Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
bjbjLULU JUDY WOODRUFF: And to the race for the White House, shaping up to be an expensive
general election battle. President Obama's reelection campaign reversed its stance against
super PACs late yesterday, encouraging contributors to donate money to a group, Priorities USA
Action, run by former administration staffers. "With so much at stake, we can't allow for
two sets of rules in this election, whereby the Republican nominee is the beneficiary
of unlimited spending and Democrats unilaterally disarm," wrote Obama campaign manager Jim
Messina in a blog post. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: It's time to put strict limits . . . JUDY
WOODRUFF: In his 2010 State of the Union address, President Obama had criticized the Supreme
Court ruling wiping away limits on corporate and labor union giving. The shift by the Obama
team comes as super PACs backing Republican candidates and causes have seized an early
financial advantage. Groups supporting Republican presidential candidates had raised more than
34 million dollars combined by the end of last year. Another conservative super PAC,
American Crossroads, has hauled in more than $18 million. By contrast, the pro-Obama PAC
has brought in less than $5 million. But the president's own campaign has received more
money than all the GOP contenders combined. The administration's change of heart also
comes on a day when Republicans are voting in three more states and as the leading GOP
candidate, Mitt Romney, continues to lambaste President Obama's record. And for more on
the president's reelection bid, we turn to his senior campaign strategist, David Axelrod.
David, thank you very much for joining us. First, on this reversal . . . DAVID AXELROD,
Senior Obama Campaign Strategist: Happy to be with you. JUDY WOODRUFF: . . . on whether
to encourage your donors to give money to the so-called super PACs, does this mean you
don't think you can win this election based on the contributions of ordinary Americans?
DAVID AXELROD: Well, no. We certainly appreciate the contributions of ordinary Americans -- 1.3
million people have donated to the president's campaign, most of them in small contributions,
98 percent of them in small contributions. And we appreciate that. What we're looking
at, though, Judy, is something we have never seen before, something unleashed by that Supreme
Court ruling. And we ve seen massive amounts of money coming in to these super PACs. And
by our estimate and by their own estimate, they intend to spend upwards of half-a-billion
dollars, above and beyond what the Republican nominee and the Republican National Committee
is going to spend in this election. And faced with that, you know, we had to act. The president
believes deeply that these super PACs are an unwelcome development in our politics and
is going to continue to try and find ways to reform them, up to and including a constitutional
amendment. But right now, these are the rules, and the question is, are we going to have
two sets of rules or are we going to have one set of rules? And we couldn't sit -- we
simply couldn't sit by and allow $500 million, $600 million, $700 million of negative ads
be run against us, with no one on the other side responding. JUDY WOODRUFF: But it was
pretty clear from the outset that this was going to be the case, a lot of money was going
to be raised. That being the case, why didn't the president stick -- I mean, he clearly
felt so strongly about this. Why did he change his mind? DAVID AXELROD: Judy, I don't think
anybody had an idea of just how much money these super PACs were going to raise. And
now, you know, we see the reality of it. They ve spent more money than all the Republican
candidates in these primaries, over $40 million, and 99 percent of it on negative ads. And
that was a little preview. That was the appetizer. You know, we're the entree. And they're going
to spend multiples of that to try and defeat the president. And it is simply -- it is not
wise and it's not right for us to sit by with our hands tied behind our back and allow that,
the election to be hijacked by these groups. JUDY WOODRUFF: Let me ask you about the economy.
There was a good report that came out last Friday on jobs, the unemployment rate. But
a number of respected economists say they don't expect that trend to continue. Are you,
in effect, David Axelrod, sort of held hostage every month to these unemployment numbers?
