tv Meet the Press MSNBC July 29, 2013 1:00am-2:01am PDT
website, caught on camera msnbc.com. this sunday, the state of the economy. and will washington make it worgs with another partisan showdown? the president on the road again to sell a second-term economic blueprint and to blame republicans for standing in the way. >> you can't just be against something. you've got to be for something. >> but what is the president's record on the economy? and what is his agenda? plus, will washington go to the brink of a government shutdown this fall? this morning i put these questions to the administration's point man on the economy, treasury secretary jack lew.
plus, a showdown this week in the house over the nsa's controversial post-9/11 surveillance program. >> passing this amendment takes us back to september 10th. >> a measure to shut down the program was narrowly defeated. but where does the debate go from here? will there be more privacy safeguards put in place? and the snowden saga. i get the latest from the chairman of the house intelligence committee, michigan republican congressman mike rogers. and our political roundtable, sex and politics, a bicoastal summer of scandal from new york city to san diego. can anthony weiner stay in the race for mayor of new york? how much more can voters take? >> it is so disrespectful of women, and what's really stunning about it is they don't even realize it. you know, they don't have a clue. >> good sunday morning. a developing story this morning
in e egypt where there is a rising death toll. 72 dead in weekend clashes between security forces and supporters of the country's ousted president mohamed morsi. it is the deadliest attack by the security services since the 2011 uprising. secretary of state john kerry monitoring it all is urging egypt's leaders to, quote, help their country take a step back from the brink and allow peaceful protests. back home, the president is focused on the economy, a refocus, if you will, as washington prepares for another high-stakes budget debate. >> but over the past couple of years in particular, washington has taken its eye off the ball. an endless parade of distractions and political posturing and phony scandals. shift focus from what needs to be done. >> the president's weekly address this weekend. that's where we're going to start this morning with the secretary of the treasury, jack lew. we sat down for a conversation friday afternoon. mr. secretary, welcome back. >> good to be with you. >> always good to have you.
i want to talk about the broader state of the economy? just a minute, but first let me talk about a potential standoff again between the white house and republicans on capitol hill over the budget. what are the chances that we are going to see the government shut down this fall because of another such standoff over the budget? >> david, i think the american people are tired of the kinds of problems that washington creates for itself and for the country. and we saw in 2011 how much harm it does to the country when we have those kinds of self-inflicted wounds. we should don't that again. >> you said even at that time that confidence in the economy is really undermined when washington becomes part of the problem. >> the fight over the debt limit in 2011 hurt the economy even though in the end we saw an extension of the debt limit. we saw confidence fall, and it hurt the economy. congress needs to do its job. it needs to finish it work on appropriations bill and pass a debt limit. >> there's also a shift in strategy, which is why i bring this up, from the white house. "the washington post" is reporting this, that senior
white house officials are discussing a budget strategy that could lead to a government shutdown if republicans continue to demand deeper spending cuts, lawmakers and democrats familiar with the thinking said on thursday, president obama has made it clear that he will not sign into law republican spending bills that slash domestic programs even more deeply than sequestration. if republicans do not relent and the white house sticks to its position, a shutdown would be likely at the end of september when congress must authorize a new measure to fund the government. is if president going to make it clear he'll go to the mat this time? >> what the president said and has written to congress is that they cannot fix the problems created by the across-the-board cuts known as sequestration by cutting domestic priorities in order to fund defense. that's unacceptable. he won't sign that. the across-the-board cuts are hurting our future. >> fair enough, but the process in washington over continuing to fund the government or raising the debt ceiling is necessary lay process that has to be
engaged in. i guess what i'm asking is, is the president, unlike what he's done before signaling, he will go to the brink this time in order to stop cuts that he thinks will harm the economy? >> what the president did this week is he sent a very clear message that washington has to stop playing these brinksmanship games. it's not about who wins and who loses -- >> but this report, mr. secretary, indicates indeed the white house is setting itself on a position to go to the brink, to force republicans -- >> what we have said is congress needs to get its work done and needs to fund the kinds of things the american middle class need, and we need to get the debt limit extended in a way that doesn't create a crisis. that is what every congress needs to do, and congress needs to do it when it gets back in september. >> the president will go to the brink if necessary? >> david, drawing this to brinksmanship is a mistake. it's bad for the economy for it to be brinksmanship. the job needs to get done and in a way that works for american middle-class families that want us to be worrying about how to build a more stable future for
americans. >> republicans would argue there's a way to protect middle-class families as well. speaker boehner mass said we won't raise the debt ceiling without real cuts in spending. >> so, you know, we've been through budget debates over last four years, and sometimes you get the sense that people are starting all over again as if we hadn't been through the last four years. we are not in the same place that we were in in 2011. we have seen several legislations enacted that have reduced the deficit very substantially. we are seeing the the most rapid reduction of the deficit since the end of world war ii when we demobilized. we're outperforming expectations in terms of how quickly we're reducing the deficit and reducing health care costs. >> debt crisis, the idea of austeri austerity, you don't think we face an urgent need for a grand bargain. >> we have an urgent need to address the fundamental cornerstones of thriving economy for the american middle class. we cannot cut our way to
prosperity. we have already done a lot of deficit retux. we are on a path right now where, you know, just recently the imf said we're doing too much too quickly. we should be doing more in the long term and less in the short term. i think that we have a composition question. the across-the-board cuts are not good for the economy, not good for the american middle class, not good for our national defense. we ought to be having a debate about the kinds of medium and long-term reforms to entitlements and tax programs, but we ought not to be talking about holding the country hostage again to a fight over e extending the debt limit. just to remind you, the debt limit doesn't commit any new spending. it gives us permission to pay the bills that congress already committed to. in 237 years, we never had a debate about whether or not the united states should pay its bills until 2011. we cannot have that debate again. >> is a grand bargain over spending and taxes, over entitlement programs, is that within grasp, realistically? >> you know, i think the question of a grand bargain kind of captivates washington.
