Guests: Bernie Sanders, Sam Stein, Ilyse Hogue, Ari Melber, Susan Del Percio, Marc Anthony, Harold Schaitberger
ED SCHULTZ, HOST: Good evening, Americans. And welcome to THE ED
SHOW, from New York.
As America awaits the Supreme Court decision on the fate of health
care in this country, the full force of the Citizens United ruling is
really starting to take shape. Tonight, I`ll show you just who benefits
from this ruling.
This is THE ED SHOW -- let`s get to work.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You`re going to have
more money spent in this election than ever before. And because times are
tough, and because they`re spending these ungodly sums, it`s going to be
close.
SCHULTZ (voice-over): Citizens United part two. We`ll show you the
real world results of how the Supreme Court is handing democracy to
America`s millionaires and billionaires.
Senator Bernie Sanders joins me on how Mitt Romney and his billionaire
backers are rigging the system so they always win.
Darrell Issa is still going after the president for the "Fast and
Furious" scandal. The White House is firing back. Tonight, "The
Huffington Post`s" Sam Stein will help me expose the latest attempt in the
witch hunt.
Singer/songwriter Marc Anthony is pulling for President Obama. I`ll
ask the singer why he`s backing the president.
MARC ANTHONY, SINGER: The president has our back. So, it`s time to
let him know that we got his.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight, folks. Thanks for
watching.
Tonight, I`m going to start with the focus on the middle of the
country, not the East or the West Coast, but the middle of the country
because last night on this program, I said that we are losing America.
Well, you need an explanation to that. We really losing America, Ed?
Well, tonight, I`m going to show you exactly why I think we are in
serious trouble moving forward in this country. When the Supreme Court
made yet another ruling to let unlimited corporate money influence
elections, you might be wondering, OK, who benefits?
Well, I`ll show you who benefits. Harold Hamm. There`s Harold right
there. Looks like a regular guy. Looks like he is a regular American,
doesn`t he? Middle of the country kind of guy. Well, he is, he`s from
Oklahoma. He`s doing a lot of work in the Dakotas and Montana right now.
You might not know who Harold Hamm is because he`s not a media figure,
and he`s not in the news all the time. But I can guarantee you, Mitt
Romney can tell you exactly who Harold Hamm is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Met a guy named Harold Hamm.
Harold Hamm is a truck driver for 10 years.
He saves his money driving trucks to get a college degree. Goes back
to college. Gets a college degree. Takes geology as a subject.
Happened to look across the country and I said, you know what? I bet
there`s energy, oil, and gas up in those hills of North Dakota. He went up
there and started drilling holes.
Now it`s estimated in this Bakken Range, there are about 20 billion
barrels of oil. Harold is doing just fine, by the way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Oh, yes, Harold Hamm is doing quite well for himself. Mitt
Romney makes it sound like Harold Hamm was some random truck driver who he
bumped into on the campaign trail.
In fact, Harold Hamm is the 36th richest man in America. He has a net
worth of more than $11 billion. Good for him. That`s according to
"Forbes" magazine, by the way.
But here`s the most important thing that Mitt Romney did not mention
about Harold Hamm. You see on March 1st, good old Harold, he was named
energy adviser to the Romney campaign. Just one month later, Harold Hamm
became a mega donor to the pro Romney super PAC, Restore our Future.
That`s right. Interesting turn of events.
Thanks to Citizens United, Harold Hamm was able to give $985,000 to
the cause of defeating President Obama.
Now, I haven`t seen Harold Hamm talk in public. But I`ve got a few
friends up on the prairie that says they have told me that he`s just a barn
burner when he goes to the podium railing on President Obama. I wonder
why. Obama has been pretty good to him.
You know, Harold Hamm`s million dollars has put him into a pretty good
position, don`t you think? Two weeks ago, he was on Capitol Hill
advocating for oil and gas company tax breaks.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HAROLD HAMM, CEO CONTINENTAL RESOURCES: I`ll be speaking on my own
behalf, not as representative of Continental Resources, nor am I`m not here
on behalf of the Romney campaign, for which I serve as an energy adviser.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Oh there you go. It`s funny how Hamm can say she`s speaking
for himself when his interests match up directly with the Romney campaign
and interests of the energy company in which he is the CEO.
Harold Hamm, you see, this is what it`s all about. This is the Bakken
shale. All of a sudden, they discovered all this in the Dakotas and it
goes to Montana. That`s why we did the Montana story last night because
you see, these corporate interests are going to start affecting elections
in this state.
You know, that they are pumping more oil here than anywhere else in
the country except Texas. And they have found some more oil that goes down
here along the North Dakota/South Dakota border, and they think that could
be even bigger than the Bakken shale. It`s where Harold Hamm is making, I
don`t know, millions, billions, drilling oil, fracking.