DAVID AXELROD: Well, first of all, let's stipulate that the most important thing isn't our link
to the unemployment rate, but to, you know, how the American people are experiencing this
economy. We're fighting hard to increase ve had 23 straight months of private sector job
growth. That's accelerating. We want to continue to accelerate that because that's good for
our country. And, obviously, you know, it is good for us as well. But -- and in terms
of the economists' projections, I think one thing that we have learned over the course
of these years is that no one really has a crystal ball on these things. And I have seen
more robust projections, less robust. The best thing for us to do is keep our nose to
the grindstone, keep pushing, keep pushing forward and taking the steps we think will
help accelerate the economy. JUDY WOODRUFF: Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts,
still has a primary fight on his hands, but your campaign has pretty much been treating
him as the eventual nominee. What are the strengths that you see in Mitt Romney that
make you assume that he will be? DAVID AXELROD: Well, look, he's been a weak front-runner
from the beginning. He continues to be a weak front-runner. He has far more resources than
anyone else. He's run for president now twice. He s got a national organization. It seems
like the Republican establishment has largely embraced him in this race. So it's logical
to assume that he -- you know, he continues to be a weak front-runner, and that he may
be the nominee of the party. And we're prepared for that. He certainly projects himself that
way. And we ll be prepared for that debate. JUDY WOODRUFF: And in terms of framing the
campaign at this point going forward, your major challenge is what? DAVID AXELROD: Well,
look, we're going to project a positive vision for how we move forward as a country and rebuild,
not just regain the jobs we have lost, but rebuild an economy in which the middle class
is growing, and not shrinking, in which people who work hard can get ahead, in which people
can look forward to a better future for their kids. That's how we measure progress in the
economy. And there is going to be a very distinct difference between the way we approach it
and the way the folks on the other side do, and particularly Gov. Romney, who seems to
believe that, if we just go back to what we were doing and cut taxes for the very wealthy,
cut regulations on Wall Street, that somehow we ll all profit from that and the economy
will grow. Well, we just tested that proposition and it failed. JUDY WOODRUFF: The administration
decision to require religious charities, universities and others, hospitals, to include contraceptives
in the health services they provide has created a huge firestorm in the leadership of the
Catholic Church and other religious leaders. You said earlier today in an interview, David
Axelrod, that the administration would work with these institutions to implement this
policy. What does that mean? Does that mean you're prepared to give them some sort of
an out? DAVID AXELROD: Well, Judy, let's back up and do -- just recite a little history
of how we got to where we are. The Institute of Medicine recommended to the health and
human services secretary, Sebelius, that contraceptive services be part of the package that are in
every woman's insurance package, insurance policy, as preventive care. She added an exemption
for religious institutions, for churches and their employees. The question is, does that
extend to hospitals? Does that extend to universities where many people work who aren't even Catholic?
And do those women get -- essentially don't -- do they get the same rights and the same
privileges as everyone else to that preventive care? And, you know, we believe strongly that
that should be the case. And, in fact, that's the policy in 28 states today. So what we
have said is, we're going to have a year's period of time in which to transition to this.
And that will give us a chance to look at what these others -- how this is implemented
elsewhere, how we can implement it here in the best and fairest way, but certainly advancing
the principle that women deserve access to contraception, and those women, those teachers,
nurses, janitors and so on who work in these institutions deserve access, just like everybody
else. JUDY WOODRUFF: But, very quickly, to clarify, are you saying there may be some
exceptions? DAVID AXELROD: I'm saying that there are models all across the country that
can be emulated, including, by the way, in Massachusetts, which was in place when Gov.
Romney was there, and in Georgia, which has no exemptions, where Speaker Gingrich is from.
These policies have been in place. Half the country has these policies. And we should
be able to learn from that in implementing this and move forward. JUDY WOODRUFF: David
Axelrod, senior strategist to the President Obama re-elect campaign, thanks very much.
DAVID AXELROD: Good to be with you. urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags
State urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags place JUDY WOODRUFF: And to the race for the
White House, shaping up to be an expensive general election battle Normal Microsoft Office
Word JUDY WOODRUFF: And to the race for the White House, shaping up to be an expensive
general election battle Title Microsoft Office Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8