Behind The Headlines - June 21, 2013

(female narrator) This is a production of WKNO - Memphis. Production funding for "Behind the Headlines" is made possible in part by.. Representative Steve Cohen on debt, Delta Airlines and the state of congress tonight on "Behind the Headlines". ♪♪♪ I'm Eric Barnes, publisher of The Memphis Daily News. Thanks for joining us. We are joined tonight by US Representative Steve Cohen from the ninth district. Thank you for being here. You're welcome, Eric. Nice to be with ya. Also joined by Bill Dries, senior reporter with The Memphis Daily News. We'll talk tonight. Thank you for we wanted to have you on the show for quite some time. But you never asked. We never asked! I know I asked. We'll talk international. We'll talk local. We'll talk national. I want to start though with something in the news which is the surveillance program, the NSA surveillance program. You were a major critic of George Bush, um, Patriot Act and some of those things that came out of the Bush administration. This in many ways is, this NSA surveillance is an extension it seems of the Patriot Act. How do you feel about it? Are you? Do you want to see it reigned in? Do you want to see it change, the surveillance program? I have never supported any parts of the-- Well, there are parts of the Patriot Act but I never supported the Patriot Acts. And when they came up for a reauthorization under the time that I served, including under President Obama, I've opposed them because I felt like it was an infringment on privacy. This is a situation where a lot of people will believe that it is an infrignement on our privacy. It is clear. And I think the Presidents tried to make it known and I think it's true that collecting data, meta data. It's the numbers, not the conversations. And they're not looking at them unless there's a connection to terrorism and they can make that connection. I think some people do think somebodys out there -- Big Brothers listening. There is the potential for Big Brother listening and that's the problem. And as we saw in the '60s, the J Edgar Hoover abused his powers in many instances and so did Nixon there after. And FISA came in to effect in the '70s. So I think there's concern for abuse of it, the storage of information on citizens, that it's more than is necessary. We have had a classified hearing with the head of NSA and others in the intelligence areas. We'll have another one next week. I lok forward to all the information I avail myself of. And I've got some amendments I'm going to propose to the FISA bill and hope we can improve it for the safety of our citizens. It does seem like you're getting a lot of people, politicians, government officials, the companies like Apple and Verizon. Some of these companies that are providing data saying, "Let's put more transparency on the situation." That there are people who say you gotta do this to prevent terror, you know, attacks and so on. But there could be more transparency. There could be more disclosure. Is that the direction you'd like to see going? It's one of the directions and I think that the FISA courts opinion should at least be made more transparent. Now they can't give away classified data within those opinions and sometimes it's hard to redact the information and still give the opinion. But somehow that could be accomplished I believe. I don't like the composition of the FISA court. Right now the FISA courts appointed. They're are 11 members appointed by the Supreme Court Chief Justice. Made me think, and it may be a little bit fine tuning, but it made me think, "Well, who's on the court?" Ten of the eleven appointees were appointed by Republican presidents. That doesn't necessarily mean they all think alike. For instance, John Paul Stevens, one of my favorite justices, was appointed by a Republican president and turned out to be a very balanced and tour progressive justice. And there have been others like that. But I think it shows a possibility that most of the people in the CASA court have a certain way. So I'm proposing that we change that and we have three appointed by the Chief Justice, four by the leaders in the senate and four by the leaders in the house. So it will at least be four of the eleven will be appointed by a different political party and possibly have a different persuasion towards privacy. And I also think you should have opinions made public. And I think you should at least have 60 percent of the justices say that something is valid before it's valid so that you've got a strong support for any action taken for the interest of the security of our country. Okay. Bill? Congress, should members of congress have been surprised by these revelations? Was this something that congress signed off on or the congress knew it signed off on to this extent? Well Bill, that's still not exactly clear. I did say that officials in our first briefing suggested or stated that there were many hearings that they had made available in data through the intelligence committee where they asked the chairman of the intelligence committee, Mike Rogers, to make available to us information. I don't recall any of that and don't believe that occurred. Now Mike might not have passed it on or said he can come in and see this or whatever. But I remember some opportunities to be brief but I don't know