tv Third Rail Al Jazeera February 15, 2016 12:00am-12:31am EST
>> these are special interests, lobbyists, people who don't love our country or have our best interests at heart. >> what began last week in iowa when voters here in new hampshire confirmed tonight is nothing short of the beginning of a political revolution joining me now is jack kingston, a principal with a law firm. good to you have you with us >> it's great to be here we have a lot to breakdown when it comes to this primary. i want to talk about voters and both parties. they seem to be showing so much disdain for established candidates. do you think it is a new? >> i think it is a new factor and it is here to stay. i think it is positive. if you look at the delegate
count trump and cruz has 75. rubio, ted cruz and casic, so 27 for the throw out of the bombs, the more challenging in revolutionary-type candidates. 27 versus 14 for establishment. i think anybody who doesn't ski that trend especially in the republican party is missing it the g.o.p. establishment candidates seems to be taking a hammering from the outsiders. ted cruz, donald trump. is ted cruz is going to be backed in this. >> i don't think he will. i don't see trump supporters moving to a cruz or rub yoe, but i can see ted cruz candidacy. i can see candidates, casic or bush, i can see them comfortable with marco rubio.
that's where you might have the more establishment ver says either cruz or trump, but i don't think they will lose looking ahead. nevada, south carolina, the scc primary, that is all cruz and trump territory. i spoke to one that said trump has 37 points in his district. so he is everybody where they are. i'm very familiar with some of the tea party supporters that also support double-stranded which begs the question is the tea establishment? >> i think we have always had the element of maybe the hard-core more pure voter who is very suspicious of big government and big business and big washington. a solid libertarian streak. then you had that evangelical
vote that really does not compromise. they don't want to hear of compromising on certain issues that they decide are moral issues. they're off the table in terms of discussion. what is interesting is in iowa two out of three republican primary voters consider themselves evangelical voters, but in new hampshire only one out of five. yet cruz did very well in new hampshire. so he can also get into that libertarian voter digging in deeper, i'm wondering if some of these g.o.p. interests of candidates are beg selfish from hanging on. it seems like they are fighting for the same voters. if the so-called wants to remain the establishment and knock cruz and trump out of this, don't they need to drop out before it starts to accelerate behind cruz and trump? >> i think they do because right
now between the three of them john kasich, jeb bush and marco rubio, i don't think you can argue there's not much in it, but there is in the two versus the three and so i do think the establishment is fighting among itself and that's a different element who do you think is the best g.o.p. candidate to take on either cruz or trump? >> i think casic has a great balance in washington, a very successful job-creating governor of ohio. i think if you had a john kasich marco rubio ticket, that would be good but right now, the belief in a trump cruz ticket, i think that could be an interesting combination. the thing that as the establishment of the republican party is uncomfortable with what
is going on, if you look across the fence at the democrat party, there is a lot of reason for republicans to be comforted. hillary clinton, the presumptive nominee, has all kind of trust problems. she is potentially an indictment. she has lost women and youth voters and you have joe biden out there and certainly mayor bloomberg is nosing around. if you that of the troubles republicans have inter party, look at the democrats and you will feel better. the parties leader, is he a real publican, he doesn't want to cut social security and medicaid. >> i think he is redefined it. i think he has expanded the borders of our big tent. i think it has been helpful. the statements that he has made in the past, which would have been killers for any other candidate, he has weathered that
storm. he brought new voters could the republican party be a party that doesn't want to cut social security, that wants to keep it intact? >> i think that the rault is every time we get near the third rail, that third rail-- it is probably a good position. what he said was i'm going to be the greatest jobs president in the history of the country. that's what a lot of people right now want to hear is that kind of determination and bold announce. trump is not afraid to make those statements that's an understatement, jashg. turning to the democrats, hillary clinton getting pummeled over her talks to goldman sachs. >> i think is question of
donations to the clinton foundation. it underscores that drip drip concern that people have about hillary clinton in the clinton business dealings, in the wheeling and dealings and the personal server email what is responsible for that drip drip. is it hillary clinton, her problems or is it, as she says, the vast right wing conspiracy that is always targeting her? >> i think it's always going to be a combination of both. her enemies are going to go after anything they think is fair game. i think in this case bernie sanders has her scared out of her daylights. she actually assumed all the women vote was going to her. i think what was interesting with that gloria stein statement that chicks - i think that was the word - are going it the burn because that's where the dudes are. it is i such an 1980 statement. young women, like my daughters, are going to go to hell if they don't support a sister.
