tv The Ed Show MSNBC February 1, 2012 5:00pm-6:00pm PST
this duel will continue and will get more deadly. there is a presidential nomination at stake here and romney is cruising for more bruising. and liberals, believe it or not, are rooting for the newtster. that is "hardball" for now. "the ed show" with ed schultz starts right now. good evening, welcome to "the ed show." defense secretary leon panetta announced the united states will end its combat role in afghanistan in 2013. indiana governor mitch daniels signed the right to work for less into law. this was the scene on capitol hill this afternoon. house republicans had documentary film maker josh fox arrested on capitol hill. i don't know, does this guy look disruptive to you, he joins us for an interview tonight. this is "the ed show," let's get to work. i'm not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net
there. >> mitt romney says he's not concerned about the poor and he's getting hammered for it. except this was not a mistake. we have the proof and we'll talk about with it bob shrum and eugene robinson. >> americans deserve a straight deal right now they are not getting one from our tax system. >> the buffet rule gets its day in the senate. bernie sanders has the details. the fight for workers rights is exploding in arizona. police, firefighters and teachers are under fire in the desert, and we're going there for the latest. on capitol hill the arrest everyone is talking about. >> this is a public hearing. i'm within my first amendment rights. i'm being taken out. >> josh fox was arrested for filming a house committee hearing on fracking. because republicans didn't want him there. tonight, director josh fox joins me exclusively.
good to have you with us tonight folks, thanks for watching. mitt romney won big in florida but still has a major problem connecting with regular folks. his problem got a lot worse today. >> i'm in this case because i care about americans. i'm not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net there, if it needs repair i'll fix it. not concerned about the very rich, they're doing fine. i'm concerned about the very heart of america, the 90, 95% of americans who are struggling, i'll take that message across the nation. >> mitt romney thinks the country has done enough for the very poor in america? this was not a slip of the tongue or any kind of a gaffe. this is what mitt romney really believes. in fact, he has said it many times. >> we ought to provide help to the people who have been hurt most by the obama economy. and that is the middle class. it's not those at the very low end certainly not those at the
high end. >> i'm not worried about rich people they're dog just fine. the a very poor have a safety net. >> in our country the people that need the help most are not the poor who have a safety net, not the rich doing fine but the middle class. >> romney is not worried about the poor so many times on the campaign trail he was surprised when he was asked to clarify his remarks on cnn today. >> you just said i'm not concerned about the very poor because they have a safety net and i think there are lots of very poor americans who are struggling who would say that sounds odd. can you explain that? >> well, you have to finish the sentence, soledad. i'm not concerned about the very poor that have a safety net if it has holes in them i will repair them. the challenge right now, we will hear from the democrat party, the plight of the poor, and there is no question it is not good being poor and we have a safety net to help those that are very poor. but my campaign is focused on middle income americans. my campaign, you can choose
where to focus, focus on the rich, that is not my focus. you can focus on the very poor, that is not my focus. my focus is on middle income americans. >> trying to steal the narrative from the obama camp. romney says he will fix the safety net if there are holes in it? he's going to have to fix a heck of a lot because romney's own policies will demolish the social safety nets. an analysis of his tax proposal clearly shows the poor will see a tax increase under mitt romney. millionaires will see taxes cut by almost 5%. romney fully supports congressman paul ryan's plan to turn medicare in a voucher system and cut medicaid by billions. what about the safety net for people with under water mortgages? any plan? romney is campaigning in the land of bad mortgages in nevada. 1 in 177 housing units is foreclosed on. the highest rate in the nation. ten million americans owe more
money on their homes than they are worth. romney says ah, let them go under. >> don't try to stop the foreclosure process, let it run its course and hit the bottom, allow investors to buy homes, put renters in them, fix the holes up and turn around and come back up. >> where do the people go while they are out of their homes? on the street? you've done enough for the very poor? sure. romney isn't going to focus on the poor because his policies already leave them hanging out to dry. this is a real weak spot for mitt romney and president obama knows it. the president unveiled a mortgage refinancing plan in virginia today. he drew a direct contrast to the front-runner of the republican nomination. >> it is wrong for anybody to suggest that the only option for struggling responsible homeowners is to sit and wait for the housing market to hit bottom. >> the president's plan will never receive approval from republicans in congress, they