"Business Week" called him the man who bought North Dakota. I didn`t
know that there was somebody out there buying a state, did you?
Now, Harold Hamm wants to make billions more by fracking for natural
gas in this area. Did you know that his company is one of the largest
fracking companies in America?
Earlier this year, the Obama administration, you know what they did?
Doggone it, they tightened regulations on oil and gas industries requiring
drillers to capture emissions of certain air pollutants. Sounds
reasonable, doesn`t it?
Well, Harold Hamm only cares about making more money. For Harold
Hamm, he didn`t like that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HAMM: A lot of the things the Obama administration has done haven`t
been helpful to our industry. There have been a lot of obstacles thrown
up. And, you know, we`re kind -- our energy policy in America today is one
of energy deprivation, how little energy we can use. You know, that`s what
third world countries, what the poor countries do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: My God, I didn`t realize that Harold Hamm was living in a
third world country, did you? I mean, he`s got it so rough right now, he
just can`t live without the Bush tax cuts again.
To Harold Hamm, President Obama is the guy standing in the way of him
moving up on the "Forbes" 400 list.
You see, Hamm could get to the top ten if he could just get around all
these environmental regulations that the Obama administration is throwing
out there. Now, of course, there Obama administration, we should probably
point out, has enforced fewer regulations than the Bush administration.
President Obama has approved 613 new federal rules. President Bush
approved 643 in his first three years.
Now, these facts don`t matter to guys like Harold Hamm because
Citizens United opened the door for billionaires like him to affect
politics at every level of government. Yes, in Montana and North Dakota.
Now, this is what former Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship did. I`m
going to give you just an example. Remember the coal guy, yes, that`s him.
Blankenship, you know what he did? He spent $3 million back in 2004 to
defeat a West Virginia Supreme Court justice.
Yes, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer warned us about this on THE ED
SHOW last night when they struck down a 100-year law. They were taking
away the people`s ability to protect themselves from the rich and the
powerful in the corporate interests.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. BRIAN SCHWEITZER (D), MONTANA: Over 100 years ago, it was two
copper kings that owned all of Montana. They were the two riches people on
the planet. They were both gazillionaires. And they owned all of the
politics in Montana. They owned every one of the legislatures. In fact,
when we first sent a United States senator to Washington, D.C., he bribed
his way in and they wouldn`t even seat him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Wow, could history be repeating itself. Let`s look at North
Dakota and Montana one more time if we could. I wonder if they have any
judges out there. I wonder they have any county commissioners. I wonder
if they have anybody on the local level that might take some of that
Citizens United money so they can win. And they might know where the money
is coming from and they might give a favorable vote to those who just want
to gut the environment and go do whatever the hell they want to do and
don`t have anybody stop them.
And oh, by the way, this crowd that`s doing all that, they want the
taxes lowered in North Dakota, too. They think they`re paying too much for
this something called an oil extraction tax.
A hundred years ago, laws were presented to prevent our politics from
being corrupted. Today, they`re being struck down by a right wing court to
sell our politics to the absolute highest bidder. President Obama
acknowledged this today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: You`re going to have more money spent in this election than
ever before, by the other side on negative ads. And because times are
tough and because they`re spending these ungodly sums, it`s going to be
close.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Ungodly sums.
And the campaign e-mails its supporters today, the president wrote,
"We can be outspent and still win, but we can`t be outspent 10 to 1 and
still win."
It sounds like I`m exaggerating when I say our democracy is at stake.
But you know what, folks? It really is.
Just look at some dictionary definitions and tell me if you agree with
me.
Oligarchy, what`s that? Well, let`s see. An oligarchy is a
government in which all power is vested in a few persons or a dominant
class. Could there be an oligarchy on a local level? Oh, yes.
Plutocracy, what`s that? Well, that`s a government that`s just ruled
by the wealthy. Do you think the table is set for that? Damn right it is.
Here`s the choice in this election. I think that we really want to be
here, don`t we? Democracy?
You know, when we could easily fall down to here and here depending on
what part of the country you`re coming from, there`s only one way to
reverse this. We need to break the right wing stranglehold on the Supreme
Court. Nothing, nothing will change unless this court right here is shaken
up and progressives have fair-minded people sitting on this court and not
ideologues.
We`re going to find out on Thursday with the health care debate if
this guy right here, Chief Justice Roberts, if he`s an ideologue or not,
because they`re really bending to the right. There`s a few surveys out
there that I`ll share with you tomorrow night to show you exactly just how
right wing this court is.
