Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  Bloomberg  March 16, 2017 6:00pm-7:01pm EDT

6:00 pm
♪[music] studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." >> good evening. i'm jeff greenfield, filling in for charlie rose. not exactly the consensus choice of the republican party, roughly one in senators refused to endorse him. so did four of the last five republican presidential nominees. but with his election and with the party controlling both houses of congress, republicans almost all -- of almost all stripes saw a chance to finally their mostof significant goals, from tax cuts to the environment to regulation. first big test, repealing and replacing something ofs set
6:01 pm
a wall of opposition within the ranks. is obamacare light. meditationhanges in would leave millions without protection. and they appear to be urging break with house speaker paul ryan and forge his own path. care fightthe health to the long-term hopes of the party and the president? brett stevens, the wally editor at street journal. i'm pleased to welcome you to the table. let me start with you, ryan. this can't be what the white the republican leadership had hoped to find when they put the health care bill out. >> well, the truth is, that this isn't really president trump's health care proposal. a proposal that's been knocking around. it's been evolving over a long
6:02 pm
period of time, in the mind of house speaker paul ryan. and it reflects paul ryan's priorities. hasthe trump administration decided to put its muscle behind proposal.lative it's not obvious that that's a very sensible thing of the trump administration to be doing. for ryan and his allies is that the goals that articulated one health care are really pretty contradictory and irreconcilable. they both have to solve a political problem of not completely unraveling this health care system. on the other hand, they want to government tor their most ardent i had logical supporters. and that's a very tough circle to scare. and the trump administration, i the presidentat himself has thought all that deeply about these questions. how he did do, differentiated himself when he ran for the republican was by presenting himself as a defender of the safety net.
6:03 pm
lo and behold, he found that many republican primary voters responded rather strongly to that message. a big problemo be for him. >> so you have this -- i don't paradox, but you have this sort of odd situation where the people who most want unalloyed repeal, people in caucuses, theyom seem to be the ones who are most urging trump to break with even though, trump's instincts seem to be toward, as you say, preserving far from a kind of repeal free market system. >> that's right. to this plann comes from two seemingly very different directions. it comes from people who are themselves as -- styling idiologicals purists. it also comes from republican whotors, in particular, represent more diverse swing constituencies, who represent in
6:04 pm
some cases states that have accepted the obamacare medicaid expansion. so you both have opposition from you might describe as the left of the party and also from the right of the party. ways, the kind of base for both of those different kinds of republicans are actually quite similar. >> but, look, this is the problem. you have a congress that theher -- on one side or other, among the republicans, is in the process of making what to ideological calculations. go far enoughbill or not? i think the president is making political calculation, which is, does he want this republican party on his arm or not? to him, the congressional republicans are like a or mightd who might not be interesting to him. too colorful -- >> not for pbs. it's a late-night show. words, foro in other trump, he views the republicans, and this generation of the
6:05 pm
as basicallyrty, disposable. that's what i don't think the republicans in congress or the republican base that got behind trump ever really understood. it reminds me, ironically, of he -- swairgz, which is schwarzenegger, which is he will comfortable governing as a conservative as he would be as a populist. >> you said something that resonates, when you talked about he's tweeting republicans as disposable. i think there's another way of aoking at it, which is for lot of republican primary voters, they feel as though traditional republicans were as disposable and that trump came along and actually spoke to them, spoke up interests and pledged to defend them. i think that is a big problem, anause paul ryan has imperative that's an intra-republican pairive. he satisfy the think tanks, donors, satisfy their zeal for smaller government,
6:06 pm
whereas trump was speaking to this republican electorate? stand to that point, greenberg, just did a focus group with 35 trump voters. staying withre him. but they are very angry with the republican congress. that trump had gotten their votes in part because he was not one of them. is, when youestion move from that kind of political arena to the legislative does trump satisfy a populistwho heard message and get anything through congress? outhe thing is, if we find in the next week or so that this bill is not going to make its congress, that it doesn't lack the support, trump is simply going to turn on the republicans, on ryan. and you already see rumblings of his mediagh say this isor -- to the point i was making at the get go. you can't trust these
6:07 pm
