Security, and that ownership is very, very important because there's a lot of generational resentment by young people now to overcome that, and personal accounts is one way to overcome that, by giving them ownership, and inheritability of it.
WOODRUFF: Are you surprised at this new poll out today in the "Washington Post" and-by them and ABC News, indicating that the support for private accounts has dropped, pretty significantly, 10 or 11 points, since the middle of March. You now have opposition, 51 percent, to support, 45 percent.
GRASSLEY: Yes. Well, you've been covering Congress for a long time, Judy, and you know how demagogic some issues can be made, and this has been demagogued to death, and a lot of irrational and even intellectually dishonest things said about it. That could happen. Now, that doesn't discourage me because I intend to keep the public education aspect of it alive, as the president's trying to do and hopefully we can turn things around. Now, if we can't turn things around, then we can still do something with the solvency of Social Security. I think we've still done a great deal of good.
WOODRUFF: Very quick last question, Senator, on a different subject. Judicial nominations. We're of hearing some movement on the part of Democrats to achieve a compromise on that. Do you think your party should compromise on the question of these judicial nominations?
GRASSLEY: Well, if we can compromise without basic principle being violated, I think we should compromise. But basic principle is this to me, Judy, and that is that, remember that not a single judge, a circuit judge, had ever been killed on a filibuster in the first 214 years. And we have ten judges who were filibustered to death, that had enough votes to become judges. And the unfairness of the filibuster that hadn't been used for 214 years ought to be preserved, it seems. That's the principle of the Senate, to not filibuster judges to death.
WOODRUFF: All right. We hear you and we wanted you to get your two cents worth in. Senator Charles Grassley on that and on Social Security. We appreciate it.
GRASSLEY: Thank you.
WOODRUFF: It's always good to see you.
GRASSLEY: Good to see you, Judy.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0504/26/ip.01.html