I spoke with E.J. Dionne`s class at Georgetown University last year
and told them I thought George Bush was one of the best conservative
presidents this country ever had, that`s right, George W. Bush because he
gave two rounds of tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and he put two
ideologues on the Supreme Court which turned the court to where we are
today, and we not only have Citizens United on a national level, but all
the way down to the state level where they`re going to go to Montana and
say, you know, for 100 years you screwed it up and you know what it`s going
to do? It`s going to open up the doors for guys like Howard Hamm -- Harold
Hamm to go in and cash whip judges the way that Blankenship dude did in
West Virginia.
You don`t think it can happen everywhere? It can. So, when I said
last night that I think that we`ve lost a piece of America and that
democracy is being threatened, this is what I`m talking about.
Get your cell phones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question, does the Citizens United decision mean the end of democracy in
America?
Text A for yes, text B for no, to 622639. You can go to our blog at
Ed.MSNBC.com. We`ll bring you the results later in the show.
Joining me tonight is Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
Senator, you have the floor. What is the scariest thing about what I
have just said about Citizens United at the local level?
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: You know what the scariest thing
is? You`re right, Ed.
I think people back home are thinking -- well, he`s exaggerating.
Throwing around words like oligarchy, throwing around words like
plutocracy, but that is exactly what`s happening now. Two trends: number
one, in terms of distribution of wealth and income, you have a situation
now where the top 1 percent owns 40 percent of the wealth. The bottom 60
percent owns 2 percent of the wealth. And the gap between the very, very
rich and everybody else is growing wider.
You got the Walton family of Walmart alone owning more wealth than the
bottom 30 percent of Americans. So, that`s one trend. Rich are getting
richer. Everybody else is getting poorer.
And now with the Citizens United decision, what the Supreme Court said
to all of these billionaires -- go for it. You`re tired of buying coal
companies and gambling casinos. You know what you can buy now? You can
buy the United States government.
So if you are the Koch brothers and you`re worth $50 billion, you`re
Sheldon Adelson, you`re worth $20-plus billion, why would you hesitate one
minute to spend $1 billion, $2 billion? That`s pretty good.
You could own the government. You could own various states. You can
own county commissioners. You could own governors. Pretty good deal.
So that`s where we`re heading right now. Now, immediately, what we
have got to do is we have got to do everything we can to overturn this
disastrous Citizens United decision. Some of us have brought forth
constitutional amendments, short-term, and I think within the next couple
weeks, we`re going to bring legislation to the floor of the Senate called
the DISCLOSE Act.
DISCLOSE Act does two things. Number one, if you`re putting money
into campaigns, you got to tell the world immediately who you are. No more
anonymity. Number two, perhaps equally important, you want to put ads on
television, you`re going to have to have your pretty face right up there on
the TV screen if you`re the CEO of the corporation doing the advertising
and you have to say I approve this message.
SCHULTZ: You think Republicans will go along with that, Senator?
SANDERS: No, I don`t.
I talked to Republicans, Ed, and in their hearts, some of them know
that this is what is happening now is outrageous. But what they also know
is it`s working to their advantage.
SCHULTZ: How can somebody like Harold Hamm be a major donor and
openly serve as an adviser on energy policy? And how can this not be a
signal to the American people that if Romney gets elected, it`s going to be
guys like this that are going to be calling the shots?
SANDERS: Absolutely. And it`s Hamm and it`s energy. It is the Koch
brothers and energy. What do these guys want?
You know what really gets me, Ed, you know, if you were a billionaire,
you know, how much more do you need? These guys are worth billions of
dollars.
SCHULTZ: Well, they claim they`re going to take this wealth and
create jobs. We haven`t seen that. What they`re going to do is buy more
government to make sure they can concentrate the wealth and make sure they
can have America exactly the way they want it.
Now, that`s what I believe and I don`t have any reason not to believe
that the way things are going.
But I want to ask you, will Mitt Romney have to pay the mega donors
back if he`s president?
SANDERS: Of course, he will. But it`s not even paying them back.
That`s who he is. What does Romney talk about? He talks about to Wall
Street -- he`s going to deregulate Wall Street, the entity that caused this
horrendous recession in which so many people are suffering.
He`s talking about more tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this
country. At a time when we have lost millions of decent-paying jobs
because of outsourcing, Mr. Romney will take his outsourcing experience and
make it even more prevalent.
So it`s not that he will give them what they want. They`re in the
same boat together. They believe the same thing. More for the rich, and
less for the middle class and working families.
And by the way, Ed, these guys if they get the power to do it, they`re
going to go after Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, educational
opportunities. They are working day and night to create the oligarchy you
just talked about.
SCHULTZ: They`re going to run the table, they`re going to get the new
deal if this keeps up.