because trump, of course, was never a member of the -- never an actual republican. never part of the party ideologically, barely a part of terms of this formal party affiliation. >> you're suggesting a public open declaration? >> i don't think it would necessarily hurt trump with his movement, because the republican party was always, now to switch the horse essentially he was riding on his way to the presidency. it was a vehicle of convenience. once your horse is exhaustened you, you get under on another horse. the trump base that relates to anger, his needism, the emotional appeal that he type of to a certain voter is not going to abandon him so easily. the people who are going to find areselves disappointed those movement conservatives who made essentially what amounted devil,rgain with the thinking trump is a guy we can control, we can inform. which we willinto
6:08 pm
pour the sweet wine of paul ryan's agenda. didn't quite work out that way. >> if i may, if you think back to george h.w. bush, we've all forgotten him now, but think back to george h.w. bush, re-elected in 2004, in large part because in the state of ohio, he managed to win the votes of large numbers of lower income folks, many of them women. them over because george w. bush seemed to them like someone who was going to interests, look out for people like them, working and middle class voters in these states. after he wasrtly inaugurated, what did he press forward with? acial security reform at time, by the way, when defined benefit pensions were going lot of people were awfully anxious and wage -- not to mention that he was going to spread democracy around the world. despitewas his program, having won on the strength, again, of these working and
6:09 pm
voters.ncome so for trump right now to abandoned ryan care, which is a set of ideas that pretty much conservative is quickly abandoning, for trump to abandon be anow, would in my view very astute reading of actual flesh and blood republican voters. then you have this other little -- i don't know if it's an 800 pound gorilla or elephant, but it's something, which is i hear it on conservative talk radio. we heard it from the press that look, it's a binary choice. if you want to repeal obamacare, you have.l frankly, it sort of reminds me of a story. guys at a bullfight. vendor with a sign, hot meat pies, ten pesos. it's cold, dough wi and there's no meat. says, noome plaibz, he no, hot meat pie, that's the name of the pie. are we at a is, point where republicans are so desperate to say we repealed
6:10 pm
obamacare that they're going to argue, if we don't repeal obamacare, we're going to dispoint all the people who have been waiting eight years for this? >> look, there's a perfectly point, that if they don't get this bill through, then this apublican congress is failure. you are just as -- you are setting up a democratic majority majority in 2018 just as surely as the failure of hillary care back in 1993 set up for the newtns ency a yearcend later. that might be at the bottom what is going to win over moddom types and wavering moderates, who say we have to won'thind this or there be a republican party, the platform that they want to enact. or i should say this congress will be dead on arrival. >> to me, that reflects a kind
6:11 pm
of bizarre fantasy about republicans and what republicans actually want. corporation, they thatcted a study and found 51% of republican primary voters taxes onncreasing people who earned more than $200,000 a year. largerlook at the universe of republican voters, that number would be comparable higher than the public at large. >> so let me just ask you, why thehe health care bill are tax credits skewed so dramatically toward the more affluent? jeff.nk you very much, well-done. so you got right on to this. so in this legislation, if you more revenue -- the hard thing in obamacare, was to actually get this revenue. want toin, you might have tax cuts down the line. you might want to have bigger class tax cuts. that's something that many republicans would enthusiastically support. the grassroots furor for cutting taxes for andle earning millions
6:12 pm
millions of dollars? right? if you're looking at investment butme and what have you -- that is really the chief accomplishment of ryan care, relative to all the other disruption and harm that it may well cause. and that sends a really bad signal. it's one thing for republicans to pledge we're gonna have a tax reform that's gonna grow the on corporates taxes, do something that's going to make america a more destination, that would have been a great first thing to do. but instead you have ryan acting kind ofh there's some time limit on obamacare. this is not the debt limit. something that's gonna blow up in your face if we don't do it right now. sequence right matters a lot in politics. welfare clinton passed reform before he moved on to health reform, it's quite hadible we wouldn't have the revolution of 1994. if george w. bush started doing ofething about the woes middle class -- before passing a big tax cut, the politician of
6:13 pm
the bush years would have been very different too. trump has an opportunity to get cutting ryan loose. >> part of the problem here is that the republicans are have aning that they opportunity, comparable to the one that obama had in 2009. difference is eight seats in the senate. and that's the significant difference in that obama had just, and just, if you remember justbamacare debate, enough political capital in '09 to '10ears from to just push through something as big as obamacare. think he'ssson, i exactly right. the presidencies that succeed do steps andng small winning every time, rather than trying to reverse something as large as this as your first of business. ♪
