Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> WELCOME BACK TO THE
"DIALOGUE" WEB EXTRA.
I'M MARCIA FRANKLIN.
HERE WITH GROVER NORQUIST, IN
IDAHO TALKING ABOUT IMMIGRATION
ISSUES.
HE IS IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
THAT WOULD PROVIDE A PATH TO
CITIZENSHIP FOR THE ESTIMATED
11 MILLION UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE
IN OUR COUNTRY AS WELL AS MORE
VISAS FOR FOREIGN-BORN WORKERS
AND INCREASED ENFORCEMENT AT
THE BORDERS.
SO, WHAT HAS CHANGED DO YOU
THINK?
WHAT IS THE TIPPING POINT OR
SOME OF THE TIPPING POINTS, IF
YOU WILL BETWEEN WHAT WE SAW A
FEW YEARS AGO AND ACTUALLY
BEFORE THAT WHEN SENATOR CRAIG
FROM IDAHO WAS WORKING VERY
*** THIS ISSUE ACROSS PARTY
LINES?
WHAT'S CHANGED THAT THEIR NOW
SEEMS TO BE A MOMENTUM,
COALITION BUILDING BETWEEN SOME
RELATIVELY ODD BED FELLOWS --
>> YEARS AGO I WORKED WITH
SENATOR CRAIG ON THIS ISSUE TO
MORE FORWARD, PARTICULARLY FARM
WORKERS.
2007, BUSH, PRESIDENT BUSH
TRIED TO MOVE FORWARD
IMMIGRATION COMPREHENSIVE
REFORM.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE FELLOW
WHO WALKED INTO THE ROOM AND
KILLED THE BILL WAS BARACK
OBAMA.
HERE IS THE AMENDMENT THAT I
WILL PUT IN AT THE REQUEST OF
THE AFLCIO AND SENATOR REID SO
THAT YOU KNOW THAT THE PROJECT
IS DEAD.
AND NOW BARACK OBAMA AS
PRESIDENT SAYING HE WILL SIGN
THE BILL.
GUEST WORKER PROGRAM.
UNIONS FOR 50 YEARS DEAD SET
AGAINST IMMIGRATION, BROADER
IMMIGRATION, AND NOW
TENTATIVELY FOR --
>> WHAT CHANGED?
WHAT CHANGED FROM THAT PIECE OF
IT?
>> DEMOCRATIC PARTY BECAME
IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO KEEP
BLAMING THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
FOR NOT HAVING WELFARE REFORM
BECAUSE FOR TWO YEARS, IN 2009
AND 2010 DEMOCRATS HAD THE
HOUSE, SENATE, PRESIDENT AND
THEY DID NOTHING ON WELFARE
REFORM.
THEY COULD HAVE PASSED IT LIKE
THIS.
THEY --
>> DID I SAY WELFARE --
IMMIGRATION REFORM.
AND THEY CHOSE NOT TO.
HEY, HEY, WHAT IS GOING ON?
THEY HAVE TO ANSWER TO HISPANIC
AMERICAN COMMUNITY.
ON THE REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVE
SIDE, A COUPLE OF SHIFTS.
ONE OF THE -- ROMAN CATHOLIC
CHURCH AND MORMON CHURCH ALWAYS
VERY PRO IMMIGRATION, PRO
IMMIGRANT.
BUT THIS TIME AROUND, SOUTHERN
BAPTIST CONVENTION, YOU WOULD
THINK OF AS THE MOST
CONSERVATIVE CHURCH GROUP IN
THE COUNTRY, ONE OF THE
LARGEST, THE LARGEST CHURCH
GROUP IN THE COUNTRY, VERY
SUPPORTIVE OF COMPREHENSIVE
IMMIGRATION REFORM.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
EVANGELICALS, PARALLEL TO THE
SOUTHERN BAPTIST --
>> WHY IS THAT?
>> LOOKED OVER -- READING THE
BIBLE AND WHAT THE BIBLE SAID
ABOUT THE STRANGER AND MADE IT
VERY CLEAR THAT THIS IS A
THEOLOGICAL IMPERATIVE,
RELIGIOUS IMPERATIVE.
THEY UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS GOOD
FOR THE ECONOMY, BUT THAT IS
NOT WHY THEY'RE DOING IT.
THEY THINK THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE
CALLED TO DO.
ALSO, THEY KNOW MORE HISPANICS,
ABOUT A THIRD OF HISPANICS PART
OF CHURCHES THESE DAYS, ACTIVE
IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND
ACTIVE IN THE MORMON CHURCH.