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, great to have you with us tonight.
Thank you, Bernie.
SANDERS: Good to be with you.
SCHULTZ: Remember to answer tonight`s question at the bottom of the
screen. Share you thoughts on Twitter @EdShow. We want to know what you
think.
Congressman Darrell Issa -- well, he`s on the war path again, sending
a letter this time to President Obama, suggesting a cover up on "Fast and
Furious" just one day after he told FOX News that there was no cover up.
Sam Stein with me for the information and the discussion next.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Coming up, Darrell Issa is changing his tune on the
administration`s part in fast and furious. Sam Stein joins me on the GOP`s
witch hunt next.
And later, Grammy Award-winning performer Marc Anthony joins me to
discuss the impact of the Latino vote this November. And why he`s
supporting President Obama.
Share your thoughts on Twitter using #EdShow. We`re coming right
back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.
Republicans are still creating a lot of nonsense in their war against
President Obama and the "Fast and Furious" standoff. Congressman Darrell
Issa has sent a letter to the president of the United States challenging
the president`s assertion of executive privilege.
"Your privilege assertion means one of two things, Mr. President,
either you or most of your senior advisers were involved in managing
Operation Fast and Furious and the fallout from it, or you are asserting a
presidential power that you know to be unjustified solely for the purpose
of further obstructing a congressional investigation."
Funny how Darrell Issa wasn`t alleging a cover-up just two days ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS: Do you have any evidence that White House
officials were involved in these decisions, that they knowingly misled
Congress and are involved in a cover-up?
REP. DARRELL ISSA (R), CALIFORNIA: No, we don`t, and what we`re
seeking are documents we know to exist February 4th to December that are in
fact about Brian Terry`s murder, who knew, and why people were lying about
it.
WALLACE: I just want to be clear, we`ve got to get out. No evidence
at this point that the White House is involved in a cover up.
ISSA: And I hope they don`t get involved.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: All right. So, they Republicans love to do this stuff, stir
the pot as often as they can with outright lies.
Senator Jon Kyl took it a step farther. He says, "The bipartisan
comprehensive immigration reform bill I helped draft in 2007 was killed in
part by then-Senator Obama."
Folks, that simply is not true. Then-Senator Obama voted in favor of
Bush`s 2007 immigration plan and Kyl was part of the filibuster against it.
Now, Senator Kyl has tossed out the impeachment word in talking about the
president`s immigration policy.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
SEN. JON KYL (R), ARIZONA: If the president insists on continuing to
ignore parts of the law that he doesn`t like and simply not enforce that
law, the primary remedy for that is political. And you have it two ways:
one, oversight through the congress to demonstrate what they`re doing
wrong. And the other part of it is, the people need to react through the
ballot box to turn out of office those people who are not doing their duty.
Now, if it`s bad enough and if there are shenanigans involved in it,
of course, impeachment is always a possibility. But I don`t think at this
point anybody is talking about that.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Well, you are, Senator. You`re doing it on right-wing radio
in America.
Who listens to that? The head-nodding crowd. Yes, they`re going to
impeach Obama. That`s where they get this stuff.
Let`s turn to Sam Stein, political reporter for "The Huffington Post."
Sam, good to have you with us. That`s just how they turn in those
circles, if you know what I mean.
SAM STEIN, HUFFINGTON POST: Impeachment, did you mention?
SCHULTZ: I thought I would ask if you heard anything on the Hill
today.
STEIN: Nothing like that.
SCHULTZ: All right. The contempt vote on Eric Holder is going to be
in the full House coming up on Thursday. And Congressman Issa is doing his
best, of course, to whip this up, even though he admitted on FOX that he
has no evidence of a cover up? So, what do you make of this conversation?
STEIN: Well, it`s sort of the presumption of guilt with a recognition
of innocence, right? I mean, on the one hand, they`ve had -- they
acknowledge that they have no evidence that shows that the administration
was involved in this, but they`re searching for evidence that it was there.
The thing they`re willfully ignoring or at least seems they`re
ignoring is that the attorney general cannot exercise the right of
executive privilege. He must request that right from the president
himself. And so when the president exercised that right, it was part of
the process. It wasn`t some sort of malicious or sinister attempt to cover
it up, at least according to the White House.
That`s an important thing to actually know when you`re looking at this
because there`s no way to exercise executive privilege without bringing the
president into the matter, to then turn around and say it`s part of the
president`s cover-up is to sort of willfully misconstrue the process of
exercising executive privilege.
SCHULTZ: All right. Sam, we`ve heard Congressman Issa say that he
thinks he`s going to have bipartisan support for this contempt vote. What
Democrats are in the halls of congress saying, you know what, we`ve got to
reel in the attorney general here? He`s in contempt?