what the american people are asking is what are we doing to make sure that their kids can go to college? what are we doing to make sure that their health care is secure? what are we doing to make sure that their homes are secure? we need to be debating the things that the american people are focusing on. and in the course of it, we will -- we need to solve all of these washington, you know, responsibilities. but we can't let the washington box score be the issue. >> so let's talk about the broader economy. the president in the course of his speeches this week made this particular comment. let's watch. >> today, five years after the start of that great recession, america has fought its way back. >> what exactly did he mean by that? >> i think that the american economy has shown its resilience. the core of the american economy is strong. we've grown for 40 months in a row. we've seen job creation 7.2 million jobs. i think that there are a lot of things that we need to do for the future to be as strong as it should be.
but, you know, i go around the world meeting with my counterparts. i just came back from a meeting with finance ministers from around the world. four years ago, they looked at the united states and they saw the center of the financial crisis, and they wondered where was the united states going. now they look with admiration at the resilience of the u.s. economy, the u.s. people, and with all of the u.s. political system. >> yet look at how the american people tend to view that same question, are we coming back, is america coming back. our polling, nbc news, washington journal released just this week indicated 61% of the country believes we're headed in the wrong direction, off on the wrong track. why don't more americans share that sense that the president has, that we're fighting our way back? >> i think we have economic data that shows that confidence is actually improving. yet we have these surveys that show that the american people have kind of deep memories of how bad the recession was and concern that they need confidence that it's going to stay on the path towards
continued growth. one thing i do know for sure is that a season of washington fighting about self-inflicted crises and self-inflicted wounds will not help that. it will hurt that. i think the american people need and expect for washington to buckle down and do the kinds of things the president was talking about. >> mr. secretary, you're being prescriptive, which i understand, but there is also independent assessment of what the president's economic record has been this long in office. the reality is that most of the new jobs being created are short-term jobs, not part-time jobs, not full-time jobs. you have per sis tently high unemployment. the washington journal in its editorial would be critical of the administration. it was, and i want to lay it out and let you respond. the inequality president the editorial's headline. for 4 1/2 year, mr. obama has focused policies on reducing inequality rather than increasing growth. the predictable result has been more inequality and less growth. he called it a better bargain for the middle class, but no
president has done worse by the middle class in recent times, a reference to the wage inequality in the fall. the core problem has been mr. obama's focus on spreading the wealth rather than creating it. obama care will soon hook more americans on government subsidies but its mandates and taxes have hurt job creation, especially small businesses. mr. obama's record tax increases have grabbed a bigger chunk of affluent incomes but have dampened growth so far this year. >> david, i think that if you look at where we started out, we were in the middle of the worst recession since the great depression. the american economy is fighting back and it's coming back. the job creation has actually been a little bit more impressive than what you described. we're seeing growth in manufacturing jobs, more new manufacturing jobs than in most recent periods. clearly there's more work to do. you know, i think that the challenges ahead are how can we put the pieces in place so that we have the infrastructure in place for american factories to ship their goods.