THEY'RE PART OF THE FAITH
COMMUNITIES.
NOW THEY KNOW SOMEBODY IN
ADDITION TO HAVING AN
UNDERSTANDING.
THAT HAS BEEN A HUGE SHIFT
WITHIN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
THE SALEM COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK, BIGGEST COMMUNICATION
NETWORK IN THE COUNTRY -- ADD
TO THAT, THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY, WHICH WAS SILENT IN
2000 WHEN THEY TOLD ME AND
OTHERS THIS IS OUR TOP
PRIORITY.
MOST IMPORTANT -- BIGGEST
PROBLEM, BIGGEST ISSUISSUE, BUT
THEY DIDN'T PUSH IT --
>> BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN
ADMITTING THAT THEY HIRE
UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE?
>> THEY HAD NEVER DONE IT
BEFORE.
THEY DIDN'T KNOW IF THEY WERE
ALLOWED TO.
IT WASN'T THAT THEY -- THEY
KNEW HOW TO BE FOR LOWER TAXES
AND -- AND THAT IS WHAT THEY
HAD ALWAYS DONE.
ALL OF THE SUDDEN A NEW ISSUE,
COMPLETELY NEW TO THEM.
THEY WERE NOT SURE THAT THEY
WERE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE DEBATE.
YOU COULD SEE THE STRUGGLE.
2007, THEY WERE ON THE RIGHT
SIDE OF THE ISSUE IN TERMS OF
SUPPORTING IMMIGRATION REFORM,
BUT THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE
CAPACITY TO.
THIS TIME AROUND, STATE
CHAMBERS ARE TAKING THE LEAD,
NATIONAL CHAMBER IS TAKING THE
LEAD, ADVERTISEMENT AND
COMMUNICATING --
>> BECAUSE --
>> BECAUSE THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY RECOGNIZES THAT THEY
NEED THIS TALENT.
THEY DON'T LIKE TO BE ACCUSED
OF BREAKING THE LAW WHEN THEY
HIRE SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT A
CITIZEN.
>> AND IT IS A GROWING MARKET,
TOO, FOR PRODUCT.
>> CERTAINLY.
SO, ALL OF THAT IS GOING ON.
BUSINESS COMMUNITY WANTS TO SEE
THIS FIXED.
RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY WHO WANTS
TO SEE IT FIXED AND YOU HAVE A
LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY,
BIBLES, BADGES, AND BUSINESS.
THE BADGES, POLICE, I DID AN
EVENT IN AUSTIN, TEXAS, WITH
THE CHIEF OF POLICE OF AUSTIN,
HISPANIC AMERICAN, TALKING
ABOUT I WANT TO BE ABLE TO
ARREST THAT GUY.
I DON'T WANT TO GO AROUND
BOTHERING PEOPLE WHO ARE
WALKING TO WORK, OKAY.
IF WE HAVE TO FIGHT CRIME, WE
NEED TO MAKE LEGAL -- THE GOOD
PEOPLE SO THAT WE CAN FIGHT AND
BE SERIOUS ABOUT GOING AFTER
BAD PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO BREAK
REAL LAWS AND STEAL STUFF.
>> THERE ARE STILL PEOPLE,
THOUGH, WHO EITHER OPPOSE THE
LEGISLATION FOR CERTAIN THINGS
IN IT OR THEY ARE -- THEY ARE
WORRIED THAT WE MIGHT CALL THEM
MORE NATIVE OR CONCERNED ABOUT
THE CHANGES IN OUR POPULATION.
PUSH ENGLISH ONLY, THINGS LIKE
THAT.
SO, IT IS NOT AS IF THE
ANTI-IMMIGRATION PEOPLE HAVE
JUST DISSIPATED AND GONE AWAY.
AND, IN FACT, THEY --
COMBINATION OF THOSE
INDIVIDUALS AND THE PEOPLE WHO
POINT AT VARIOUS PIECES OF
LEGISLATION COULD --
>> IT IS STILL POSSIBLE TO MESS
UP AND NOT GET ACROSS THE
FINISH LINE.
WHAT IS INTERESTING,
OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE
SENATE WANTS IT TO PASS.
EVEN INCLUDING SOME PEOPLE WHO
VOTE NO BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT
QUITE WHERE THEIR CONSTITUENTS
ARE.
