CNN Inside Politics - Transcript

CNN Inside Politics - Transcript
4/29/2005

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

WOODRUFF: Many Democrats are accusing President Bush of planning to sock it to the middle class now that he has publicly endorsed the possibility of cutting some Social Security benefits.

We're joined now by the senior senator from New York, Charles Schumer. Senator Schumer, good to see you.

SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK: Nice to talk to you, Judy.

WOODRUFF: Senator, now that the president has laid out his plan, or more of his plan on Social Security, isn't it incumbent on the Democrats to do more than just say no to everything?

SCHUMER: Well, let me say first, he hasn't laid out a concrete plan. We're awaiting in the Finance Committee a legislative proposal. They haven't even been called up to testify. We have the outlines of what president wants and they're not very good. He was in a hole when he talked about privatization and now he's digging the hole a bit deeper by talking about these dramatic cuts to even middle-class people on Social Security.

It's our view that the president was the one who called this a crisis. Social Security is going to be in good shape 'til 2042. That doesn't mean we wait till 2041, but it doesn't mean we need to do something by this summer. And if he feels that it's incumbent, that it's a crisis, send us a detailed plan on what he believes and then will react to it.

But we're not going to, on the basis of one press conference and one speech, come out with our detailed plan, particularly in light of the fact that, again, we don't believe it's a crisis. We believe Social Security needs some changes, but we want to keep it basically the way it is. We're not recommending dramatic overhaul.

WOODRUFF: Let me read to you one of your Democratic colleagues in the Senate, Ben Nelson of Nebraska said. He said, "while the president did not lay out a complete plan to address solvency," he said, "I'm pleased that he did present one idea for us to consider as part of a solvency solution." And that of course is referring to the proposal to protect benefits for low-income workers and the benefit cuts for others.

SCHUMER: Right.

Well, couple of things here. He did talk about in general terms the plan that Mr. Posen had out together. But we don't know the details. And as you know the devil is off in the details.

Second, what he has talked about we don't find-I think the vast majority of Democrats-don't find to their liking. And privatization would entail such a dramatic overhaul of Social Security, fundamentally it's destruction as we know it from an insurance policy to an investment policy, that we believe he has to take that off the table before we sit down and negotiate.

WOODRUFF: Well, the president is saying also though, senator. He said I'm willing to listen to good ideas from either party. The American people look at this and they see the Democrats not even willing to come halfway. Not even willing to engage in a conversation. Why couldn't that come back to hurt the Democrats?

SCHUMER: Well, because I think most of the American people believe we are defending a program that they love. And the president is trying to radically overhaul a program that they recommend. And that's why he's in so much trouble. The more he speaks about it, the less happy they are with his plan.

And there is a simple solution. We brought it up a lot of times. First, the president has to take privatization off the table. We believe privatization's equal to the destruction of Social Security as we know it. Then, my view-and this is the view of many Democrats-he could do just what Ronald Reagan did. Put together a grouch of respected Democrats and Republicans who would make the adjustments, twist the dials if you will, and preserve Social Security for this generation and for future generations.

WOODRUFF: Let me ask you about judicial nominees. We know now that the Republican leader in the senator, Senator Frist, has proposed a compromise that would include having-allowing Democrats to block lower court nominees if you would agree to give up the power to block nominees for the appeals courts, to the Supreme Court. Now, Senator Reid has said no way in effect. But again if the Republicans are giving in here, why shouldn't the Democrats?

SCHUMER: Well, they're not giving in. We haven't blocked a single-lower court nominee. And in fact Orrin Hatch just unilaterally took the power from senators to block these nominees which we had until a few years ago, it was called the blue slip.

The real issues are decided in the Supreme Court and the court of appeals. How about we ask Senator Frist to reverse it? We won't filibuster on lower court nominees if he gives us the right do it on court of appeals nominees and Supreme Court.

We have proposed a real compromise. Compromise means everyone gets hurt. And the plan that Senator Reid has outlined, which talks about giving up a few judges who they don't like and changing some of the rules is a real compromise. The two things that Senator Frist has talked about. One, long-delayed-longer debate. Well, that's slow death rather than fast death. And now this one.

We haven't blocked district court judges. It's the court of appeals and the Supreme Court that is where it's at. So he's really not proposing compromises at all.

Now, I know what's going on here. The hard right, very far out, people way at the extremes. Senator Frist can't buck them. But most Americans, again, quite surprisingly are on our side on this. We didn't expect that, but they seem to understand, we are preserving checks and balances and they're overreaching.

WOODRUFF: All right, senator, we are going to leave it there. Senator Charles Schumer of New York. We thank you for joining us-from New York.

SCHUMER: Judy, nice to talk to you.

WOODRUFF: Appreciate it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0504/29/ip.01.html