how do we make sure we have the workforce that's trained with the skills for the modern workplace? >> one more on this in terms of the effect on real people's lives. as i was going through material this week, i saw this out of georgia about persistent poverty affecting folks in georgia, the food stamp program. this is "the atlanta journal constitution" reported on tuesday. four years after the end of the recession the economy has been growing, employers have been hiring and the number of people relying on food stamps in georgia has been going up. a year ago the program provided food assistance to a record 1.91 million people in the state, nearly one-quarter of them 6 years old or younger. by this june the program added 40,000 more recipients. those numbers have nearly doubled since the economy slid into recession in late 2007. georgia suffered more than most states and is still hundreds of thousands of jobs below its prerecession levels. moreover, many jobs that have been add are low-paying positions. the question is who's got the responsibility here? does the federal government have responsibility? is it the states? and is the job to do more to help the poor or to do more to
get the poor and working poor off these government programs? >> you know, david, the problem of income inequality was at the core of what the president spoke to this week. it's not a new problem that emerged out of the recession. it was decades in the making. at the beginning of this year we saw an important step when we took back some of the tax cuts and by raising the tax rates on the very wealthy in america. that was an important piece of policy to start remedying the ine kui ti of the tax code as it existed at the time. we need to create more jobs. we need an economy that's growing faster. and government needs to do his part. >> is he responsible for an anemic recovery that could be more robust? >> david, you keep describing the economy -- the recovery in terms of -- you know, understating where we came from and where we are. if you look around the developed world, our economy has recovered better from this recession than others because of the decisive thanks we took.
we are not satisfied that we're done with the job. but we inherited an economy in free first of all and we took the kind of des sisive action to create opportunities for people to get back to work. >> so you would not describe this as anemic recovery at all. this in your judgment is strong economic recovery. >> i'm saying the core of the economy is growing, and i'm saying we need to do more, and i'm saying the president's laid out a vision of the things we need to do. and we need to get outside of the kind of inside washington debate about who's winning and who's losing and deal with challenges that the middle-class families want us to deal with. >> before i let you go, the irs scandal. first of all, was that a phony scandal? why did the president and others refer to that as a phony washington scandal? >> the president and i have been clear what happened was unacceptable, extremely bad judgment, and it's unacceptable for groups right or left to be targeted because of their political views. i think that the piece of it that the president was referring to is after weeks and weeks of investigations, ig investigations, justice department investigations, congressional hearings, there's
no evidence of any political involvement in the decisions leading up to that situation. so the attempts to continue to raise this question in the absence of any evidence is what he was referring to. and i think that, you know, politics being what it is, it will probably continue. but we have to distinguish reality from the part that is phony. there was a real problem. the problem was bad judgment that was, you know, career officials trying to operate their programs more efficiently using bad judgment to do to it. but the political piece, that's a stretch. there's no evidence. >> mr. secretary, i'll leave it there. thank you as always. >> pleasure to be with you, david. >> from the economy to national security debates this week, particularly over the government's surveillance programs that were put into e effect in 9/11. an important house vote that almost scrapped those programs. joining me now, the chairman of the house intelligence committee, republican congressman from michigan mike rogers. chairman, always good to have you back. >> david, thanks for having me. >> before we talk about the nsa programs, let me mention this
developing story in e egypt this morning. you have violence in the streets. off provisional government. really the military cracking down on protesters with dozens who have been killed already. i wonder whether you believe that the tacit support by this administration for a military coup is not leading to stability as was forecast but leading to something far worse. >> well, i do think that in a circumstance like egypt you need to pick your friends, and clearly i think the muslim brotherhood-led government, although democracy without freedom is certainly no democracy at all, and that's what they were trying to get to, changing the constitution, reducing the rights of women in e egypt, reducing the rights of religious minorities in e egypt. they weren't concerned about the economy at all. they were concerned about pushing towards an islamist state. to that end, i think the people of egypt rose up and said that's not what we bargained for. and so i would argue that we
need to make sure that all political parties have a voice in egypt, that the secular parties have an opportunity to have a voice in egypt. and i do think that the military was acting on behalf of the huge secular movement that actually got mubarak thrown out in the first place. >> let me come back to these nsa programs and momentous week. i wanted to have you on because i wanted to get into this debate, which we've had in the house. you had 205 members of the house including 94 republicans who, and i'm boiling this down, essentially voted to scrap these programs that allow the nsa, the national security agency, to sweep up what's called the meta data, which is call details in the united states in order to track down terrorists. last month, general haden, michael haden, former head of the nsa, former head of the cia, was on "meet the press." he said the following about these programs. listen. >> i think it's living in this kind of a democracy, we're going
to have to be a little bit less effective in order to be a little bit more transparent to get to do anything to defend the american people. >> do you agree with what general hayden said there? >> well, i'm not sure what point he was making there, but let me tell you this, i mean, i share the frustration of the american people, and that's what we saw happen recently. it was a collision of really bad, awful policies and ideas coming out of administration, the data hub that would take social security and health information and other information, put it in one place. all of that is bad, and we should all be very concerned about it. the problem was this was i think the first opportunity for members who are frustrated about those things and the american public is frustrated about those things, and by the way i'm frustrated about those thing, and say this is exactly the same. unfortunately, it's not. so this is a program -- let's talk about why we have it, and this is really important to get to the point, should we or shouldn't we.