are against everything. but he gave a real raw meat speech and a plan to the american middle class today. the thing mitt romney doesn't seem to understand is that there are a lot of people dropping out of the middle class and going in poverty and in the lower income brackets. the president offered a safety net for these folks. mitt romney says he's not going to focus on them. which message do you think the american people will respond to? what president obama did today was talk to ten million people who were upside down when it comes to the value of their homes. that is a real kitchen table problem. they didn't do it because it was a bad financial deal. somebody else did it to them. how do you control the value of your home? how do you upgrade your siding or paint the inside or put new carpet and the value goes down, that is what happened in america. romney doesn't have anything for those folks? president obama does. he said today in his speech he was going to get rid of the red
tape, make it easy, the wealthiest bankers in the country were going to have to pay a little bit of a fie. a lot of people turn away from refinancing because of the fees. the president will do something about that. so you decide tonight who is on your side, is it the republicans or is it president obama who is trying to save one of the most influential markets and driving engines of this economy, the housing market. but once again, the damn republicans are against it. oop, i said a bad word. that is just how i feel. this is so common sense. how can you be against somebody wanting to stay in their home? get your cell phones out i want to know what you think. tonight's question, will there be more very poor people if mitt romney is elected president? text a for yes, b for no. go to edmsnbc.com. bob shrum, and eugene
robinson, associate editor and columnist for the washington post. great to have both of you with us tonight. >> happy to be here. >> gene, talk about his comment, mitt romney, how much if any damage did he do to himself today or do republicans eat this up? >> in the republican primary process i'm not sure he did much damage to himself but if he gets the nomination, this is going to be on a continuous loop, i think, in democratic political ads. look, where to begin with this statement? he goes on to say that 99% of americans he thinks are neither poor nor rich? i don't get this. i looked at the figures in 2009, 14.3% of the americans were below the poverty line. poverty line is drawn artific l artificially low in any case, does he just not see these people? does he not know they exist? apparently he doesn't.
and of course he caught it from both sides because he said there is a safety net we'll fix it now he's catching it from conservatives, who say he shouldn't be talking about that, he's talking like socialist obama. this was not a good day for mitt romney. >> conservative commentators took romney to task for his comments about the poor. even tea party senator of south carolina jim demint says he needs to backtrack and reframe his comments. when you got jim demint to pull something back you know you're in trouble. bob, will the romney camp shift gears or stick to the script here? >> this wasn't the script. he may have been saying it on the road but i'm sure stewart stevens, his strategist, doesn't want him to say something like this. what happened with romney in a series of comments overtime when he gets off the leash, he's actually proving the point that president obama is trying to make. that this is an election between fairness and unfairness. that is why i think you've seen
the approval numbers for romney go down, he's now 31/41 upside down in the nbc wall street journal poll. a new poll in ohio today showing him losing that critical state by 6 points to the president. they have been clobbering newt gingrich by saying he has a lot of baggage. the truth is, romney has a lot of baggage, too, only his is louis vuitton. >> what do you think of the timing of president obama's proposal to people struggling with mortgages and upside down situations as far as value and what they owe on their homes? republicans, they are in nevada dealing with the number one problem every time i jump in a cab in las vegas, i'm told the housing market is just absolutely terrible. is this a winner for president obama? >> i think the timing is obviously deliberate. he foreshadowed this in the state of union address but i don't think it's pure
coincidence that he rolls it out the day after romney wins in florida, his biggest primary win, it was supposed to be try up fant day for romney, so obama got to steal some of his thunder. he couldn't have anticipated that on his day that romney would step in it. >> here is president obama talking about the difficulty of dealing with mortgages. >> i remember when michelle and i bought our first condo. and we were both lawyers. and we're looking through the forms, kind of holding it out. reading it again. what does this phrase mean? and that's for two trained lawyers. the forms, the confusion, potential for abuse is too