STEIN: It`s a bit more complicated because the National Rifle
Association has decided they`re going to score this vote. And that, of
course, is putting a lot of pressure on the Democrats who live in moderate
or conservative-leaning districts with a lot of passionate gun right owners
to cast a vote. So, we have one report out this afternoon that Jim
Matheson of Utah is leaning towards doing, voting yes on a contempt vote
because of this.
SCHULTZ: The NRA, the folks that scare the heck out of Wisconsinites
that Tom Barrett was going to take their firearm, they`re back in it on the
contempt vote.
John McCain has suggested a special prosecutor for security leaks. Is
the White House seriously concerned about that?
STEIN: Not that I`m picking up. They have denied they would leak
this intentionally. They point it out that it`s a "New York Times"
reporter that could have good sources and uncovered the information on his
own.
SCHULTZ: Yes.
STEIN: And, you know, this process is going to play out over time and
we`ll see what is happening here.
But of course, leaking this type of stuff is a problem if it was done
with the intent of bolstering up the president`s credentials in national
security. But we have seen no evidence yet to suggest that was the case,
except for assertions that it maybe was the case.
SCHULTZ: Sam, great to have you with us here on THE ED SHOW. I think
there`s going to be a real political fallout for the Republicans if they go
down this road of a vote of contempt.
STEIN: We will see.
SCHULTZ: We shall see.
Coming up, a major American city is burning to the ground, but
tonight, there is hope.
And Grammy Award winning artist Marc Anthony is performing at a fund-
raiser for President Obama tonight. Later, he joins me to talk about
politics and the power of the Latino vote this year.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. Now let me give you some good
news, and there was really good news coming out of the housing market
today. Home prices are actually rising. They`re on the move up in major
U.S. cities. According to the S&P Monthly Index, 19 of the 20 biggest
cities in this country saw their average home price go up from March to
April. That`s good.
The only city that went backwards was Detroit, where home prices
actually fell 3.6 percent. The big reason why is because Detroit keeps
sliding backwards -- is because, hell, it`s on fire most of the time. No
kidding. As MSNBC.com reports, last year alone, the Detroit Fire
Department fielded 30,000 fire calls. The city of 714,000 sees 30
structure fires a day.
In contrast, Los Angeles, a city of nearly four million faces just 11
structure fires a day. Now, Detroit is always -- almost always burning at
least somewhere. As one firefighter put it in the recent documentary
"Burn," Detroit is like Katrina without the hurricane.
Detroit`s finances are also in a disaster. The city has a 200 million
dollar budget shortfall and 13 billion dollars in structural debt. On
Monday, Mayor Dave Bing announced layoffs of 164 firefighters beginning in
July. Is that going to help? The situation in Detroit could go from bad
to worse.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I started smelling the smoke.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The announcement comes within hours of an east
side arson spree, 11 fires deliberately set, one fire fighter slightly
injured. One fire buckled the aluminum siding Iona Momfort`s (ph) house.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`m looking at this house and my neighbor starts
yelling, the one behind you is burning. And so they had set both of them
afire at the same time.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Detroit Firefighter`s Association said the
layoffs would mean 16 fewer engine or ladder companies. Its president
calls the job cuts disastrous.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is not going to work in the city of Detroit.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tracy Sykes (ph) is still worried. Last night,
firefighters had to spray water on the house where she lives with her four
kids.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Our lives are in jeopardy. It`s sad.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: But the federal government could step in. The mayor is
applying for a federal SAFER Grant that would allow him to rehire nearly
two thirds of the laid off fired firefighters. SAFER Grants have been
awarded by the federal government since the recession began. The grants
have kept firefighters on the job across the country, from Newark, New
Jersey, all the way to Sacramento, California.
Unless you`re someone like Mitt Romney, it`s pretty clear government
is the answer in Detroit.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MITT ROMNEY (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Instead, he wants to add
more to government. He wants another stimulus. He wants to hire more
government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policemen, more
teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people
did. It`s time for us to cut back on government and help the American
people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Mitt Romney says hiring more firefighters is a problem.
There`s no doubt in my mind that that guy who said "let Detroit go
bankrupt" would let Detroit burn to the ground.
There`s a lot more coming up in the next half hour of THE ED SHOW.
Stay tuned. We`re right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney
to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: A Pennsylvania lawmaker says voter ID laws are going to
deliver his state to Mitt Romney. The big panel weighs in.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARC ANTHONY, SINGER: Latinos are a force that can and will help
decide this election.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: And singer Marc Anthony has something to say about the
president`s immigration policy. He`ll join me next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. We have some unlikely news
tonight. A Republican is actually telling the truth about voter ID laws.