after 9/11, our intelligence services knew about a guy who was a pretty bad guy that we believed was going to be involved in some type of attempt in the united states to commit an act of violence, a terrorist, who was living in san diego. but because we couldn't find the nexus, we were not allowed to find out if somebody from overseas was calling in to the united states to talk to him, we couldn't get that piece, we missed it. he got on a plane and flew it into the pentagon shortly thereafter. so we said that's a scene we have to fix. how do we do that. >> but -- >> and what we ended up doing is the program they tried to turn off is the program that catches foreign terrorists from talking to people in the united states, helps us identify those individuals. >> and again, in talking to senior government officials this week, the way to understand these programs is as they lay it out is a suspected terrorist calls somebody in the united states, the way you put those two together is you have a haystack, and in the haystack in the united states is basically every phone number that is swept up in the united states. it's not the content of the calls. it's the details.
and it's put in this kind of vault in, you know, a cloud scenario. and you get the ping, you get that relationship in the haystack. is there any better way to provide privacy, when it's been explained to me, you have the haystack of phone numbers and call detornados or you don't, and that's what libertarians are really concerned about? >> i understand. but here's the thing. there are so many protections on this. there are no names and no addresses in this database. there's more information on an envelope that you fill out and stick in the mailbox than are in this database. this is billing records that already exist. they said we just need to put them in one place and hold them long sore we have a number to compare them to. so they're not calling them. they're not doing pattern analysis. here's the best news of all. in this program, zero privacy violations, 54 terrorist, violent terrorist attacks thwarted. that's a pretty good record. that's a great record. and that tells me this is one
program that works to protect your privacy and li up to our constitutional obligation in congress that says we must provide for the general defense of the united states. we have found how to do this and protect your privacy. remember, most people think these phone calls are recorded. they're not. most people think their names are associated with these phone numbers. they're not. it's just a whole list of phone numbers with no names and no addresses. when a terrorist number, just a terrorist number is found, they plug it in to these numbers and it pops up with somebody they may be talking to in the united states. again, no name and no address. what we do with that is say, oh, that's bad, we're going to give this to the fbi to determine who that person even is. and so that's the way we protected privacy nap's why there's been zero privacy violations with this, and it's been able to used ed td to sto violent terrorist attacks. >> edward snowden. there are some attempts by the
administration to suggest to the russians and to him they would not pursue the death penalty to try to get him back here. senior government official told me this week that snowden has the blueprint for the nsa but not the owner's manual. what does that say to you about the threat he still possesses with more disclosures that could come forth? >> we need to understand this very quickly. he has disclosed programs that make it easier for terrorists overseas, and the first people who are going to feel that damage are our soldiers in afghanistan. we need to understand that. this is serious and it's real. as well as empowering chinese and russian intelligence officials. i think it's important that he comes back, brings what he has left, and if he really truly believes he did something good, quote, unquote, then come back to the united states. he missed every opportunity to be a whistle-blower when he missed every opportunity to talk to a whole host of avenues for him to -- >> but is it realistic to compel him to come back? >> i'm not sure. i think he may be too far gone. i would hope at the end of the
day he makes that decision. we know that he's certainly -- the russian intelligence services would love to have further conferrings with him. we think he's already had some disclosure to the chinese intelligence officials. so there's a lot more to this story, a lot to be concerned about. i would like him to come back as well and bring what he has stolen from the people of the united states. >> all right. chairman rogers, we'll leave it there for this morning. thank you as always. >> thanks. coming up, we will switch gear, talk about politics and scandal, men behaving badly. in fact, two big city politicians, san diego mayor bob filner, new york city mayor hopeful anthony weiner under fire this week for their personal misconduct. both remain dee death faint in the wake of public outcries, but at what point will voters say they've had enough? up next, weiner's main flooifl the new york race, christine quinn, and our political roundtable. david axelrod, cnbc's maria bartiromo, republican strategist mike murphy, former democratic congressman herod ford. [ jen garner ] imagine a makeup so healthy your skin can grow more beautiful
every time you wear it. neutrogena® healthy skin liquid makeup. 98% of women saw improvement in their skin. neutrogena® cosmetics. 98% of( windnd blowingng )nt in their skin. there's s a new waway to buyu. it's's called d truecar.. and trtruecar ususers sasave time e and moneney. use e truecarr and mamake suree yoyou never r overpay.y. visit trtruecar.cocom toda.
this week the new york tabloids dedicated their coverage to who else, new york city mayoral hopeful anthony weiner, the former congressman facing new revelations this week about his inappropriate behavior. they threaten to derail his bid for mayor. should he drop out? his chief rival, christine quinn, weighs in on that. and the larger question. how much more can voters take? [ female announcer ] we love when summer gets hot... but the instant frizz? not so much. so i'm taking pantene's 72-hour dare. [ female announcer ] beat humidity for a smooth 72 hours. get pantene smooth with moroccan argan oil in a pro-v system. help lock out humidity. keep frizz from forming. go 72-hour smooth.