great. just because the forms were too complicated. so this is what a mortgage form should look like. this is it. >> bob, this is a real hit, i think, with americans, no more red tape, no more run around from the banks, that was in the script today. a very relatable moment by the president showing that he understands the problem. is this what mitt romney can't do? >> yes, i think he can't do it. look, the sub text of what the president was doing there is to say that he understands what ordinary people go through. romney is coming across as a kind of callous cold fish who has lived this very privileged life, doesn't understand what is happening to ordinary americans. now there is nothing wrong with him being wealthy, john kennedy told his speech writer, dick goodwin after he was down in west virginia in the coal mines and hills and valleys, that he
couldn't believe people lived like that. and even though they seemed to be prejudiced against him because of his religion, if he became president he would help them. folks in west virginia figured that out, they voted for him even though he was catholic. what is happening with romney is he's being figured out by the american people and he himself is the person who is revealing what he is. you said they are not gaffes, but they are gaffes what he says what he really thinks and he's not supposed to do that. >> the more devil in the details, in a small fee on the largest financial institutions will make sure that it doesn't add to the deficit. gene, that is the part that won't fly with the republicans. >> yeah, nothing will fly with the republicans in anything the president proposes. >> even a small fee on the banks, my friends. bob shrum, eugene robinson, great to have you with us. >> thank you. >> answer the question at the bottom of the screen, share your
thoughts on twitter. >> bernie sanders joins me, the buffet rule was brought to the senate today. governor jan brewer is pushing the country's most anti-union agenda yet. it's wisconsin on steroids. the democratic leader of the arizona senate is calling for a wisconsin style backlash. he'll join me coming up, stay with us.
coming up on "the ed show" the buffet bill was introduced senate. massive protests in indiana where right to work for less is now the law of the land. is this what the people really want? were there demonstrations in favor of this? ? arizona jan brewer is picking a fight with the cops, firefighters and teachers. we know the story. one of the democrats fighting brewer is here on defend the workers, only on "the ed show." later, an oscar nominee is
million dollars a year should pay at least 30% in income tax. it's not about punishing the rich as republicans like to say. it's about fairness. >> but, with all the advantages that do come with enormous income, paying a lower tax rate than regular working families should not be one of those advantages. >> let's turn to independent vermont senator sanders, one of the co-sponsors of the bill. senator, before we get to this, i do want to ask you, your reaction to mitt romney "i'm not concerned about poor people because we have a social safety net for them, if it needs fixing, i'll fix it" what is your response? >> a horrendous, ugly statement especially coming from somebody worth hundreds of millions of dollars. ed, the reality is that poverty today is at an all time high.
we did a hearing on this in my sub committee, if you are in the lowest 20% of the american people, you will die six-and-a-half years younger than if you're in the top 20%. poverty in many ways is a death sentence. romney and his friends want to cut medicaid, throw children off health insurance, they want to cut medicare, they want to cut social security, and they are going to war against the poorest people in this country. i think that is an immoral just -- an immoral position to take. >> and while they are going to war against the most vulnerable for wealthiest americans, is this a good time for the democrats to get behind the buffet rule? the president talked about it in the state of the union address, now you're a co-sponsor, what do you make of it? >> i think it's an absolutely
opportune time. we have a huge deficit in the country because of two unpaid wars brought about by the bush administration, huge tax breaks for the wealthiest people in the country, and a recession. what the republicans want to do to deal with this deficit is cut social security medicare and medicaid. what many of us think is that when the wealthiest people in this country today are doing phenomenally well, the gap between the very rich and everybody else is wider than it has ever been. the effective tax rate, ie real tax rate for millionaires and billionaires is the lowest it has been in decades, where you have a quarter of millionaires in this country are paying a lower effective tax rate than the average middle class person of course it is proper. of course it is right to ask the wealthiest people to pay more. >> every survey we've seen shows that the american people want the wealthiest americans to pay more. why a million dollars, why 30%?
is there rhyme and reason to those numbers? >> i don't think there is any magical reason for it. i think what most people perceive is that somebody making a million dollars should not be paying an effective tax rate lower than ordinary people. you have a guy like romney, a multi-zilli multi-zillionair, paying 14% tax rate, that is wrong. the million dollars is a number that people understand, i think 0% is a fair number to proceed with. 30%. >> here is your colleague on the floor. >> in theory, high end taxpayers are paying 35% and many do. there are a lot of hard working, high earning really great folks out there who are doing well and who are paying the full 35%. but there is a group that has been able to take advantage of a loophole so they only pay 15% or in some cases less.