6:14 pm
6:15 pm
6:16 pm
>> so let's say that president trump comes to the realization that you know what? message that was essentially populist, you know. my inaugural speech could have been given by bernie sanders. been misled by the republican leadership. i'm going to refashion or i'm gonna have my people refashion the health care bill that's
6:17 pm
doied with what i'm going to with taxes that really is devoted to the middle class. campaign,aid in the i'm not really interested in helping those who already have so much. is that a plausible political for him to take? >> it is, because i've always thought, and this is one of the trumper, isa never that actually donald trump, ideologically, would be more comfortable in the democratic party than in the republican onty, that his emphasis social protection, his belief in infrastructure spending, all of with align at least classic democratic economic agenda. defined about a year ago, before the election, he was asked what the future of the be inican party would five or 10 years' time. he actually gave, to my a really coherent answer. he said i see the republican party as a workers' party. all right? party of plutokrats, entrepreneurs, capitalists and
6:18 pm
so on. protection, whether it's protection from competition or illegalants immigration, they want astection from what they see a muslim horde innervating the country, they want social protections, a corporate state examples that we have of from, frankly, argentina. this is very different from the came ofan party that i age with, under ronald reagan. set upif i may, just to or maybe i won't set up. i'll try. it always seemed to me that third-party was a candidate who figured that the only way a third-party candidate could actually win the white was to take one of the two parties. and both parties are so hollowed institutionalf forces that could prevent that, that he ca did it. trumpt case, if donald tried to redefine the republican party along populist lines, how who thet work, given leadership is in the house and senate?
6:19 pm
mitch mcconnell is populist, ryan populist, in the sense of changing the tax laws. that's a pretty hard road. >> well, when you're thinking about the two parties, one way think about them is purely through an ideological lens. to think about it is that, over the last 20 or so years, the democratic party has what younto more of might call a bar bell party. it's a party that represents large numbers of working class people, particularly working class people of color, and it largerpresents a percentage of some very rich people as well. if you look at the 2012 election, barack obama romney amongmitt voters earning more than $200,000 a year. so then the republican party is a party that represents the broad american middle. right now it's largely the white middle. but it represents parts of the country that are more
6:20 pm
cosmopolitan.ess so to me, that is a place that -- that should prompt republican politicians to think about how do i better represent the interests of this constituent? course there are ideological imperatives but i think that's a point.arting i think donald trump's politics were a very good starting point for thinking about, how do we take these parts of the country that have been left out of rising prosperity and deliver message? we want to make sure that everyone in the country is with global economic integration, with automation, with rapid change. and the republican party can be party that ensures that everyone is making that transition. right now it's not. described you -- you yourself as a never trumper, and reflect that. let me ask you about the broader republican party. is there anything in the republican party leadership, in their agenda, that fits what ryan was just talking about in terms of where they want the tax
6:21 pm
cuts to go, how they want to protect workers? there anything substantive that you can point to that says -- >> look, you know, the republican party at its best is a party that represents aspiration, opportunity and inclusion. that says we can -- we are going to get government you canhe way so that pull yourself up without being burdened by regulation. something like, you know, for instance the push for greater school choice, greater disadvantagedr minorities, a perfect example of party.nd of in fact, the classic ryan sort call it you want to that -- the ryan wing of the republican party, i don't think antithetical to that, although it doesn't do a fantastic job of presenting in those colors. what is antithetical to that is the kind of nativism, close your doors, you know, batten down the hatches republicanism,
6:22 pm
trump.nted by donald but you're absolutely right in that this wing of the party has not done a particularly good job of selling that vision of in part, i would wholly hasuse it so given itself over to trumpism, to working with donald trump, trying to make clear what the differences are between reagan-style republicanism and -- >> when we talk about government i'ming out of the way, often sympathetic to it. the problem is, when you think choice, when youis think about changing the health care system, you actually need institutionshese work. and when you take this reflexive anti-government view, as as it might be, that means you're oftentimes bereft know-how that's required to actually make these things
6:23 pm