[ eva ] ditch the frizz... i dare you. [ female announcer ] get smooth from pantene, the world's no. 1 haircare brand. hair so healthy it shines. are you flo? yes. is this the thing you gave my husband? well, yeah, yes. the "name your price" tool. you tell us the price you want to pay, and we give you a range of options to choose from. careful, though -- that kind of power can go to your head. that explains a lot. yo, buddy! i got this. gimme one, gimme one, gimme one! the power of the "name your price" tool. only from progressive.
adviser to president obama, now an nbc news senior political analyst, david axelrod. republican strategist mike murphy, anchor of cnbc's "closing bell," maria bartiromo, former democratic congressman from tennessee, harold ford jr. welcome. scan zals, scandals, everywhere, and they have to do with sex and misconduct. let's get right to it. you can't make it up. this is the cover of "the new yorker." it is anthony weiner sit eight stride the empire state building the picture tells a thousand words about his scandal. he is talking about these sexting relationships that he had. he was asked about it while campaigning earlier this week on coney island. this is what he said. >> it's not dozens and dozens. it is -- it is six to ten, i suppose, but i can't tell you absolutely what someone else is going to consider inappropriate or not. >> and what is so inappropriate, david axelrod, is so much of what's in the new york tabloids we can't even discuss this morning because it's simply not appropriate for our air. bottom line is can he stay in
this race? >> well, first of all, let me just say it's a matter of disclaim they're my old firm, the firm i sold, is representing one of the other candidates. i'm not involved in that. and i haven't really commented on this because huma is a friend of mine, his wife, and i deeply respect her. but at this point it's absurd. he is not going to be the next mayor of new york. he is wasting time and space. you asked at the beginning -- you know, americans believe second chances but not third chances. and you asked at the beginning when will voters say enough. i remember an old song from the 1970s that i loved called "how can i miss you when you won't go away?" i think they think it's time for him to go away, let new york have its mayor's race. >> maria bartiromo, speaking of huma abedin, his wife, she was quite out front. on tuesday at this press conference saying that she stands by him. this is what she said. >> anthony's made some horrible mistakes both before he resigned from congress and after.
but i do very strongly believe that that is between us and our marriage. >> maureen dowd in "the new york times" this morning writes the following -- "bill and hillary clinton transformed the way we look at sex scandals. they plowed through the ridicule, refused to slink away in shame like gary hart, said it was old news and argued if hillary didn't object why should voters. now defining deviancy downwards, senor and senora danger are using the clinton playbook. the difference is there's nothing in weiner's public life that is redeeming." a lot of people i talk to wonder out loud what has she been doing this week marx rhea. >> i think she's got to stand by him, but i wonder if she's actually talking to him when they get home. i feel bad for him. i do. from an economic standpoint, the people of new york want to see a leader who will protect jobs. when you're looking at new york, you're talking about roughly 3.3 million jobs. they want to make sure those jobs stay in the city and the leader of that city has good judgment in terms of ensuring
that the regulatory environment is not too burdensome for companies to come, locate there, and create jobs. i would have to agree with david. i think the people are frustrated. i think mayor bloomberg has done a lot in terms of expanding the number of industries that are locating in new york, rewiring the city for health care, and i thought it was really interesting what his comment was on friday, putting weiner aside, about ellioiot spitzer, basical saying you don't want an attack dog coming and killing probably the most important industry in new york, which is financial services. it feels like that's the tone. >> the regulatory environment is not getting a lot of play in the perez here. >> look, what sells -- it's a horrible spectacle. new york is the most important city in the world. the only thing weiner's qualified to run for is mayor of spectra vision. he didn't have any qualities in congress that made him exceptional. his campaign manager quit today. he won't be mayor of new york. it could move on to spitzer
running for city comptroller with his own checkered past, and a pervert mayor in san diego, going off to the playboy mansion. >> you talk about mayor bob filner. he spoke out on friday after more women were coming forward accusing him of sexual harassment. these were part of his comments. >> the behavior i have engaged in over many years is wrong. my failure to respect women and the intimidating contact i engage in at times is inexcusable. i am responsible for my conduct. and i must take responsibility for my conduct by taking action so that such conduct does not ever happen again. >> but that action, harold ford, does not include resigning. it's just defiance. i'm going to get some help for a while but i'm going to stay in office. >> it's probably inevitable he will have to leave office. i know bob. i served with him. but it's probably time for him to move on. i would identify myself with all
the remarks that have been made this morning. as i listen to anthony's campaign, he makes the case he's fighting for middle-class new yorker, he wants to ensure that a lifestyle of good jobs and opportunity there r there. if he generally cares about that, he should move on and allow the race to get back and allow people to talk about the issues people care most about. maria made a good point, there's been an issue here. who's going to grow the economy, ensure the tax base doesn't flee and ensure that what the mayor has invested in in the last few years will continue to grow? i'm not sure that's happening right now. >> as i said, a story like weiner's, in addition to not bringing husbands and wives closer together as a general matter, also begs the question about why do they think they can hang on? what is it about our current political culture, daismd, that makes these guys think i can ride this out? >> i wouldn't generalize too much because what makes them behave the way they did in the first place, there's a certain pathology associated with this.