>> both of you are singing from the common sense hymnal, no question about it. are there any republicans that you think that might say, you know what, maybe we need to do this for the country? or all of of them in the senate going to say no, we're not going to do any of this, this too obvious obviously is a problem. do you think any republicans will go along with this? >> i don't think there are republicans who will do it for the country. they would do it and will do it when we put enough pressure on them and when millions of people start telephoning congress and make their position clear. i would not want to be a republican defending a position that says not only do we think that the wealthy should not be asked to pay more, we believe the wealthy should be able to pay less while we cut programs that the middle class desperately needs. how would you like to campaign on that position? >> i would not. i think it's a moral issue as much as anything else that is
why we put the vulture chart up quite often here on the "the ed show." estimates 40 to 50 billion dollars in revenue alone. senator, great to have you with us, thanks for co-sponsoring that. the country needs it. coming up, republicans in indiana score a major victory against unions. but the workers vow to fight back. how will they do that? unexpected announcement today from the secretary of defense. it's a big one, leon panetta lays out a time line for the united states to end combat operations in afghanistan. we're right back. if there was a pill
to help protect your eye health as you age... would you take it? well, there is. [ male announcer ] it's called ocuvite. a vitamin totally dedicated to your eyes, from the eye-care experts at bausch + lomb. as you age, eyes can lose vital nutrients. ocuvite helps replenish key eye nutrients. [ male announcer ] ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. now, that's a pill worth taking. [ male announcer ] ocuvite. help protect your eye health.
welcome back to "the ed show." you know when you elect republicans thesy come after yo, pension, wages, voice in the work place, anything. to depress the workers is what they do. systematically they do it. mitch daniels promised to keep right to work laws out of indiana. >> we can not afford to have civil wars over issues that might divide us and divert us from that path. i'm a supporter of the labor laws we have in the state of indnd and i'm not interested in changing them. not the prevailing wage laws, and certainly not a right-to-work law. >> well, that was the old mitch daniels. the new mitch daniels, the guy republicans love, who gave the gop's doomsday response to the state of the union broke the promise he made to the people of indiana. today, indiana became the 23rd
right-to-work state in the country. it's also the first state to pass such legislation in over a decade. this is what happens when republicans take over state houses. right to work, weakens unions by preventing them from collecting dues. they are telling you what you can do with the paycheck. republicans argue that weakendownens attract business a create jobs. indiana was doing pretty well, in terms of job growth compared to other states without right-to-work legislation, especially when you compare to it other right-to-work states in the midwest. right-to-work states have lower wages than non-right-to-work states. daniels signed the legislation with very little fanfare, probably because the people of indiana overwhelmingly don't want it. a survey taken last month found that 69% of indiana voters wanted more time to debate
before discussion was made on a decision was made on right-to-work. 71% did not want lawmakers to make a decision on right-to-work, forcing a public rear ren -- referendum. this was the scene at the state house earlier today. >> i'm standing on the steps and i see a photographer bill riley is a way back. there is people as far as you can see you get the idea of thousands of people here for this rally. >> no, that is not wisconsin, but it ain't far from it. the law takes effect immediately. daniels signed the measure in record time. just hours after it passed, the republican controlled state senate. maybe a big reason the super bowl. it will be held in indianapolis this sunday, blocks away from the state house, lawmakers don't want union protests to overshadow the big event. the nfl players union oppose the law, "we're always going to be
standing shoulder to shoulder with men and women who want to collectively protect themselves." do you see some kind of statement coming during the super bowl on sunday from the players? workers are now planning to go occupy the super bowl. today they marched in solidarity. >> hundreds of protesters marched in the super bowl village shortly after right to work pasd. >> this ain't right for the state of indiana. it's wrong. all the way around wrong. >> keep in mind, indiana is the first right to work state in the rust belt. >> i think it's always good publicity for a republican if in an argument with me. >> first, she picked a fight with the president. now jan brewer and arizona republicans are picking a fight with teachers, firefighters and police. the radical republican war on workers has a new battle ground, we're going to arizona next.