happen. party for thebeen a big republican party. brett has referred to nativism. big difference between contempt for immigrants, just a for them asste though they're somehow worse people, and also a belief that the united states, like all countries, is a country that needs to be thoughtful about our immigration policies wants to be sure that our immigration policies serve our and the interests interests of vulnerable americans, including the children of immigrants, who are often quite poor. that our policies to date, you know, and also policies among many pro-immigration republicans take the view that let's let in numbers of people and then deny them medicaid and other programs. lo and behold, most republican voters agreed that it didn't work. >> immigration views that are
6:24 pm
the trumpresented in immigration are those of the king.ongressman i have to give him credit. he perfectly captured, in his exactly what this wing of party --lican >> nobody on earth says we should have no kind of -- we completely a irrational or open border system. on the extreme libertarian right that.s, you can find everyone understands that you need a regulated immigration system. a --y -- that's >> what is the principle, the basis of regulation? be a nationalis interest or should it be what's in the interests of employers? a national interest? i mean, look, my mother arrived sevens country with dollars to her name. she was a refugee. all right? and then in the space of one generation, her son is routinely
6:25 pm
accused of being elitist, one of of americaniumphs democracy i would say. >> and when you're looking at folks in the mississippi delta, that we neglect. why? because we can. >> no. >> it's because we can, because decided to replace one workforce with another. that's not to say that wonderfuln isn't a thing that enriches our country. but it also means that having a more thoughtful policy is not crazy. having a policy that emphasizes skills, having a policy that's designed to enrich the country, is not somehow -- >> look, you know perfectly well int what threatens workers -- it's automation. >> at this point, i think i need little backuggest a to where i started, although this is clearly one of the arguments that's going to be at theheart and soul of republicans. i wanted to ask a perhaps less lofty question. clearly a lot of republicans made their peace with donald trump, despite some significant
6:26 pm
temperament and character, because they thought, a, it's a binary choice. either get him or we lose the supreme court for a generation. extent,ion is, to what if there is legislative gridlock, if the obamacare repeal crashes and burns, if there are increasing tensions 1600 pennsylvania after and the other end in congress, to extent will the patience of some republicans with donald trump's more erratic behavior begin to whither? in other words, do you expect there will be people willing to step away from, say, take this seriously or literally because he's our guy? think hextent do you erosion within his own party if he can't do what the congressional wing is do?ng he'll >> my sense is that if trump
6:27 pm
were to prevent republicans from politicallying disastrous, they may well be beholden to him. but conditioning is an independent and coequal branch of government. is the job of congress to do its job of holding the executive branch accountable. thatu may well be right there's some political calculation going on here, but seriousis, if there are questions, and i think there are, about the trump administration, about its, you foreignes to governments and what have you, those should be investigated by congress. >> what i find stunning is the resilience of trump's supporters. about this just the other week. i mean, so far, seven weeks of administration -- just think how much political capital, how many political opportunities have been squandered in one self-inflicted wound after another, one stupid tweet after another that simply seems to consume all of the administration's energies smghtd and you would think, or i would
6:28 pm
would make this thoughtful trump supporters say, this isn't quite what i signed for. i signed up for a guy who knew how to drive a bulldozer and was to drive it right through congress to accomplish a task. polling out ofhe michigan. look, trump is a personality figure. the trumpand phenomenon, we have to look at phenomena that go beyond the regular democratic experience, which is why i mentioned perron in argentina. why is it that he has this on his corell supporters that can't be explained by results? i think a lot of us miss the point, going back a year and a half. and it's one of the few things i i got right. from the very beginning. and hadng we thought been taught was a bug was a feature. vulgarity proved that he was not a prisoner of the
6:29 pm
establishment, the very fact that he was wanted to break china, the fact that he boasted of his money was a way to steal is too rich any camp he bought. the resiliency he has now you us trace back to what all of thought he'll never make it through the first insult of mccain. has a stronger attachment to a republican base, and a republican base that is very skeptical of republicans who don't seem to have their interests in mind. the truth is that trump never had ahave happened if you republican party that was more responsive to the party. >> i think it's a mistake to of trump as an agenda phenomenon, like he was speaking immigration or trade. he could completely flip his views on any number of these the next year or so. and i don't think that would alter his bases, attachment. gety wrote me -- i literally thousands of letters for my columns.