how many times. He said judiciary, which I'm on, and intelligence. So I thought that maybe congress was a little asleep at the wheel when they supported this. And that it might have should have known better. But I've asked for information from those individuals, specifically the dates and the purposes of those briefings because they might have overstated their bounds in what they said. You know one thing if you know about intelligence people, they don't tell the truth. That's their business is to lie. And I had just been in Russia which I'm sure we'll get to and met with the FSB, the deputy in charge of the FSB which is their KGB successor. And their business is lying. And so you know we found out that the NSA folks lied to Senator Wyden and lied to other senators, Mark Udall, in questioning of the senate. And then said something about I was as truthful as I could be under the circumstances. Well, I mean, it's just a lot of mirrors and smoke. You mentined Russia. You were in Russia recently. Tell the viewers a little bit why you were there on a delegation with some other congressmen and follow up to the Boston bombings -- correct? It was. Dana Rohrabacher who's a good friend from California, Republican, invited me to go with he and Michelle Bachmann and Steve King which some would have thought of as murderers row. A group! It's, well.. it's kind of uniform in their objections. And they've been the leaders in the anti-Boehner. There was one Democrat for two days, Bill Keating, and there was another Republican who's become a good friend of Paul Cook who's a freshman, 70-year-old freshman who's called and says, "I'm just a old, dumb marine." Well, he's not dumb at all. Brilliant guy, really. And I got to kind of be profound of him and appreciative of his experiences. But we went to Russia to look at the kind of follow up on the Boston terrorism. We had meetings. We went to North Ossetia as well to visit the Beslan School where there was a death of about 320 people, 180 children in 2004. Terrorists took the school. Terrorists were responsible but the Russians didn't want to negotiate Caymen and caused the roof to come down in terrible tragedy. And then so we visited with different people in Russia. And I don't know that we found out too much additional information because, again as I say, the FSB -- You don't know if they're lying to you. But they claim they had asked for data and I believe they did. The FBI director Mueller confirmed at a hearing when I asked him that they had requested information when Tamerlan Tsarnaev was returning to Russia. They wanted to know. And the FBI didn't tell them. And they said if we'd known, this tragedy might not have occurred quite possibly. I presume what he was saying was a presumption on a leap. And since they have known he was in, back in Russia, in Dageston which he was in in 20 -- I think   it was 2012. That they'd offed him. They'd offed to of his buddies. And he split right after that. Yeah. So you know we should have told them. But we didn't tell them. And it was an error. And FBI Director Mueller said we've corrected that error. Well, hopefully they have but they shouldn't have made it in the first place. They also gave them information about this fellow that was down in Orlando, was killed by FBI agents during his interrogation where he was allegedly about to sign a confession for murdering three citizens in Boston who one of them was a friend of Tamerlan Tsarnaev. And they were marijuana dealers and allegedly had made it look like marijuana-drug death but they left $5000 in cash and sprinkled their bodies with marijuana. And the guy, Tsarnaev, didn't come to the funeral. So it's thought that maybe Tsarnaev participated with this other gentleman of Chesnian descent to kill him and allegedly. But the Russians tipped us off about this guy because they were listening in their conversations apparently in Boston. Yeah. So there's all kind of people out there listening. You talked about going there with a group of Republicans and who are friends of yours. That gets to a thing that people, they think of congress. Well, there are no friendships between Republicans and Democrats. It's just one big disfunctional group. Is it? You're now in your -- what? Fourth? My fourth term. Fouth term, eight years or so. Is it as disfunctional as it seems? Not disfunctional on a personal level. I mean, Republicans and Democrats get along. We're friends. I've got lots of Republican friends, lots of them. And Dana Rohrabacher always wanting me to do things with him. And.. But is it disfuncitonal in terms of getting things done? Yes, it is. It's disfunctional in getting things done and it's disfunctional for several reasons. One is that we shouldn't be having to raise so much money and spend so much time raising money. For campaigning? For campaigning every two years. The terms should be four year terms split with people running in off years. Half the people every two years. You still get a flow from what the country's feeling but people get a four year opportunity. That won't happenbecause the senators don't want house members to have a free shot at them. So that constitutional amendment won't occur. And you also oughta have a redistricting law that John Tenner started and I've picked up from them to have non-partisian kind of judicial ways of