THEY HEAR A RINGING IN THEIR
EAR FROM A TALK SHOW HOST AND
YOU CAN ALWAYS -- YOU CAN'T GET
IN TROUBLE VOTING NO ON A BILL
THAT PASSES.
BECAUSE IT PASSED.
AND EVERYBODY WANTED IT TO
HAPPEN.
AND THE CRITICS GO OH, THANK
YOU FOR -- CAN NEVER GET IN
TROUBLE VOTING AGAINST A BILL
THAT PASSES.
WHO IS GOING TO BE MAD AT YOU?
SO, THERE IS SOME -- IN THE
SENATE, WHAT IS REALLY THERE IN
TERMS OF THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO
SEE IT PASSED.
SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN THE
HOUSE, THE QUESTION IS WHETHER
THAT GETS ACROSS THE FINISH
LINE.
I THINK IT WILL, BECAUSE THE
BUSINESS COMMUNITY WANTS IT,
THE COMMUNITIES OF FAITH WANT
IT, LAW ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE WANT
IT.
ALL OF THE FREE MARKET
ECONOMISTS CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT.
YOU'RE RIGHT, THERE ARE PEOPLE
AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN IN THE
UNITED STATES, WHO ARE SCARED
OF THE OTHER.
THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T WANT
IRISH AMERICANS TO COME.
THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T WANT
CHINESE AMERICANS TO COME OR
JAPANESE AMERICANS TO COME.
THE PEOPLE WHO THOUGHT THE JEWS
HAD LOW I.Q.S AND DIDN'T WANT
THEM IN FROM EASTERN EUROPE.
THERE WERE -- ALL OF THE NASTY
RHETORIC THAT YOU HEAR IS SO
MUTED COMPARED TO OUR HISTORY.
THE GOOD NEWS IS HOW LITTLE
THERE IS OF THAT.
IT IS STILL THERE, SADLY.
BUT IT IS NOT WORKING.
>> YOU ARE APPROACHING THIS AS
YOU STUMP AROUND THE COUNTRY --
IS THERE SOMETHING IN YOUR OWN
LIFE THAT INFORMED YOU ON THIS
ISSUE THAT MAKES YOU PASSIONATE
ABOUT IT?
YOU KNOW, YOU SAYING THAT YOU
DON'T LIKE TO SEE PEOPLE TALK
ABOUT THE OTHER.
>> PART OF BEING AN AMERICAN.
>> PART OF BEING AN AMERICAN.
>> YES.
>> RECOGNIZE --
>> THE IMPORTANCE OF
IMMIGRATION.
THE CHALLENGES -- OTHER
COUNTRIES DON'T DO IT.
OTHER COUNTRIES DON'T
UNDERSTAND IT.
WE DO.
IT MAKES US DIFFERENT.
>> AND YOU ARE MARRIED TO A
PALESTINIAN WOMAN --
>> SHE IS AN IMMIGRANT.
>> SHE IS AN IMMIGRANT.
DOES THAT HELP INFORM YOUR
THOUGHTS ON HOW WE TREAT WHAT
SOME MIGHT VIEW AS THE OTHER --
>> YEAH, ACTUALLY NOT -- I WAS
THERE BEFORE.
>> YOU WERE THERE BEFORE YOU
MET HER.
YEAH.
IT IS INTERESTING HOW WHEN YOU
GOOGLE YOUR NAME, OF COURSE
WHAT COMES UP FIRST IS THE
PLEDGE, YOUR NAME, AND THEN THE
TAX PLEDGE.
NOT FAR AFTER THAT, IT SAYS
GROVER NORQUIST MUSLIM, GROVER
NORQUIST -- ALL OF THIS -- TO
THE FACT THAT YOU ARE MARRIED
TO A PALESTINIAN --
>> BUT THAT IS JUST -- I HAVE
WORKED THROUGHOUT MY LIFE
ALWAYS DOING OUTREACH WITHIN
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.
WE HELP GET THE -- ENDORSE
REAGAN BACK IN THE 80s --
REACHING OUT TO THAT COMMUNITY
IS IMPORTANT.
WORKED THE -- I -- SOUTH ASIAN
COMMUNITY, IN TERMS OF DOING
OUTREACH WITH THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY.
MUSLIM AMERICAN COMMUNITY.
SO, IT IS JUST SOMETHING THAT I
HAVE ALWAYS DONE.
>> AND CLOSE TO YOU YOU CAN
TELL.
IMPORTANT TO YOU.