6:30 pm
they become almost a representative sample. i thought the best letter was a guy who said you don't get it. know he's vulgar. we know he's crass. we know he doesn't have a command of policy issues. but at last we have a president -- and since i'm on it's a wordision that rhymes with drawers -- got.s what they here was a politician who was not -- who never backed down. who never apologized. the appeal went well beyond what saying about immigration or any number of other subjects. it was a sense that here was a last didn't care what guys like me or guys like you -- >> exactly. >> -- think about him. >> but the question, if i may, that sustain, for instance, legislative defeats in which his core supporters say, well, you promised you'd deliver something? or is this bond with trump so
6:31 pm
strong that they will simply of reality,ersion you know -- i was betrayed or republicans were too weak -- in other words, how resilient is resilience? >> if you have democrats who acknowledge that w ought to have that isration policy based in legality or in national in bigts, trump will be trouble. if his opposition enables him, by trying to marginalize some of commonsense views, then he may well get away with it. but the fundamental issue is, the reason why i emphasize the agenda part, and you're right, aump is not someone who is thinker, butpolicy if you had a candidate running on a national interest agenda, much, as reagan did, that yes, we favor free trade but we to punishnly going those who violate the rules.
6:32 pm
if you had someone along those lines, that candidate would have won this election in a land side. run the election 10 times, nine times out of 10 trump would have lost. again if you had another republican who was aligned with measured, more, dare i say it, centrist on some would, that candidate have won overwhelmingly. a well, i mean, that's counterfact. we're never going to know. i come back to this theme. it's very important. i think what you are thinking ofut trump in terms american -- as another american in an american political tradition, and he that. isn't he's out of -- he landed as it comet, so to speak. he is i think the most -- if you in a globalk of him way, he is the most
6:33 pm
wavesentative example of a ill-liberalism. it with marine le pen. it's sort of neither left -- the distinctionstical of liberal and conservative, i think, have washed away. moreeal distinctions are illiberal.l and and that's his strength. i don't think you're going to up finding a new republican party but sort of adjusting or traditional republican beliefs and the virtues of free markets. >> here's the problem. you literally have a lot of claimvative outlets who that the basic center right christian democratic consensus many otherve in countries is socialistic. you have them claiming it's lunacy. you couldn't have a center right republican party
6:34 pm
that recognizes that people net.d on the safety by marginalizing and stigmatizing all those who said, hey, maybe we need child tax credits for middle-income saying that is socialism, you open the way to someone like donald trump. is something this illiberalism that's driving me seems silly. it's a failure on the part of mainstream republicans. >> i think it would be a fine if at the end of this legislation, it has you both we'llnd you can weigh -- play these comments and see whether or not the next three to out.onths bear it but i will just say this is one thing i think is kind of universal. presidency unlike anything we have ever seen or imagined. could have thank you very much. >> thank you. live-stream your favorite sport
6:35 pm
6:36 pm
at the airport. binge dvr'd shows while painting your toes. on demand laughs during long bubble baths. tv everywhere is awesome. the all-new xfinity stream app. xfinity. the future of awesome.