redistricting so that districts aren't just totally Democrat or totally Republican. Because this gets to the whole thing that people talk about and critics talk about that again, districts that are carved out for a single party means that the congress people can go, be very unpopular on a national level but extremely popular in a home district and that creates that dynamic where they have no incentive to vote against the interest of their very narrowly defined district. Exactly. Well they're very narrowly defined interest group. You know and so if you have a Tea Party Republican which we've got in the eighth distirct, he has no reason to reach out to his moderate Republican or Democrat folks. But is this the same truth for you in terms of being in a district that's heavily democratic that you don't have that intiative to reach out to Republicans or people of other, you know, persuasions. Theoretically, that's true. But it in fact, it's not because I've always represented people from my senate district and I try to represent everybody. And I've got a lot of business interests and not for profit interests that I represent. So I guess I don't reach out to the Tea Party because I'd have to have, you know, some kind of long arms. (laughter) That's a tactful way. Bill? During the reelection campaign, you talked at that time because it was also presidential election year as well. And you said at that time that you thought that once this election, presidential election was decided, the Tea Party would pretty much be out of gas because people would look and they would say, "Alright, we had this discussion about President Obama." He's either being reelected or he hasn't been reelected. End of story. Let's get on. Has that played out the way you thought it would? Yes and no. The Tea Party is still a very strong element in the Republican party. And it's one of the reasons Speaker Boehner couldn't pass the farm bill, will have trouble passing immigration and probably won't get a background checks on guns. The Tea Party is adamant against all those things. And they've got certain members who would rather appeal to the Tea Party constituency than the speaker. The speaker doesn't have the power to deal with them like old speakers did with earmarks and other options. But the Tea Party still has strength. But at the same time you look at Sarah palin and Michelle Bachmann. Nationally, they're toast. Rand Paul is still stong and he's trying to make himself a presidential candidate. But I think the Republicans realize that to have a president, they're gonna have to get beyond that kind of constituency and they're gonna have to appeal to a more Howard Baker, Louis Donaldson, Bill Scranton, Charles Percey if I'm not dating myself type of Republican. And that they can find them again. That's what they have to have to win and that's why they need to appeal to hispanics, latinos and immigration and appeal to some soccer moms on guns and not just be with the NRA and be with the people who are afraid, people who don't look like them or sound like them. What about in Tennessee? You were in the state senate for.. I was sentenced to 24 years. 24 years. You were also county commission before that. But on the state level, there's arguably something of an inverse of what you're talking about where Republicans are dominant. They dominate the state housing. They dominate the state senate, governor, both senators and -- what? Eight of the nine -- Seven of the nine. Excuse me. Congress-people. So what for you as a Democrat, a life long Democrat, what does the Democratic party have to do with the state level to reach out? Does it need to look to a different model of people to grow it's base? You know, I don't know. It's hard to say because I've been invited and I may go. But I've been invited to speak to a major Democratic group in East Tennessee in the fall. And I don't have plans to run for statewide office. So in a way, why go? I mean there's the good of going to rally the troops and tell them about what's going on in Washington and they want me to come speak. But the reality is there's not going to be a Democratic governor anytime soon or Democratic United States Senator anytime soon. But is that a failing of the Democratic party in Tennessee? I think it's somewhat a failing of the Democratic party. You know, when I came up, the Democratic party was really dominated by a group of people that got things done but they were ethically challenged. (laughter) And I think it's left a scar on the party. And they were very, like they were a family. They kind of controlled things and kept things to themselves. And it was like a mafia. And they kind of called it. I mean Gentry Crowell was the godfather. He committed suicide before he has to testify and maybe implicate others some years ago back in the '80s. And they didn't leave a good taste in people's mouths and I think they didnt' take certain issues. You know when I championed the lottery which may be one of the more popular intiatives and success intiatives in this state's history, it was tough for me to get the Democrats or the Republicans on board. And I finally got my 22. But the Democrats didn't embrace it. And when I ran in 2002, Phil Bredesen just kind of did the least he could to support it but hedge it and they were hedging their bets. I was reading the