and i would say the issue here isn't about his relationship with his wife. the issue is about his relationship with the voters. he's twice deceived them, lied about his activity, and why would you repost trust in someone who did that? i think he is delusional at this point and doesn't understand the situation. >> if you're the ceo of a company looking to locate to new york city in the next couple years with anthony weiner as mayor, would you feel confident and comfortable with his leadership styles and abilities -- >> it's not even worthy of discussion. he shouldn't be mayor of new york. >> bad judgment. >> what happened to honor and shame? in european politics, which has a lot of problem, people resign for much smaller stuff than that. you feel bad about it but keep running. it's narcissistic, selfish, and insult to the people of new york and mayor. >> speaker of new york city council mayoral candidate christine quinn. speaker quinn, welcome. >> thank you very much. >> you have called anthony
weiner's behavior reckless. "the new york times" has said he's been disqualified as a candidate. you've heard that discussion here. is he disqualified as a candidate? >> you know, i think that what's going on here is beyond unfortunate because as has been said by everyone on your panel, this is the greatest city in the world and it has potential to be even better. and when you see scandal after scandal like this, what it does is create even more distrust and maybe even disgust in government. and we really need to move beyond that, to reengage new yorkers in this mayor's race and have conversations about the records and the future. you know, i've been in city government for a long time. my time as speaker i've balanced eight budgets on time, saved the jobs of 4,100 school teachers, and grew tech and manufacturing jobs during the recession. very few cities can say that. and i want to make this city even better. >> speaker, what about my question? is he disqualified as a candidate?
>> you know, i think it's become very clear that former congress member weiner has a pattern of reckless behavior, an inability to tell the truth, and a real lack of maturity and responsibility. i don't think he should be mayor, and i think voter, if he stays in the race, will make that very clear. >> one more try on this. again, "the new york times" says he's been disqualified. do you believe he's disqualified even as a candidate even as you decry the lack of focus on serious issues? from a political point of view are you benefitting from the fact he is weakened but still in the race? >> you know, i don't thinkitis appropriate for opponents to say who should or shouldn't get in or out of races. that's for voters. did he have the qualifications to be mayor of new york? has he disqualified himself? yes. not just because of these scandals thoeshgs that certainly has. he didn't have the qualifications when he was in congress. he was in congress 12 year, passed one bim at the request of a campaign contributor, a tobacco magnet. you compare that to the kind of
work i've done bringing republicans and democrats together in the new york city council, passing legislation that improved the quality of 5,000 apartments in new york city, passing legislation -- getting it passed in albany that come september makes kindergarten mandatory for every 5-year-old. that's what we need in leadership, and that's what voters want. and i think that's what we're going to see happen come primary day and election day. >> one issue here that you haven't talked about that's not getting as much attention, that's the stop and frisk policy in new york that has been targeted by critic who is say it is racial profiling. you have raised constitutional questions about stop and frisk. and yet you still support it. why? >> i think stop and frisk can be used in a way that keeps us safe, because i believe we can be the safest big city in america but can do it in a way that brings communities and people together.
no arrests, no weapons brought in. that is over the line. that's pulling communities and police apart. that doesn't make us safer. that's why when i'm mayor you'll see the number of stops go down, we'll be focused on quality stops that keep us safe and that are done in a constitutional way, not just a rash to stop everyone. and that's what's happened, and that's been a danger as well because it rips people and police apart. >> christine quinn, speaker, thank you very much for joining us this morning. >> thank you. >> to mike murphy here. not only retoox that but again back to this issue of what maureen dowd calls the clinton playbook in this weiner race in the new york mayor's race and those comparisons and whether the public was moved on all that. >> i think weiner's gone so beyond the pale it's over. i agree with these guys. for a lot of us who care about new york, i lived there for a while, it's a weak field.