breaking news on the end of the war in afghanistan, john soltz of vote vets is here. the director of the fracking documentary "gas land" returned to capitol hill to film a hearing. republicans objected and the film maker arrested. >> this is a public hearing, i'm within my first amendment rights. >> tonight, josh fox is here for an exclusive interview.
welcome back to "the ed show." jan brewer and the arizona republicans are on a tear. they are on the offensive. they are on a mission to completely destroy public employee unions. have you heard the story before? one week after governor brewer went on a media tour attacking president obama, she is attacking teachers, cops, firefighters in her own state. republicans are fast tracking and i mean fast tracking,
several pieces of legislation aimed at just flat out stomping out public employee unions. the bills will do this. outlaw all collective bargaining for public employees including public safety workers. they will outlaw automatic payroll deductions for union dues. hold it right there. you mean to tell me they will tell people what they can do and not do with the money they've earned? yes. they will outlaw the compensation of public employees for any kind of union work whatsoever. arizona is already a so-called right to work state, which means unions already have a severely diminished role. of of course the state government doesn't engage in collective bargaining to begin with. so, the new legislation will affect sectors of the government where unions still have i guess you could say a seat at the table and a voice. like local governments. like schools. public education has taken a hit. you know what they've done down there, cut more than $2 billion
out of the budget since 2009. over the last four years, funding for state universities has been cut by 50%. yeah, that's right, arizona, arizona state, northern arizona. they are dealing with half the money they used to deal with. this is another case of the republican agenda being carried out by a radical governor and radical leaders. arizona republicans are trying to put the final nail in the coffin of unions. my question, did they campaign on this? the answer is no. democrats are virtually in this situation sad to report to you tonight, powerless to stop it. they have the smallest democratic caucus in arizona state history. this isn't what they campaigned on, but this is the popular thing. for radical governors and radical ledge i have bodies to go after the middle class because now that citizens united has passed, heck, they can do anything they want. they'll get the money to keep them in office to cut all these
state budgets, cut the elderly, cut the public service, cut the law enforcement, cut the firefighters, go to public education, go to higher education and let the people dangle in the wind. let's turn to arizona state minority leader david shapira, appreciate your time. you're kind of a young guy, how old are you? you're in a position of leadership, congratulations. tell me how old you are. >> thank you, i'm 31 years old and 16 days away from being 32. >> dog gone it folks, we got us an a general ygenuine 30 some-year-old that cares about people. i understand you have a petition you want the people to respond, tell us what is happening. >> we launched a petition just
now we're announcing it now on your show, solidarityaz.org. you can sign up to join in solidari tc solidarity with the workers of arizona. it's already a right to work state. it's a state where workers already have a choice as to whether or not they want to join a union and management, school districts and cities, have the right to choose whether or not they want to allow public employees to have a seat at the table. if this legislation passes, school districts and cities will no longer even have a right to allow the workers to come to the table because this will completely eliminate collective bargaining. you were talking about wisconsin and indiana, this legislation is a far cry from those two states and in fact would make us the most anti-union state in the country. >> why is this happening? is this what the people want? did the people of arizona want this to happen? >> you know, in arizona every legislator has to run for office every two years, house and
senate. i tell you having been on the campaign trial quite a bit over the last six years, i have not heard from a single voter in my district that they want this. that they want workers in our cities and in our school districts to no longer be able to have a seat at the tan he'll. what is interesting, ed, what is great about having a seat at the table for law enforcement and firefighters and teachers, is that they are the ones on the ground. we have our public safety professionals, education professionals who are actually there on our streets, in our classrooms, they know what is going on there and allowing them to have a seat at the table allows us as elected officials as heede leaders, allows us to what is going on on the ground and make wise decisions. if this law passes we won't have them at the tab toll have the kfrg. table to have the conversation. >> you're calling for or you need a wisconsin-style backlash. what do you want people to do?