Since 2011, 20 states have enacted or attempted to enact voter suppression
laws. Half of them passed voter ID laws, well, including the swing state
of Pennsylvania. On Saturday, Pennsylvania House Republican Mike Terrizzi
let the cat out of the bag on his state`s voter ID law.
He gave them the play book Republicans are using around the country to
take back the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE TERRIZZI (R), PENNSYLVANIA STATE REPRESENTATIVE: We are focused
on making sure that we meet our obligations that we have talked about for
years. Pro Second Amendment, the Castle (ph) Doctrine`s done. First pro
life legislation, abortion facility regulations in 22 years, done. Voter
ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of
Pennsylvania, done.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Does that prove what we have known all along? Voter ID laws
are nothing but a Republican plot to suppress Democratic votes so they can
gain power? Let`s bring in Ilyse Hogue and also Ari Melber of "The Nation"
magazine, and Republican strategist Susan Del Percio, who is happy I didn`t
identify her as a Democratic strategist, as I did the last time.
Ilyse, Republicans claim that voter ID is to prevent fraud. And it
has been proven it`s just not widespread. There are just sprinklings of
these events that take place. Does what he just said really put a hole in
his entire argument?
ILYSE HOGUE, "THE NATION": Absolutely. It puts a hole, but it
doesn`t put the absolute hole. What we have to understand, Ed, is that the
Republican party, Susan`s Republican party, actually not only wants to help
Romney win this election, but fundamentally they are actually in opposition
to Thomas Jefferson`s Declaration of Independence, where all men are
created equally.
In my home state of Texas, the Republican platform now actually
advocates repealing the Voter`s Rights Act. This is a group of people that
fundamentally believe not all Americans have the right to vote. And they
have to --
SCHULTZ: Susan, what about that?
SUSAN DEL PERCIO, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Well, it`s not true. First
of all, there`s a lot of Republicans that believe that everyone should have
the right to vote. I don`t know what this man was doing when he said that.
Frankly, it was not the wisest thing that he could do politically. It`s
almost as ridiculous as the conspiracy theory that Nancy Pelosi says that
the reason Issa is going after Fast and Furious is because it`s all about
voter ID.
SCHULTZ: Well, he has done a good job of voter suppression.
DEL PERCIO: It`s not about that. And there`s a lot of states out
there who are saying, there`s nothing wrong with requiring ID. You have to
have ID to take out a library book. Now I realize the one in Pennsylvania
that we`re talking about, the idea of having a photo ID that has to be
current or has to have an expiration date, that does seem like it goes too
far.
ARI MELBER, "THE NATION": I think the big issue here, and the reason
why this is bigger than a political gaffe is when the Supreme Court said
that voter ID was OK in 2008, they said that it was only OK if the main
goal was not partisan. It was only OK --
SCHULTZ: So does that sound bite violate the law?
MELBER: What it does give people who want to challenge these laws
another hook. That particular time in 2008 was about Indiana. And even
though it was a party line vote, they said it looked like there were many
reasons and it would be OK if partisanship was but one. Here when you have
a leader of a party saying this law is to elect their party member, that`s
a legal problem now.
HOGUE: Ed, you have Michigan on the precipice of passing a similar
law which would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters. We`re
looking at a party where the ends justify the means. This is positively
anti-American.
SCHULTZ: Susan, seven out of 20 voter suppression states happen to be
swing states. Coincidence?
DEL PERCIO: Well, let`s face it, there is -- clearly, there is
politics. And there was politics in the decision that Ari just mentioned.
So it goes throughout. But at the end of the day, things need to be, I
agree, more reasonable. But at the same time, there`s nothing wrong with
having that law.
SCHULTZ: Are you saying the Republicans have gone too far on voter
ID?
DEL PERCIO: I think, in certain circumstances, yes, they have.
Again, like I said, the expiration date on photo IDs, that is going too
far. Or having another solution -- where the Republicans made their
biggest mistake was not doing some kind of sample or some type of audit to
show that there`s cause for concern and then implementing this.
MELBER: If I could briefly say, on the cause for concern, the Supreme
Court, which conservatively upheld the voter ID law, said in that case they
had no evidence of voter fraud in Indiana. Think about that. All this
work, all this --
SCHULTZ: Has there been evidence of voter fraud in Pennsylvania?
HOGUE: They haven`t been able to prove it, no. Absolutely not.
Actually, one of the things you have to understand is this man can say
this and get away with it because there`s been no penalty. Americans for
Prosperity, Koch funded front group, absolutely proven to be providing
misinformation to voters about when they`re supposed to show up to the
polls. They`re still out there acting like a legitimate political group.