i think it is just a kind of a 1980s feminist view that the world has evolved. hillary clinton is known for her 1980s dress code and her old pant suits. so for me to my daughters and their friends, they look at her as yesterday's news and somehow bernie sanders with his free college education to everybody has become the daryling of the youth vote. he is exciting to them and he says things. he doesn't have the baggage of email complications and strange donations and wall street. right now wall street is probably the only group that has less popular numbers than members of congress. so that is pretty bad. >> very, very bad final question. you're a principal with the washington lobbying firm. do your clients fear this braich new political world? do you think we will go back to
politics as usual once all these outbursts and anger simmer down? >> i think there is some jitteriness because what groups like is to have predictability , whether it is the big agenda or calling on the doors of an individual member of congress. with a trump, a bernie sanders, with a ted cruz, with a ben carson, you don't have that kind of predictability. so they will come along, but right now they would rather have a tried and true political figure that they dealt with in the past you have yet to formally endorse anyone in this race. are you prepared to do that right now? >> i'm very close to endorsing someone and maybe if you can check back with me in the next day a little hint? >> let me just say this. i was born in texas. i have some partiality to
texans thank you. >> okay the third rail panel is coming up next. >> invest in middle-class constantly is it behaviour. >> what do you say to the citizens who abide by the laws, the young kids, poor young kid. criminal. >> "inside story" takes you beyond the headlines, beyond the quick cuts, beyond the soundbites. we're giving you a deeper dive into the stories that are making our world what it is.
welcome back to third rail. washington dc council supporting a bill. it would give a check to the most violent centimetres to not commit crimes. is it award will bad behaviour. some >> reporter: it would offer a reward for not committing crimes. the amount is minimum at all compared to the cost of invitation. criminals. >> if you're a good person for your whole life you will never be rewarded. >> this is $9,000 a year and they learn to be good american citizens. i like it our panel. a republican strategist and white house aid. a senior fellow at the independent women's forum.
also a features editor at the nations mag zen they're trying to do this. should cities pay violent criminals to not be violent? >> how do i get myself signed up for this. i'm a good citizen, i pay my taxes and volunteer. i'm responsible. i contribute to my community. hazard. >> reporter: is it true you're not getting money. when you think about it-- >> i work, so-- >> we invest in middle-class kids constantly. i suspect, i certainly have held fellow ships in my life, internships. we give people who are doing well, who have had kinds of opportunity additional opportunity. come to this program, study. you will get extra cash for it as well. this idea is what if we did that for poor kids too
is it rewarding bad behaviour. it's a $9,000 check. >> for repeat offenders of violent crimes these are human beings. i work with this population. i pass through a church in the inner city in a deprived neighborhood this? >> you have to give people hope and a shot to change their behaviour and to see a brighter future. who invests in poor kids? nobody does. >> what does this is a to the citizens who abide by the laws, the young kids, the poor young kids. not every poor young kid is a criminal. what does it say to them who abidely the law and has a job, a newspaper rout. >> the perfect world. >> it is not sensible >> in a perfect world you would want caring people to raise kids >> this will cost $5 million over five years. i'm sure the city can use that money in better ways
>> i think it will save money. >> i don't >> if you have say ten or 20 kids, change their behaviour, to look at their scales and make money legally raerp just locking up which costs a lot >> absolutely this is not an idea that popped up in a vacuum um. they have been running a similar program like this. no-one has looked at this analytically. a respect specialist they don't know in the program works >> the hope is you can teach kids to find out what it is they do well. help them to find what it is they can do in life. they're getting a check to explore what they can do for the rest of the life >> it is not just cutting them a check. it is something like ten different elements to this program that involve investment in infrastructure in the neighborhood. it's about investing in the
world that they're in, about putting them into a program themselves where they're learning life skills, where they're getting health check ups and doing the things that we want to create positive outcomes and alongside that they get an amount to encourage their participation >> these are repeat violent criminals. i really think we need sentencing and justice reform for the petty thief or someone caught with a small amount of drugs. i worry about the incarceration rates for small crimes, but i think these repeat offenders and violent criminals need to be put away for longer. maybe they don't need to get out and get the money. >> every kid we lose, every kid that doesn't make t we pay for those kids. we can't afford them to slip through the cracks and send them off to jail. if we can save a kid who didn't
have the benefit of a good upbringing, mum and dad, brothers and sisters or other role models, we can save a quarter of the kids in this program. productive. >> it's not just failures of the family but that of the states. they're paying to have social workers and psychologists in hospitals when people show up with gunshot wounds. repeat violent offenders, one thing we do is that the homicide in the shooting clearance rates in neighborhoods where this happens are so disgustingly low krit six say that a lot of these programs are already in place. why not beef up those >> they're not in point. that's the place rather than throwing cash at a problem >> we're not solving crimes.