blue book the other day and the little two sentences they give to Phil Bredesen, one of them was when he ran for reelection in 2006, his accomplishment was he'd signed the lottery bill. And I thought, "That's all he did with it was sign it." With those long arms you talked about before. Extremely long arms. And so, you know, it's just the party hadn't gotten the progressive group that it needs to to appeal to young people and appeal to progressives and maybe throw itself and it hadn't done that. And I don't know if it can. And I don't really deal with the state party. Yeah, let's switch to a very local issue. But I want to kind of frame it in to more of a national debate. Right now, Memphis, city of Memphis, is in a huge budget crisis for lack of a better word. They've under a lot of pressure from the state to make some tough decisions. They're trying to balance, you know, is everyone, you know, keeping the tax rate low or even decrase it with the fact that they need to -- They've got long term benefit obligations, health care benefications, benefits to retirees. And they've got staffs that they can't afford. They're mid way through a process where they're going to be cutting it looks like positions and cutting people. It's a big problem. And it's not unlike I think on some level a national debate about defecit spending and long term benefit in terms of Medicare and social security. Do you see a connection between those debates? And it plays out in one way on the national level in part because the federal government can just print some money to make up the gap. But on the local level, what are your thoughts on that? You know, Eric, I can see a little bit but not really. I think on the federal level, things are getting better. We still need a jobs bill. We still need an infrastructure bill. And we've woefully and adamantly funded our infrastructure and maintained it. And that will cost us in the long run in productivity as well as possibly loss of lives and the high cost of repairs when birdges crumble and problems occur. But we can grow ourselves out of that. And the federal government is supposed to go in to debt to finance the infrastructure and other needs and grow just like a family mortgages a house. They grow in to it and they earn. The city governments got problems. Mayor Whartons got a tough job. And for years, they've put things off and a lot of the tax base has been eliminated by giving incentives for industries to come here and even local industries have even come and said, "Hey, we're not going to stay here unless you give us "that tax freeze or just eliminate our taxes." And so we don't have a lot of room to grow in that regard. And we're challenged by our boundaries and people moving to Mississippi and moving to Arkansas and Tipton and whatever. So there are problems but I think that they're different. And I really think the federal governments problems have been overblown. The Tea Partys got on to that idea about the debt. And even though economys improved, we have decreased the debt greatly and will increase the debt by passing immigration which they're against and by implementing the Affordable Care Act, we will decrease the debt which they are against. They're still on their same mantra and that's one of the places, Bill, where the Tea Party just doesn't get it. They haven't changed their tune as the economy's changed and the efforts of the Obama presidency has shown it to be successful. And Obama's team hasn't done a good enough job in the letting the people know that we've had some successes economically and the ACA and the Immigration Bill will save money in the long run and reduce the debt. So I think there are differences. I think there are real differences. But I mean some of that - I'll just dwell on this one more time. The people say, "Look, the city had to spend this money to bring "in jobs and had to spend money to bring in things like the "FedEx Forum because it's a civic boost and the corporations "like it." And they have to spend the money on things like the Main to Main, you know, connector and Greenlines and bike lanes and these things. So to some extent, it is a similar sort of debate of how do you spend money to make the city more attractive to keep people from moving to Mississippi and, you know, the suburbs and so on and so forth. And part of my question is is there more you can do as a US representative to help Memphis in that sense or is it just really it's beyond the federal government's per view. Well there's things. We try to bring in as many projects as we can. And I'm awfully proud of the Main street to Main street project which is going to be more than just bicycles and walking across the Mississippi as Moses did of the Red Sea -- the great bridge that we're gonna have. It's gonna be improvment to the Main Street Mall that needed to be done for years and improvments to Downtown in general. And we try to bring in a tiger grant, as much money as we can. I think we've done grants and programs that benefit our community and bring money in here. But you know, directly, it's a city issue and a chamber issue to bring in business and bring in jobs and to try to staunch the exiting of people and business. And it's tough when you've got two states right here competing with you with tax incetnives. There's so much goen to Mississippi