a lot of good liberal democrats but is somebody exceptional? i think it's a pretty thin group. >> before we go to a break, the polling in new york indicating right that anthony weiner is in a different pigs. quinn is the leader at this point. others like thompson who have called on wooener to get out of the race where we are at the moment. we're going to take a break here. we'll switch gears when we come back. more with our political roundtable, the washington fight over the economy, congress, the [ sponge ] now for the main event. in this corner, the reigning lasagna dish, the big cheese. and in this corner, the best generation of dawn power, platinum! [ bell dings ] here we go! [ female announcer ] dawn platinum power clean's micro-scrubbing enzymes give you the power of an overnight soak in 3 minutes, and 3 times more everyday grease cleaning ingredients. for all your dishes. so if you like dawn, you'll love platinum. [ sponge ] the champion! [ female announcer ] dawn platinum does even more... [ sponge ] so it's not a chore.
and we're back. let's talk about the economy. maria bartiromo, you heard second stair of treasury jack lew. they're getting ready for a fight here in washington again over funding the government this fall, then there's another battle over the debt ceiling, cutting government versus helping the economy. how do you see it? >> well, i think there will be a fight. i think the president has been very clear that he is not going to negotiate on the debt ceiling. and john boehner has been e equally as clear that it's not going to come from more revenue in terms of taxes and we need to stop spending. so i do expect another fight. having said that, i think jack lew does have a positive story in terms of the recovery to talk about. things are clearly getting better. housing has improved. the corporate sector probably in the best shape it's been "in depth" years with trillions of dollars of cash on balance sheets, but there is still a very deep frustration i think within the administration in terms of we are in an anemic recovery. you were right, this is an anemic pace, not even 2% growth.
we need to get beyond this 2% growth. it's not happening in gdp. and of course the unemployment situation remains persistent. i think there are things to do to, particularly when it relates to business. business needs to create jobs, but they need to believe it's a landscape that is favor to believe do so. >> mike murphy, the republican case against this president is what? >> well, the debt's too big, unemployment's out of control, the middle class has been more squeezed under this president than anybody in recent history. people want to change this. that's not just republicans talking. the problem is washington is stuck. i think people on both sides would agree with that. the president's in a box because his numbers are dropping, yet he's a good liberal democrat and it's very hard for him to make the ideological compromises that would get republican support. republicans are locked in conservatives, particularly in the house. they don't want to lose unless the president move mrs. than he can. the hidden actors in all this are the house democrats are who are every bit as fierce ideologically as the house republicans will, but they don't
get quite the attention because the president is the star of the democratic show. we'll have all if the fiscal showdown madness banana republic stuff we have at the end of the year. if the president would move more to the center weed have some hope. with this campaign tour, he's locking in the other way. >> i think mike's analysis about the president would be more persuasive if you were born in like 2012. but if you have any sense of history and understand where we were when he took office and the impact of the decisions that he made, you mentioned, maria, the auto industry which has come roaring back. it would have collapsed had he not intervened. recovery act. >> and yet when bankrupt. >> stand up the financial industry which was not popular with his base. all of those decisions have contributed to where we are. what's held us back are the antics in washington. you know, you had speaker boehner say last week that he will be judged not by the bills that he passes but by the laws that he repeals. well, if squeal and repeal is
the essence of your philosophy, then we're in deep trouble and that's what's happened. you had 12 republicans in the senate saying they would shut down the government unless they defunded obama care, and you've had republicans, tom coburn said last week, that's a suicidal impulse. >> i agree. we're shutting down the republicans we e want to shut down, at least those of us who think it's madness. >> but they're in control of the house caucus, mike. >> right. >> you don't have a speaker who's willing to stand up to them. >> you also know the pelosi side would not move either nap's the problem. the house is polarized between your guys and ours, so it's very hard to see in an election, which is why the president is off on a campaign trail. >> he was criticized for his speech because people said it's what he's been saying for the last eight years. actually, he's been saying these things for 20 years. we need a strategy to push back on the economic forces that have marginalized the middle class. >> how do you get that done? >> there are things that can be done outside of what congress has to do. for one, i'm a firm believer,
approve keystone pipeline. create jobs and tax revenue for the state who is will be touched by the construction of this. >> that's a game changer. >> higher paying job, more tax revenue. two, the president has to come forward with a great infrastructure plan for the country. we talk about it but there's nothing concrete. treat it like the health care plan the president passed a few years back and make that the signature piece of legislation between now and the end. why? you build for the country, invest in the future, from broadband to the pipeline, bridge, et cetera, you create jobs. this has not cost a great deal of money. i think country would rally around it. finally, give the republicans something. if they want something on taxes or debt, you've seen detroit declare bankruptcy, other american cities have their credit rating downgraded, the country's long-term problems are much greater than the short-term problems. give the republicans a little something on the long-term stuff and get big deals going forward. if the president says no, mike,
then we have something concrete, i'm a democrat, to campaign on between now and november. >> he's repeatedly proposed the kind of infrastructure program you're talking about and hasn't gotten takers. >> i'm on your team. i'm only saying give me something concrete so when i'm out and others are out saying this is what we want, we've laid out -- >> it seems to me that's exactly what he's done. he's said here are the pilars hee we need to get this economy moving. i don't agree with either of you on the keystone pipeline as a job creator. but what i'm saying is that when you have a republican caucus in the house whose fundamental rationale is anything that they can oppose they will oppose, that they want to grind the government to a halt, it hurts the economy, and it makes it impossible to make this kind of progress. the only thing the president can do is make the case for the american people. >> look at congress' approval and disapproval. it's striking in our recent poll. 83% disapproval. is the federal government stuck,
mike? is this a role more for the states to deal with poverty and infrastructure spending? >> some states get stuck, too. we have highly incentivized to get stuck politics. republicans are afraid of primaries and democrats are afraid of their interests groups, the employee unions and the like, so it's hard to move. i'm sympathetic to the president's frustration. he's between a rock and a hard place. he want s to be a liberal president with a liberal policy. he doesn't control the house. he has districts that don't care for him or obama care or his agenda. >> and politically -- >> in the short term. there's got to be a superhero, and that's the president. then it's painful ideological move. then he ood have an issue. >> -- national papers, the president is talk about income equality and republicans are in a parallel article saying they're going to make abortion a big issue in the next several months. i don't necessarily disagree with what they're trying to do, but is that the number-one issue to be dealing with in light of all these things?