6:37 pm
>> if you're having trouble reaching an office in the next few weeks, it might be because the workers are too busy brackets.heir seeing how their choices are doing, as they make their way weeks ofhree competition that will decide who ncaa men's basketball title. of sportsess is one biggest spectacles. midstd sports are in the of a $19.6 billion dollar deal
6:38 pm
rights.dcast a single ad in the finals goes million. while the tournament produces memorable moments like this villanova's shot by chris jenkins at the buzzer last year, there is also a long scandals and controversies. players coddled through their work, shady recruitment practices and the bigger question of whether those by theirare exploited schools and the ncaa. joining me in new york, bill rhoden, a columnist and editor espn's "the undefeated." joe nocera is author of the inside story of the rebellion against the ncaa. and john feinstein, author of "the legend'sks club." whatin to the uninitiated makes march madness so
6:39 pm
compelling. >> well, i think it's two things. and out nature of the event. it's not best of seven. teams can be the number one seed, number two seed, whatever. bad lose, they have a shooting night, somebody is hurt at the wrong time, they're done. but more than that, it's the true underdog aspect of the so-called double-digit seeds, those teams seeded 10 and higher, who have a real chance inwin early round games and some cases actually get to the final four. george mason got to the final four in 2016. v.c.u. got to the final four in 2011. and butler, which is now in a big-time lead, got to the final four in 2010 and '11, to the championship games. love to root for underdogs us underdogsgives like no other arena does. >> i take your point. is it also the nature of the
6:40 pm
competition that there are that we're going to keep a special eye on? i'm thinking of a certain from ucla, for instance. >> yes. and the shame of it, though, is that lonzo ball will not be a sophomore at ucla. at a junior he's going to be playing in the nba next year. that's one thing that has years, becausee the nba passed a rule saying you one yearo college for before you can go in the nba draft. but after that, you can. to be that a great player like lebron james or kobe bryant might skip college altogether and go to the pros. but most guys who didn't do that would stay at least three or four years and we got to know them. they were almost part of our family. grant hill, who stayed at duke for four years, almost became part of people's families. that's why he's still so popular now 23 years of he graduated. same, but there's no doubt that many will
6:41 pm
emerge -- somebody will emerge as a star at the end of this tournament, last year, it was chris jenkins. by the way, he is a senior at villanova. >> let's stay with the tournament itself for a minute or two. handicap this for us. >> oh, god. mean -- that's -- >> did i put you too much on the spot? >> that's great. everybody knows i'm not on the spot. maybe john knows. >> i'm glad you got that bill.on, >> yeah, i know. the thing is -- and john touched of this is, beauty and for me, the most compelling part of these next two weeks, got the so-called underdogs, we all know that after these two weeks, it's up withuch going to end big money. it's gonna with the duke, north carolina. context, if ucla makes the final four, it's kind because a, they're in another time zone. so i would not be surprised if the final four is duke, carolina.
6:42 pm
i don't know if that can happen. kansas and iolina, think i would put in ucla, just because it's a really good story. but this whole idea of the underdog, i mean, after these me, it becomes very predictable. >> and there's another aspect to because you've written not just about the surface of sports but what's underneath it. some extent, when you watch guiltyurnament, is it a pleasure? >> not me. all know where all the bodies are buried. if i'm tearing up, it's not for thei'm crying exploitation of the athletes. no. big guys now. and i tell kids, from the age of either going to be -- or 14 -- you're either theg to be the tool or carpenter. you make that choice. you make the choice. so by this time, when we see the competition, you know, you've got an opportunity to get an
6:43 pm
education. you make that call. of the exploitation is this idea of making people have to go somewhere. go to ucla for a year or two as opposed to let them do what do or anybody else. if you're good enough to play professionally, go. of kind of having to make them stay for a year, it does turn things into a farce. think anyone has critically about the ncaa than you. do you watch this tournament with at least one eye as a fan, do you watch with the knowledge of what you see as a pretty un-- >> i definitely watch it as a fan. i root for providence all my life. that hasn't really changed. everygo in knowing that aspect of this tournament is about maximizing revenue. aspect. you can't walk into your seat
6:44 pm
a product that's not ncaa sponsored. they actually take them away in through you walk the gate to take your seat. every aspect of this is commercial. maximize the revenues, except for the labor force, as i it. to put the labor force does it for free. so you know that. you know the players are enjoying it. but there's something wrong. is something wrong. you think extent do the way that the mans get weeks,d in these two particularly the bracketology, to what extent do you think that this event ands an institution like the ncaa from a more public accounting of done?hey've >> you don't need bracket technology to shield the -- bracketology to shield the ncaa. the average fan does not care. to an alabama football game, and you start to ask
6:45 pm
people about the exploitation of athletes, they'll laugh at you. if you go to an ncaa final four game, they'll laugh at you. the average -- there's a segment that has come to view this as a problem. i'm among those people. views that something wrong is happening here in the way they're treated, both in terms financial exploitation and academic exploitation. but most people don't care. >> john, do you care? john feinstein, should we care? theh, i care and i watch games. i enjoy these first and second-round games that bill is referencing more than any, it does involve the smaller schools, where there are not the big bucks. but it's not the bracketology that shields what's going on, jeff. it's television. television presents the best of the ncaa tournament. we see the fantastic finishes. stories on these these wonderful, quote, student
6:46 pm
athletes as the ncaa always calls them, as television always calls them. they do these interviews with which, and players in you know, they're all going to save the world, when they get out of college. psa that runs every year during the tournament which says there are 470,000 student athletes in the ncaa who will never play in the nba or the nfl, and you've got a kid who is swimmer and plays the violin 4.0gpa, as if he's the typical student. sellnk that's where they it. they sell it very well. but you can still acknowledge thatthe games are great, the players are terrific at what they do and enjoy the knowing, as while bill said, that there's something behind that door that don't want you to see. >> yeah. and, again, we've all been doing decades. i've been going almost 40 years. it's nothing to become jaded. we all have our passions about what's wrong.