and I don't know how we're gonna be able to. It's going to be tough. Mayor Whartons got a tough job and I think he's I understand getting Electrolux and getting Mitsubishi. Those are important. Now how much you give to get them? There's a question. Bill? You certainly have worked with the Wharton administration on coming up with federal funding in paerticular for Main to Main, the Tiger grant that we got for that. One of the things in the Comptrollers report that he expressed concern about was the transfer of money that the city gets from one place to another or an advance here to make something happen and then pay back the money. In terms of the federal funding that we've got, have you had any concerns about that or have you seen any indication that kind of caused you to go, "Wait a minute, what happened there?" Well I respect greatly. The comptrollers an outstanding public servant. I'm happy he brought some-- The city council and the mayor to the table are realizing long term debts a serious problem. I haven't seen federal funds being used improperly and so I haven't had that concern. I'm just concerned as a citizen of Memphis who wants to see the city prosper and a tax payer. Delta Airlines -- You've been a big advocate and critic. Advocate for the Memphis airport and air service in Memphis. A huge critic of Delta Airlines when the merger between Delta and Northwest happened. In your view, promises were made by Richard Anderson, CEO of Delta, that the hub would stay here. Service might expand. It's been the opposite obviously. Is there -- You wrote recently a letter I think to another merged airline, American, and US air. Do you have some hope that there will be increased competition that maybe on the other side of losing the Memphis hub we actually get better fares and more competition from the airlines who do remain? I think we'll get better fares. Jack Sammons is a positive go getter. And I think he's going to do all he can. And George Cates is a great guys who's working on that. I meet with those folks this afternoon to see where they're going. I suspect Southwest is going to come in here a little bit longer than they are. I wish they'd keep their lantern up. I hope American and US Air will bring another flight or two. I mnea, they're not going to bring another hub. We've got the infrastructure for a hub. We've got an airport that's remodeled and it's in good shape. And we've got, as we all probably know, we've done the tarmacs over real well. Hopefully we'll have planes to go on them. But we're in trouble. And Richard Anderson and the NSA -- I'm not sure who's more truthful. Probably the NSA. He flat out lied to us and said that this merger was going to add flights, not subtract. And we've gone from 240, give or take. Now we'll be to 60. Amsterdam disappeared. He said we'd have Paris possibly, too. Well that's just a lie. He knew that when he said it. So I hope the American and US Air people were more forthcoming in their proposal for a merger. And that's what I posed in my question that Anderson has given murders of airlines a black eye and executives and that I had asked them if they would consider and look at our airport which is a facility they can serve more airlines. And maybe Southwest will come in more. They've got Little Rock. They've got Nashville. So it's unrealistic to think they're going to have a major, major hub. But they might bite some more flights whether Jetblue will come in here or Frontier. I don't know. We need to find somebody. And I think you know Jack's close to Fred Smith. The bottom line is Fred Smith is our best hope because they fly so many people in and out of here, pilots, executives. And they can put cargo on those planes to help subsidize them. I think, you know, Jack is like, you know, he's close to Fred. Just a minute left. Bill? You talked a bit about immigration reform. Immigration reform is also a local issue because it's a local issue in a very different way from I think the national debate we've seen over borders and fences in that regard. What do you look to come out of the discussion about that? Well I'd like to see comprehensive immigration reform. I think it will reduce the debt. I think that there's citizerns. The people in this country who want to be citizens, adults and kids, and the kids came here without any intent. They came with their parents. They lived here. I've seen them at Kingsbury High and other places. Good kids that want to serve in the military. They want to go to our state colleges at reasonable prices and Hope scholarships which they can't now because they're not citizens. We need that work force. One of the first opportunities I had when I was elected to congress orientation session was at Harvard. And the head of the Kennedy School is a demographer. And he told us then that we do not have in the future of a work force that will keep our economy moving where we want it to be. And a lot of thats going to be hispanics who come in and fill in. We need many more stem science technology engineering and math people. And some of them will be hispanics who are here. It could be made legal.   We need to have that and save money. Alright, I'm gonna leave it there. Thank you for being here. Thanks for joining us. Thanks, Bill. Absolutely. And thank you for joining us. Join us again next week. Goodnight.