RAND PAUL, WHO I ASSUME YOU
SHARE VIEWS WITH ON OTHER
ISSUES HAS SAID THIS IS DEAD ON
ARRIVAL IN THE HOUSE.
AND BOEHNER HAS SAID I'M NOT
GOING TO VIOLATE THE RULE --
NOT EVEN GOING FORWARD WITH
IT -- ALL TALK, ALL RHETORIC?
>> TWO THINGS.
RAND PAUL HAD A PROPOSAL ON
BORDER SECURITY HE THOUGHT
SOLVED PROBLEMS, ALL OF THE
LEGITIMATE PROBLEMS THAT PEOPLE
HAVE AND THE CHALLENGE -- THE
CONCERN IS THAT THAT COULD BE
GAINED PERHAPS IN THE FUTURE
AND SOME PEOPLE DIDN'T LIKE IT.
HE FELT HE HAD HIS AMENDMENT
WHICH WORKED AND IT DIDN'T GO.
DIDN'T VOTE FOR THE BILL.
HE HAS ALWAYS MADE IT CLEAR HE
WANTED COMPREHENSIVE
IMMIGRATION REFORM.
HE IS NOT ONE OF THESE GUYS
TRYING TO STOP THE BILL.
HE IS TRYING TO HELP MAKE THE
BILL WORK.
>> FREE MARKET --
>> YES, FREE MARKET GUY.
I THINK HIS PERSPECTIVE IS GO
TO THE HOUSE AND SEE WHETHER
THE HOUSE MIGHT LIKE HIS
APPROACH.
THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO
THE BORDER.
WHAT THEY CAME OUT WITH NOW
INCREASES THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE
AT THE BORDER AND PEOPLE FELT
COMFORTABLE WITH THAT.
RAND PAUL APPROACH MIGHT BE
ACCEPTABLE AT SOME POINT, TOO,
BY SOME PEOPLE.
I UNDERSTAND RAND, AGAIN,
MOVING TO MAKE THE BILL HAPPEN.
WHEN THEY DIDN'T GO WITH HIS
APPROACH, HE SAID I CAN'T
SUPPORT IT AT THIS POINT.
HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE HIS
APPROACH TAKEN PERHAPS IN THE
HOUSE.
SO, AND BOEHNER'S POSITION -- I
THINK HE WOULD CLEARLY LIKE TO
SEE COMPREHENSIVE PASS.
YOU NEVER SAY TO REPUBLICANS IN
THE HOUSE, GUYS IN THE SENATE
PASSED SOMETHING, LET'S JUST
SWALLOW IT.
EVEN IF BOTH RUN BY THE SAME
PARTY.
HOUSE DOESN'T REFER TO THE
SENATE, VICE VERSA.
THE HOUSE WILL TAKE THE SENATE
BILL, TOUCH IT, POKE IT, FIDDLE
WITH IT, AND MAYBE EVEN COME UP
WITH SOMETHING COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT AND THEN MUSH THE TWO
TOGETHER.
>> THROUGHOUT THIS WEB EXTRA
CONVERSATION AND IN THE MAIN
PROGRAM, YOU HAVE BEEN TALKING
ABOUT THE VALUE OF COMPROMISE
ON AN ISSUE LIKE THIS.
YOU ARE GOING TO WIN SOME, LOSE
SOME.
MAYBE ON E-VERIFY YOU ARE NOT
AS COMFORTABLE.
SOME PEOPLE ARE NOT AS
COMFORTABLE ON THE BORDER
ISSUE.
YOU ARE KNOWN AS A 100% GUY ON
THE TAX ISSUE.
IT IS BLACK AND IT'S WHITE --
>> CIRCLE --
>> PEOPLE SCRATCHING THEIR
HEADS, IS THIS THE SAME GUY WHO
IS -- HAS BEEN CALLED THE DARK
WIZARD --
>> ANTITAX CULT --
>> RIGHT.
AND ALL OF THE SUDDEN HE IS
WORKING ACROSS THE TABLE AND
COMPROMISING.
>> I WORK ACROSS WITH DEMOCRATS
ALL OF THE TIME ON LIBERTY
ISSUES.
AND --
>> GUANTANAMO FOR INSTANCE.
>> YEAH, WHOLE QUESTION OF A
NATIONAL I.D. CARD.
I USED TO WORK REGULARLY WITH
ALL -- ACLU AND -- ALWAYS
WILLING TO COMPROMISE ON THE
ROAD TO LIBERTY.