We`ve got to expose --
SCHULTZ: Eric Holder looking at a contempt vote in the House on
Thursday. Is it all about voter suppression or is it all about Fast and
Furious?
HOGUE: I think it`s that they see him as one of the few people who
can uphold the law in support of American voters. They won`t stop him.
SCHULTZ: Ari, what do you think?
MELBER: I don`t see a direct link to voter suppression, but I don`t
see a real case, if you look at the history here. I don`t see a real case
for trying to get the Documents that were only about responding to
Congress. They`re on really thin ice. And I think they`re in danger.
(CROSS TALK)
SCHULTZ: It is about Fast and Furious?
DEL PERCIO: Absolutely.
SCHULTZ: Will Democrats support the contempt vote?
DEL PERCIO: I think they`re very concerned. That`s why they started
negotiating again today, because they say up to 30 Democrats are going to
come over and vote for that contempt charge. That will be very damning for
the Democrats and the president.
MELBER: And that may tell you something about gun politics. But all
that would happen with contempt is it would go to the D.C. courts. It
would take longer than the election to get resolved. This is theater.
DEL PERCIO: -- having it be deemed bipartisan is huge in this
political charged environment. There`s nothing that gets done bipartisan.
If you can say there`s a contempt charge against the attorney general,
politically -- I understand. I`m not a lawyer. I don`t play one on TV,
but I can tell you that politically, this would be a mistake.
MELBER: I will tell you briefly, I worked on the Hill, everyone knows
when the NRA says jump, there are bipartisan answers. That doesn`t solve
anything.
SCHULTZ: Ilyse Hogue, Ari Melber, Susan Del Percio, great to have you
with us tonight. Thanks so much.
Coming up, he`s one of the most influential performing artists of our
time. Next, singer Marc Anthony will join me and explain why he`s
supporting President Obama. Stay tuned.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Moments ago, President Obama addressed a very enthusiastic
crowd at a Miami Beach fund-raiser.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You can decide whether
or not it makes sense to stop denying the opportunity of responsible young
people to -- to allow them to stay here and prosper here and get educated
here, just because they`re the children of undocumented immigrants. They
are Americans through and through, except for their papers. I believe it
was the right thing to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: The president needs to support of the Latino community all
across the country. Singer Marc Anthony, a President Obama supporter, is
helping mobilize Latino voters. He performed at the president`s fund-
raiser tonight. Earlier, I spoke with the Grammy award winning artist and
entertainer.
Marc Anthony starts his 15-city tour in Miami on August 2nd. Here`s
part of our conversation.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SCHULTZ: If you could give us a sense of the enthusiasm in the Latino
community for President Obama, is it real?
ANTHONY: It is absolutely real. And I think that, you know -- and my
support is real. I have been representing the Latino community all my
life, being a Puerto Rican descent. And to think about what he`s been able
to accomplish in the past -- during his administration is just
unbelievable. And to me, he is us.
You know, I think there are a lot of -- there are a lot of
similarities. We have a lot in common as a community, you know. There`s a
lot that he understands. And what he`s been able to accomplish, when you
think about Sonia Sotomayor as a justice, the secretary of labor, what he`s
been able to do as far as Iraq is concerned -- the face of America is
finally being recognized, especially after the last Census, knowing that we
have almost 60 million Latinos here.
So we see him as one of us. If you think of it, the son of immigrants
coming with a dream, and educated himself. Like I said before, if you
think about some of the greatest success stories here in America, they have
been the sons and daughters of immigrants. And all they had was a dream
and an education, which is very, very important to me.
I lived it. So I`m a product of that. So we support him because we
understand his story. We understand what he`s been able to accomplish,
considering what he stepped into.
SCHULTZ: Marc, how important is the Latino vote going to be in
November?
ANTHONY: I think the Latino vote is going to make all the difference.
I think that we`re a community that -- we sort of feel like we`re being
recognized for the first time in many ways. And you know, once you
activate -- activate them, I think 60 million is a big number to contend
with.
You know, so -- so we get it. I`m here to support him wholeheartedly.
And speaking to him personally, he has assured me and reassured me of how
important it is. He listens more than he speaks because he wants to learn
as much as he can. And I have always walked away with a sense that it is
extremely important to him.
And so I think we can make all the difference in the world. I`m here
to support -- support him, and in any way, shape, or form I can. And it`s
an honor to. I`ll be with him in a little bit. And I just hope he
practices the salsa.