>> let me just point out, when the president stepped out in the spring and said, yes, i will do some things on social security, the cpi and so on, and i will talk about entitlement reform, the republicans were like the kid -- the dog who caught the car, you know? they didn't want to engage in that discussion. >> well, yes. but the president -- >> let me -- >> he has no partner. >> maria on this and also business still hanging back here despite record profits? >> yeah. look, i think at the end of the day people are so tired of these fights. it's your fault, your fault, your fault. we need to come together. i think what harold said is critical here. there are some things that are low-hanging fruit that we can actually agree on and get things done over the short term. one is tax reform. everybody agrees that tax reform is necessary. and we need to make this simpler. and i think a lot of people agree that it does include or should include lower corporate taxes so that business is
incentivized to actually create jobs here. another thing low-hanging fruit is energy. we are rich in this country in natural gas. whether it's keystone or natural gas. whetif your moisturizerr leaves an oily finish behind imagine what it's doing to your pores. [ female announcer ] neutrogena® oil free moisture hydrates without clogging pores. 100% free of oil, fragrance and dyes. oil free. worry free. [ female announcer ] oil free moisture. neutrogena®.
before we go this morning we are marking the end of an rather at "meet the press." our senior executive producer betsy fisher martin is leaving the helm of the program in order to expand her portfolio at nbc news where she'll now serve as one of the key executives on political coverage. no doubt, "meet the press" wioud not be what it is without her. down the street at american university, the lure of the world's longest running television program was too great to ignore. well, something like that. >> i thought, this is great, i can sleep late, i can walk to work. this is an ideal internship. and little did i know i sort of
got bit by the journalism bug. >> it wasn't long before betsy made her mark on the program, catching the eye of moderator and washington bureau chief tim russert. as his executive producer, they worked side by side as the program reached its greatest heights. >> almost every morning for the last ten years tim would call at exactly 9:00 a.m. and say, hey, bets, what do you know? >> after tim's untimely death, betsy led the program with tom brokaw as the moderator during the homestretch of the 2008 campaign. betsy and i, after being classmates at american university years ago, partners on this program in december of 2008. from wall street to the campaign trail to our program in afghanistan, we pursued one of her signature goals. >> i want to take a story and figure out how do we move it forward, how do we get to the bottom of something, how do we progress a story. >> now it's her own story moving forward. betsy leaves us, but she gets
her weekends back, a little bit more time with husband, jonathan, and her darling ella. 22 years with "meet the press," 11 as executive producer, murph and axe, you know her well. >> i was shocked to hear she took the job in the first place because she thought she could sleep late. >> as an intern. >> it's paid off for the american people because she has made this show as much as you guys who carry the load in front of the camera, she has made this show what it is for so long. and so she will be missed but she'll enhance the coverage for nbc i'm sure. >> best in the business. when i starmtded out here, tim brought me to the show, i was terrified. she brought me up. she's a combination of kind of a mother hen and a drill sergeant. and i'm always going to be very grateful and she's going to be a huge addition to the campaign coverage. >> the good news is as we say, betsy won't be far away. we're going to miss her. i spe that's all for today. we'll be back next week.
. it's sunday, it's "meet the press." good monday morning. right now on "first look," tragedy in southern italy as a tour bus plunges off a highway killing dozens. senator john kerry brings peace negotiators back to the table. anthony weiner's campaign setback as pressure mounts for him to drop out of the race. plus a jewelry heist at a hotel. one couple's trash turns out to be treasure. and details on kimye's bed budget. good morning to you. i'm veronica delawara