SO, THIS BILL MAKES US FREER AT
EVERY LEVEL.
MAKES THE BORDER MORE SECURE.
IT ALLOWS PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE
TO LIVE IN PEACE AND NOT IN THE
SHADOWS.
IT MAKES US WEALTHIER, MORE
SUCCESSFUL ECONOMICALLY.
GIVES PEOPLE MORE OPTIONS.
BRINGS MORE PEOPLE INTO THE
COUNTRY.
AND MAKES FREEDOM STRONGER.
I WOULD ARGUE -- I LIKE THIS
BETTER THAN THAT.
OR I WOULD LIKE MORE OF THIS,
LESS OF THAT.
BUT IT IS ALL A QUESTION OF HOW
FAR YOU'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT
DIRECTION.
>> AND THAT YOU'RE CONFIDENT
THAT THIS WILL NOT IN THE END
RESULT IN HIGHER TAXES AND IN
ORDER TO PAY FOR A LARGE
BUREAUCRACY, DESPITE THE
HERITAGE FOUNDATION AND OTHER
CONSERVATIVES, THAT THIS WILL
NOT RESULT IN HIGHER TAXES BUT
INSTEAD RESULT IN HIGHER
REVENUE.
>> YES, HIGHER REVENUE, NOT
HIGHER TAXES BECAUSE MORE
PEOPLE ARE WORKING.
THE FORMER HEAD OF THE
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
ESTIMATES THAT IT WILL INCREASE
REVENUES, NOT TAXES, BUT
REVENUES TO .7 TRILLION --
>> FOR SOMETHING YOU DIDN'T
LIKE WOULD YOU --
>> HE IS A FREE MARKET
ECONOMIST.
HE USED TO RUN THE CBO.
CBO ITSELF DID AN ANALYSIS OF
NOT THE NEXT 10 YEARS, THEY DID
20 YEARS, THEY SAID THIS IS A
NET REVENUE INCREASE.
MORE PEOPLE --
>> HERITAGE FOUNDATION RECORD
IS -- HIS OWN STUDY, LOOKED OUT
50 YEARS, AND SAID IT IS GOING
TO BE MORE OF A BURDEN ON OUR
SOCIETY FOR ALL OF THESE
PEOPLE --
>> THERE HASN'T BEEN IN THE
HISTORY OF STUDY.
EVERY FREE MARKET GROUP IN
WASHINGTON, D.C., HAS LOOKED AT
THAT AND SAID AMONG OTHER
THINGS IT IS NOT A STUDY OF THE
BILL.
IT IS A STUDY OF A IMAGINARY
BILL THEY DON'T LIKE.
HALF OF THE COSTS, THINGS THAT
ARE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY
ANYWAY.
I'M NOT WORRY ABOUT THE BILL
THAT FAILED -- HUDSON, EVERY
FREE MARKET GROUP HAS LOOKED AT
THAT AND EXPLAINED WHY IT IS
FLAWED AND PUT OUT THEIR OWN
ANALYSIS, WHAT IS BEING
DISCUSSED IN THE GANG OF EIGHT,
NOW THE SENATE'S PROPOSAL WILL
BE GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY, AND
GOOD FOR TAXPAYERS AS WELL.
>> I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DID
NOT ASK YOU ABOUT THE TAX
PLEDGE, ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE,
FISCAL LANDCAPE THAT WE'RE IN
RIGHT NOW.
THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF
POLITICAL WATCHERS SAYING, YOU
KNOW, PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO
DEFECT FROM THE PLEDGE.
BOB CORKER -- THAT YEARS FROM
NOW PEOPLE WILL NOT HOLD TO
THIS PLEDGE AND YOU JOKED ABOUT
IT AND SAID HAVING IMPURE
THOUGHTS.
THEY'RE NOT REALLY GOING TO
FOLLOW THROUGH.
THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE,
SENATOR -- FROM WYOMING BEING
ONE OF THEM --
>> FORMER SENATOR --
>> RETIRED.
>> RETIRED SENATOR, STILL VERY
INVOLVED IN THE ISSUES SAYING
IT IS A GIMMICK AND STALLING
PROGRESS -- YOU KNOW, PEOPLE
SHOULDN'T BE BEHOLDEN TO IT.
>> OKAY.
HERE IS THE GOOD NEWS.
SOMEBODY COULD HAVE THOUGHT
THAT YEARS AGO.