SCHULTZ: He does sing pretty well. Marc Anthony, thanks for your
time tonight. I appreciate it so much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHULTZ: Coming up, the dilemma over natural disasters. Two states
need help right now. But Mitt Romney says they`re on their own. Find out
why next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: And in the big finish tonight, thousands of firefighters
will spend another night trying to contain the wildfires just scorching
Colorado`s high country. The weather is dry and the wind is still gusting.
More than 10,000 people have evacuated their homes. The fires have
blackened at least 90,000 acres.
But so far, no one has been hurt. It`s amazing. The number of
firefighters and the amount of equipment required to fight these fires is
absolutely staggering. Colorado simply could not do it alone. The
military brought in four specialized C-130 aircraft; 1,400 Forest Service
workers are battling the flames in shifts. The Department of Interior sent
an extra 500 firefighters.
That`s on top of Colorado`s local resources. Then there`s the money.
FEMA is releasing grants to pay 75 percent of the state`s firefightering
costs. At the same time, Florida is getting soaked by Tropical Storm
Debby. The storm has already dumped more than 20 inches of rain in parts
of the state. Forecasters expect another 10 inches of rain when Debby
crosses the Peninsula.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Over 58 years, I have never seen it this high.
Even with the hurricane, a real hurricane.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: People who lived here all their lives, they have
never seen the water up across the road right here.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Debby is going to cost big bucks. The storm has already
shut down 18 percent of the Gulf`s oil output. The National Guard is on
standby. Governor Rick Scott thinks every county in his state will be
effected. But Mitt Romney thinks the states should deal with these
disasters on their own. He`s proposing deep cuts to FEMA.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROMNEY: Every time you have an occasion to take something from the
federal government and send it back to the states, that`s the right
direction.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: By the way, both Colorado and Florida have Republican
governors. Both of them are coordinating with FEMA to help the people of
their states tonight.
Joining us tonight is Harold Schaitberger with the International
Association of Firefighters, the president of that organization. Mr.
Schaitberger, good to have you with us tonight.
HAROLD SCHAITBERGER, PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
FIREFIGHTERS: Good to be with you.
SCHULTZ: You bet. We have a couple examples about how federal
funding is vital. How important do you think federal funding is for fire
departments across the country?
SCHAITBERGER: Well, it`s critical, Ed. It`s critical in two
different ways. First of all, as you mentioned, these wildfires,
hurricanes, floods, Katrina, all of the natural disasters which really
require extraordinary resources and response, part of the federal
government`s responsibility is to secure our homeland. And so it`s not
just a local government responsibility. It`s part of the whole network of
providing protection and response to our citizens in times of natural or
manmade disasters.
On the other hand, it is also, as your earlier segment showed, the
federal government`s responsibility in deep economic troubled times to
insure that the government is able to provide the essential services that
our founding government is really based on. Keep our streets safe, respond
to people in their most difficult of times, as well as educate our
children.
It`s a government responsibility. And the federal government has a
role in terrible economic times to help assure that we keep enough
firefighters on the line to respond to what is increased incidents in time
-- in difficult economic times.
SCHULTZ: If we take Mitt Romney at his word, we`re going to be
cutting spending to FEMA at the worst possible time?
SCHAITBERGER: First of all, he has made that clear. He also made it
very clear that he thinks the SAFER Grants, which you referred to earlier,
which has been able to put thousands of firefighters back on the line,
which is there to help cities like Detroit, which is right now on the verge
of losing 164 firefighters -- Philadelphia, 160 firefighters down, eight
companies lost. Places like Camden, New Jersey, and Falls River,
Massachusetts, Muncie, Indiana -- cities all across this country where they
have been losing firefighters, putting our citizens at risk, our
neighborhoods at risk, and our federal government is there to help shore
that up, to bridge these economic difficult times.
And Mitt Romney says no, the federal government has no role or
responsibility in providing resources and help to our localities, which is
exactly what he did when he was the governor of Massachusetts. He cut
local aid every year for four years, and put scores of communities into
deep, deep trouble, places like Lawrence, Massachusetts, and Springfield,
Massachusetts, and places that were unable to maintain the essential
services that a community and the citizens expect and deserve.
SCHULTZ: You mentioned Detroit, as we covered earlier in this
broadcast tonight. What`s the solution there?
SCHAITBERGER: Well, first of all, the solution is understanding that
the basic responsibility of government is to keep their citizens safe. And
even in these difficult economic times, is to look for ways and look for
the programs that are there to assist the city. And in fact, that`s what
we`re doing through the SAFER Program; 1.3 billion dollars, 13,000
firefighters.
SCHULTZ: Mr. Schaitberger, great to have you with us tonight. Thanks
so much.
SCHAITBERGER: Always good to be with you.
SCHULTZ: You bet.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END
Copyright 2012 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
The Ed Show for Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Read the transcript to the Tuesday show