counsellors. >> we don't have the money. i would loov to have the money. it would help me where i'm a pastor and where i serve the next issue, beyonce knowles, her new video have some people praising her and others are questioning her motives. >> reporter: her performance has controversy. >> she dressed up in the tribute to the panthers. >> i thought it was outrageous that she used it as a platform to attack police officers. the >> the super bowl is a family event. >> this shows a divide. >> artists are known to use their platform >> this was the super bowl i don't know about you, but i was caught off guard.
i missed all of these subtle tones that i read in the paper. >> this was, obviously, very political statement, the song, the performance. now that we're reading into it, is she doing this to sell here. >> first of all, who cares. >> of course she is selling records. that's her job. i don't have a problem with her selling records. the interesting thing is that we have arrived at a cultural moment where sympathy, one of the most successful-- she, one of the most successful artists, the way to talk the records is talking about the way to reclaim our culture, to tap into the black lives matter. she is speaking through her music, the formation, the song formation in the music video are both about a reclaiming of the powers of golf black culture and particularly of black women.
the fact that she is like this is the kind of thing that will be popular rate now. it is hopeful to me that that is where she is >> if i was an entertainer i would be loving this because you're talking about it selling records >> absolutely. more people will study this >> the beauty is that she is big enough that sympathy can say what she thinks. that's the sweetness of it. there was a time if you had too much saying what you believe, you might lose your record deal. she is at a point in her career where she is so big and so popular that she can afford to say exactly what is on her mind. that's what muveng and america is-- music industry is about and america, you can say whatever you want you can do this show, there might be a disconnect between black lives matter and white people.
they don't understand. >> i think that in the super bowl the back up dancers were dressed in a way to look like a black panther. i think there a lot of people who are turned about praising the black panther movement which was involved in extortion and murder. this was a violent group. there is legitimate concern about that. she is a business woman. she doesn't talk about these things. she does a video which i might beity whitest person here, but i didn't understand the song. it took me a while to under what the message was. the video is interesting and beautifully shot, but i don't understand how this moves the conversation at all you were praising her for at least going out there and making a stand. do we need more beyonce out there?
so many don't get political at all >> take her and j zchlt. they were both criticized. they were criticized because they were not showing up at the beginning. before we with were calling it black lives matter. around 2010 and 11 when we were seeing a surge in racial organising and there was a time in our culture and history, and black history in particular, that the entertainers were the funders of the whole movement if more entertainers got involved, whatever the issue is, if they got out there and speak their mind would that encourage others to get involved? >> if we actually got young people to read a day.
>> you can't underestimate the power of pop culture and social media. for those who-- social media. for those who are stars in that realm, they speak to millions of people. it is huge at least one thing we do has an impact. look at the sales at red lobster. thank you to my guests. straight ahead the country is outraged over the flint water crisis that is poisoning thousands of children, but this
the biggest victims are some 8,000 kids, as young as 6 years old. it comes at an age which causes permanent damage. flint michigan is not alone. led contamination is taking place in cities and towns all over america. so is official indifference to what amounts to mass poisoning. two examples here. this week the new york times reported that the village of seep refreshings ing found led in the water supply last august. in michigan, officials didn't bother to warn people not to drink the water. they held that information for five months. at last july firnls in jackson also found their water was also contaminated with led. they held on that this new for six months. in michian, officials says if
anyone dies of led contamination, they could face manslaughter charges. it is important that the entire national has to face the reality that while most of the water is safe, the ageing infrastructure that delivers it is often crumbling and sometimes dangerously. congress bears a lot of the-- pairs a lot of the blame here. the explanation has to be cut back on funding for safety and failed attempts to pass infrastructure improvement bills. making sure everyone who lives in the wealthiest countries in the world has safe water to drink, that's really third rail. >> we're here to fully get into the nuances of everything that's going on, not just in this country, but around the world. >> what, as if there were no cameras here, would be the best solution? >> this goes to the heart of the argument. >> to tell you the stories that others won't cover. how big do you see this getting? getting the news from
the people who are affected. >> people need to demand reform... >> we're here to provide the analysis... the context... and the reporting that allows you to make sense of your world. >> ali velshi on target. >> my family, a part of them, they get killed. and i don't like to see people get killed. those people that died, that was really close.. i miss them like i don't really going to -- i can't really be on them. >> in 2015, nearly 3,000 people were shot in chicago.