6:47 pm
my passion, i'm less -- and joe and i have kind of been on the side of this. i'm less concerned about the exploitation of athletes. now i look at the media. media, and what you're going to see tonight, you're gonna see the media is white.99% if you look at anything around it, event production, everything around it is white. the only thing -- the only role play are gonnas be these 10 kids on the court maybe. but if you look at our industry, media, which is overwhelmingly white, how could we correct that? you could argue that the ncaa is trying at least to do things with gpa's or make sure we get the $20 million coaches. but our industry, and that's all i can deal with, our industry remains this sort of almost exclusionary industry that we'll with these black guys on the floor, but in terms of the coaches, there are fewer black coaches. to me, when joe
6:48 pm
says something is wrong, now, that's something that's wrong. industry. that's something that we should passion withmuch eradicating as whether a kid billion dollars after staying for one year. >> there are 65 schools in the power five conferences. nine of them have african-american coaches. players are african-american. and with all this hand wringing about graduation rates, which, know, there's reason to ring at a golf, hie i'm here tournament. the golf players don't graduate better rate. but nobody worries about it. why? because they're not african-american and everybody that anrned african-american without a college degree can't survive in society today. white kid, who is no smarter, no better educated, going to be okay. i think bill is right on it. you'vest think, bill, if got 10 black kids on the field
6:49 pm
making all these white people doing, and they're not being compensated for it, to withhere's something wrong that. >> the compensation -- i hear what you're saying. compensation should be the degree. >> why do you get to decide that? why? >> i think anybody if in civilized america thinks it's -- our community, education has always been the key. it's always been the key. think, to all of a sudden make this about money, that well, you know, we are getting no., the payment should be your degree. the payment should be education. and i like the idea -- if katie ledecky gets $200,000 from the olympics and to swim as she is, in college, why is that okay? wrong withe nothing that? which the ncaa louse. the ncaa allows. but for a black kid to get a booster -- >> we're talking about two things. talking about how each
6:50 pm
sport kind of picks and chooses to make money. the fact is that, and what you're talking about is the plantation system. basketball, football, at the highest level, supports everything. are the two money-making revenue sports. pointerto be clear, the here is -- the point here is that those big-money sports instance,or women's -- >> they support everything. >> everything. these top 25 schools, and the heavy doing lifting -- you know, the football, basketball, so the field hockey people, so the can play, why shouldn't they be compensated? i'm saying, sure, i think in football, yeah, i agree that if you go to a bowl game and $2 million payoff, i absolutely agree there should be some revenue sharing. get 10% put into an escrow that when you graduate, you have access to it. no problem with that. >> the point is, as somebody who
6:51 pm
playight have expected to in big-time college athletics, it does occur to me if i had was a bigbook and it success and i wrote it while i was in college, i'd have made a lot of money from that. the question that joe keeps raising is very valid. the one group that is not permitted to profit when helping other parts of the university make a ton of money? and that is a very good and important point to make. i've always said, when i was a college, if the washington post had come to me and said, we think you are the sportswriter and we're going to pay you $100,000 a year right now, which back now, is like $1 million never would have been a junior. i would have said this is what i'm training to do. i'm good at it. somebody else is willing to pay me to do it. college degree? carl bernstein never graduated from college. he did okay. paying thent about
6:52 pm