i know you got the petition tonight, do they need to get outside the capital is that what you're talking about? >> the reason we're launching the petition is we want people to sign up so we can communicate with them, let them know what is going on, let them know when the bills are coming up for a vote at the state senate and likely later on in the state house so workers and those who support them can come to the capital and fight these pieces of legislation. really, what people need to know about this, not just about our public service employees, and not labor unions. what is about our community. the safety of our communitiecom the education our kids get. we are making our streets less safe, we are making our schools not as effective if we disallow the people who understand what is going on to have a seat at the table and let us know what needs to be changed in those segments of society. >> i hope i didn't embarrass you when i asked that question how old you are. i have two stepsons and a son, in jaur neighborhood, in your
age group, 30-something, i tell them fell as, you have to pay attention. it's so refreshing to see someone of your age and demographic jumping right in public service, and blowing the horn for americans. who would be -- who would be against safe neighborhoods, that is what we're talking about. who would be against teachers in the workforce trying to do their very best? and their wages and everything else will be attacked, voices, it's unbelievable what is happening. this wave that is taking place across the country. it takes people in your on backyard such as yourself to stand up, and say something about it. arizona state senator dave shapira, thank you for joining us. we'll follow this story once again, arizona is wisconsin on steroids. how else do we view it, a story to follow. just like indiana, just like ohio, where workers won in ohio, we have to get it done in the other states to protect the middle class in this country.
[ slap! slap! slap! slap! ] ow, ow! [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium rich tums goes to work in seconds. nothing works faster. ♪ tum ta tum tum tums up next, big news from defense secretary leon panetta, he says troops will be out of afghanistan ahead of schedule. jon soltz, votevets.org has reaction to that. later the director of "gas land" is arrested at congressional hearing. he joins me exclusively on the ed show tweet us #ed show, we're right back. sleep when it's done" academic. for 80 years, we've been inspired by you. and we've been honored to walk with you to help you get where you want to be. ♪ because your moment is now.
training advise and assist role. this is the first time the united states official has put a date on a drawdown of troops. the time line fits president obama's promise to hand over authority by the end of 2014. jon soltz joins us tonight, did a number of tours in iraq. good to have you with us. your reaction to the news and do you believe it? >> i think i'm like anyone else who served in the wars, everyone is happy to hear 2014, they only have 24 months to call you up and send you. do i believe it? i think there is some framing we could put on this so the public has a better understanding, essentially what the secretary of defense is saying in 2012 in afghanistan, it will be the way it has been in prior years, a lot of troops outside the wire, a hot lot of troops in villages. in 2013, we'll advise, train and assist, additional officers
attached to each brigade, won't be outside the wire, working with the afghan military in a role more of a counter-terror advising the afghan army. i think it's a shot across the bow and pat tretraeus theory. >> what does this do to the troops as far as exposing them to greater danger and also what does it do to the budget? >> well, if we're going to go to advise train and assist mission in 2013 in, iraq we had 17 b brigades on the ground. when we went to an advise position in iraq, we went down to 5 combat brigades. they are wrong when they say u.s. troops aren't in combat, they are because people are shooting them. they are conducting a mission safer, they are on the base, training the foreign military, but there is distinct challenges
with the afghan military, less trained less educated than the iraq military. they will still be in danger but the mission is more safe than now. by 2014 that will look like what happened in december in iraq where we pull out and hand it over to afghan forces. >> last summer president obama announced plans to speed up withdrawal from afghanistan, at the time 72% of americans supported him which suggests this policy should help president obama in an election year, what do you think? >> i think the president learned putting the troops in the counter insurgency doctrine he was pushed into hasn't worked. he has seen tremendous success because he had a counter terror operation and killed osama bin laden. last week he freed two hostages being held by terrorists, so he's going to a lighter footprint to kiltl terrorists
where they are at. 56 or so percent think we are not on the right role in afghanistan. now the republican will be in the less popular position, but none of this will matter, none will matter if the president loses reelection, the time line is off the strategists and the people who think we need hundreds of thousands of troops to take a country from the 15th century to the 20th century will be in power and it will be a shift again. the time line won't matter if the president loses. >> jon soltz, thanks so much. house republicans take a stand against the first amendment by having a journalist arrested and led out of a hearing in handcuffs. the journalist, josh fox, joins me exclusively here on "the ed show," stay with us. [ male announcer ] is zero worth nothing?