I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE WE HAVE TO
RAISE TAXES IN ORDER TO GET A
BUDGET REDUCTION DEAL.
AND SOME PEOPLE THOUGHT THAT.
HE WROTE A PUBLIC LETTER TO ME,
AS HE WENT INTO NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE GANG OF SIX AND SAID I
WILL NEVER VOTE FOR A TAX
INCREASE.
NEVER.
WON'T HAPPEN.
AND THEN GOT SUCKED INTO
IMAGINING TAX INCREASES AND --
AND TOTALLY AT THE TIME, HE
SAID, YOU KNOW, I HOPE YOU ARE
RIGHT THAT WE CAN CUT THE
BUDGET WITHOUT RAISING TAXES
BUT I DON'T THINK WE CAN DO
THAT.
BUT I HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT.
GOOD NEWS IS IN 2011, WE HAVE
$2.5 TRILLION REDUCTION IN THE
DEFICIT.
$2.5 REDUCTION IN SPENDING.
NOT ONE OF THESE PHONY SPENDING
CUTS, THERE IS A CAP ON
SPENDING AND A SEQUESTER TO
BRING THE CAP DOWN.
NOT A DOLLAR OF TAX INCREASE.
AND NOT TO SAY I TOLD YOU SO,
HOWEVER, I TOLD THEM.
OKAY.
I SAID IF YOU HAVE TAX
INCREASES ON THE TABLE, 82, 90,
TAX INCREASES AND NOT SEE A
PENNY OF SPENDING CUT.
THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE.
IF YOU INSIST NO TAX INCREASE,
YOU CAN GET TO SPENDING CUTS.
SO, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT
HAPPENED.
AND WE NOW KNOW IF YOU PUT A
TAX INCREASE INSIDE A BUDGET
BILL, BY PUTTING A PIRANHA IN
THE GOLD FISH BOWL, YOU END UP
WITH NO GOLD FISH.
TAX INCREASE IN SPENDING
CUTS --
>> FOLKS LIKE SENATOR CRAPO AND
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE SIMPSON
FROM IDAHO COMING TO THE TABLE
AND SAYING, IN NEGOTIATIONS,
EXTRA REVENUE SHOULD BE ON THE
TABLE.
>> HAVE A NEGOTIATION, WE WON.
WE DON'T EVER HAVE TO TALK TO
THE PRESIDENT AGAIN AS LONG AS
HE IS PRESIDENT ON SPENDING
QUESTIONS --
>> YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE
IMMEDIATE SITUATION.
I'M JUST --
>> 10 YEARS.
NOW, THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS
THERE IS A BUDGET DEAL THAT IS
WRITTEN DOWN.
NOT ONE OF THESE IMAGINARY
BUDGET DEALS, THE RYAN PLAN,
AND IT TAKES SPENDING --
PRESENT SITUATION.
IF WE GO WITH OBAMA'S GAME
PLAN, WE END UP WITH 40% OF
GDP -- 2050.
>> THAT IS THE FUTURE --
>> ACCEPTED BY ALL OF THE
REPUBLICANS.
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT AND
REPUBLICAN SENATE PASSED THE
RYAN PLAN.
SOLVES ALL OF THE PROBLEMS.
IT IS NOT AS IF WE DON'T HAVE A
WRITTEN DOWN BUDGET PLAN TO
HANDLE -- WE DO.
WE JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
REPUBLICANS IN THE SENATE,
REPUBLICANS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.
THE GOOD NEWS FOR LIMITED
GOVERNMENT, THE PLEDGE HAS
HELD.
STOPPED THEM FROM RAISING TAXES
INSTEAD OF CUTTING THE BUDGET.
GOT THE BUDGET CUTS.
NOW JUST HOLD THE SEQUESTER AND
IN 2016 AND 2020, REPUBLICAN
HOUSE SENATE PRESIDENT SOLVE
ALL OF THE PROBLEMS.
>> FIVE-YEAR-OLD, AND
FOUR-YEAR-OLD, AND SEE IF THEY
CAN UNRAVEL THINGS.
NICE TALKING WITH YOU.
>> GOOD TALKING WITH YOU.
>> HAVE A SAFE TRIP.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
YOU HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO
GROVER NORQUIST, THE HEAD OF
AMERICAN FOR TAX REFORM IN
IDAHO TO TALK ABOUT IMMIGRATION
ISSUES STOPPED IN TO DO THIS
SHOW AND ALSO THIS WEB EXTRA.
THANK YOU FOR TUNING IN.