athletes, there are all sorts of issues. joe knows this better than i do. in this areaert than i am. there are issues with taxes and scholarships and things like that. but bill's idea is headed in the right direction. create a trust fund. for the athletes, in football and men's basketball. graduate, youyou know -- lonzo ball isn't going money, but most of the players on the ucla team 35-, 40,000 and have an incentive to graduate to get that money and maybe more athletes would graduate then. that would be good for everybody. and the other thing about it is, going to say, well title ix. you can't do it because you have to compensate the women's athletes. no, you don't. the women's athletes of yes, because they make the school money. you write the bill or whatever revenue be to say any sport. a sport that makes money for the school, whether it's men's or or whatever iter might be. and that way, title ix isn't an
6:53 pm
issue. to joe.e turn do you think that there is ofement toward the paying athletes? >> no, no. it will never happen. the only way it would happen is if the athletes themselves went on strike and that's not gonna happen. there are a lot of people who five years ago, that the legal system was going to fix this. and it's very, very clear that will not happen, that the legal system has basically said, and appeals in california, that the ncaa -- amateurism violate america's anti-trust laws. but the courts are unwilling to take the next logical step and gotta get rid you of the rules. instead, the courts have basically said you can fiddle yound with the rules but can keep them. so the fact is, there's no incentive on the part of anybody system to pay the players, except the players. >> different point, if i may. because you raised the issue of television. you work for espn, which is in
6:54 pm
the odd position sometimes of celebrating the athletes. the promos alone are something a massive hollywood concept, also covering the darker side. is, and luckily for you, espn is not broadcasting ncaa, do you think when north carolina takes the floor, we're gonna hear about some of about academic bending of rules that have shadowed north carolina? >> i think you will. you have to. i mean, espn -- again, i work times, for 35 years, and that was a different kind of animal. yeah. butted headsally with roger goodell because of side of his sphere has really covered the nfl and concussion issues. think, yeah, you're gonna have to talk about ncaa and north sort of darkere issues of the academic fraud. you have to. thing.just say one i played football. i played at morgan state
6:55 pm
university. years.d for four and, you know, this was an -- was i exploited? sure. i had a mentor who we played every year at yankee stadium. he he stopped going, because said, you know, you guys are -- there's a thing. you kind of get exploited. 19.s i was having a ball. i was an english major. got a degree. are doctorsuys who now, lawyers. i guess what i'm saying to joe things thatere are are definitely wrong with the system. but this is one of the most unique systems in the world where you can actually go to a university and be a runner or a a degree andget get a college degree. there's nothing wrong with that. thing. that's a good now, do we need to tweak things? yes, but in terms of rid of, you getting are going to hurt more people by thaneliminating this you're going to help. >> well, are you talking about this -- you're not talking about cancelling the
6:56 pm
ncaa tournament, are you? not., no, absolutely look, my thing is pretty simple. when you have an exploited labor that's not getting its economic value and making everybody else rich, you should change that system. it really comes down to. i don't think a scholarship is youly enough, especially as just brought up, north carolina, since so much of the academics is substandard. and it's worth pointing out that north carolina was in the final four last year. and, you know, the scandal came up. i won't say it was glossed over. a certain point, there wasn't much to say. that's true this year, because settled.hasn't been >> john, this is sort of -- williams,way, roy north carolina coach, says he hopes it's settled before the end of his life, because the good at drag its feet. [laughter] >> let me thank you, joe nocera, feinstein, bill rhoden. pleasure to have you. ♪ ♪
6:57 pm
6:58 pm
6:59 pm
7:00 pm
run outed the rallies of steam. wall street slumps after saying its best again in two weeks. >> salvage the -- saudi arabia says opec may extend. rex tillerson takes washington's message to asia. telling north korea it has nothing to fear. >> brexit moves a step closer, with a the bill becoming law. the proce


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on