99% said yes. the big finish, film maker josh fox joins me to give us his side of the story after his arrest at a congressional hearing today. we'll tell you who josh fox is and his great work, stay tuned. ♪ it's nice to be here ♪ it's nice to see you in my bed ♪ ♪ ♪ there are diamonds... [ male announcer ] this is your moment. ♪ ♪ and they sparkle in the night ♪ [ male announcer ] this is zales, the diamond store. take an extra 10 percent off storewide now through sunday.
has gone a long way in exposing the truth about fracking, the toxic extraction of natural gas in america. fox was arrest the after republicans at a committee hearing insisted on enforcing a rule that is routinely ignored for journalists. >> come on. come on, mr. chairman. >> can we discuss this -- >> this is a public hearing. i'm within my first amendment rights. i'm being taken out. >> where is the transparency?
>> fox was arrested on a charge of unlawful entry, maybe they don't like what josh fox stands for. here is a clip from "gas land." >> it was the same story, water trouble. >> we never had a problem with the water. after they drilled the water was bad. >> oh, man. >> health problems. >> i'm never healthy. hazardous explosive conditions in the house. >> whoa. >> joining me exclusive oh on "the ed show," josh fox, academy award nominated who directed "gas land" working on "gas land ii" we saw the video of your arrest, we want you to describe it from your perspective, what happened, what went down? >> i didn't expect to be arrested for documentary film making and journalism on capitol hill. i was prepared for it but didn't expect it. i did think they would come to our senses and let them film the
hearing. we were there covering a very crucial hearing about a case of ground water contamination in pavilion, wyoming, three-and-a-half year investigation by the epa shows subjects from the first film from pavilion, with ground water contamination resulting in 50 times the level of benzene in ground water. and epa pointed in this case that hydraulic fracturing is the likely cause. what was happening today, republicans called in the science and space and technology committee a hearing to challenge science, their panel was made up of gas industry lobbyists. we were there to expose what i believe is ugly and brazen attack on science itself, on what is happening across the country, with hydraulic fracturing, we were there doing our jobs. i was not interested in disrupting the hearing, was not charged with that. was simply interested in capturing on film in a broadcast quality camera, what the
republicans were going to be doing right there, putting the epa and citizens of pavilion and everyone across the nation who is complaining of contamination due to hydraulic fracturing on trial. we wanted to make sure people knew it was happening. >> fracking is getting a lot more attention because of you and it's very dangerous and needs to be monitored big time. how did the republicans know it was you? they know who you are because of the work you've done. i heard on the tape it seemed to be congressional members arguing that you be allowed to stay. >> we went through the proper channels to request per -- permission to entering the hearing. you have to be a special credentialed journalist. you can ask the chair of the committee or the committee for permission to film. we had that successfully in the past when the democrats were in control of the house. since the republicans took over, we have had obstruction after obstruction getting into congress. this time, this was something that we have been covering in a very personal way for
three-and-a-half years, and felt look, i'm going in there because this is the first amendment. this is freedom of speech. the amendment is congress shall make no law cwhich infringes upn the freedom of the press. that means congress can't pass a law or a rule or regulation in a sub committee hearing to obstruct journalists from coming in and exposing to the american people what they are doing. >> are you going back? >> am i going back where? >> well, back do more hearings? will do you what you can to get in there? >> our film is about the influence of oil and gas on the government. i'm sure we will be back at other public hearings. we are very close to being finished with the film, and this is incredibly ironic that all these events have come together and they are kicking science out of the house of representatives. they are kicking science and journalism out of the science and technology committee and it's really a