Guest: Chris Hayes, Michael Nowakowski, Rick Perlstein
RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: Good evening, Lawrence. Thanks very much.
And thanks to you at home for staying with us tonight.
Lots to come this hour.
The whole idea of paying for health care with food is really starting
to catch on. It‘s not just the one Senate candidate in Nevada who wants
people to pay their doctors with chickens. It‘s starting to seem like a
whole fully-fledged health reform proposal now. Thank you.
And as Arizona‘s governor considers whether to sign or veto the
papers, please—legislation that would make it a crime to not carry
immigration documents on you at all times, one congressman has now
suggested that he can spot who‘s an illegal immigrant and who‘s not based
on footwear.
That is all ahead.
Plus, the NFL draft, a puppet apology, and Rick Perlstein, the author
of “Nixonland” on Michael Steele‘s candid, possibly, historic admission
about the Republican Party‘s racial southern strategy.
It‘s all coming up over the course of this hour.
We begin tonight, though, with President Obama and Democrats in
Congress apparently on the march toward chalking up their second big
legislative win in as many months. Tomorrow, it will be one month since
President Obama put pen to paper and signed into law the most sweeping
changes to this country‘s health system in nearly a century. Now, the most
sweeping changes to this country‘s financial system since the Great
Depression and the “great deregulation” of the ‘80s and ‘90s appear to be
in the offing as well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We need to enact a set
of updated common sense rules to ensure accountability on Wall Street and
to protect consumers in our financial system.
(APPLAUSE)
OBAMA: I‘m here today specifically—when I speak to the titans of
industry here—because I want to urge you to join us, instead of fighting
us in this effort.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Join us instead of fighting us. Mr. Obama, as you heard,
directing that message to Wall Street executives in attendance today in his
speech today at Cooper Union.
But he might as well have been talking right to congressional
Republicans when he said that. As with the health reform battle of the
last year and frankly, everything that‘s been brought up in this Congress,
Republicans right now are blocking this. They‘re even blocking starting
debate on Wall Street reform. They have a standing filibuster on even
talking about Wall Street reform.
But unlike the health reform fight, President Obama and the Democrats
have apparently decided to not go along with the delaying tactics this
time. Those delaying tactics that almost allowed Republicans to kill
health reform. And also unlike health reform, Democrats, apparently, have
decided to take a rapid response approach to misinformation about what‘s
actually in the bill. They‘re not going to get death-paneled this time
around.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: What‘s not legitimate is to suggest that somehow the
legislation being proposed is going to encourage future taxpayer bailouts,
as some have claimed. That makes for a good sound bite but it‘s not
factually accurate. It‘s not true.
A vote for reform is a vote to put a stop to taxpayer-funded bailouts.
That‘s the truth. End of story. And nobody should be fooled in this
debate.
(APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: That‘s the truth, end of story.
Just 10 minutes before President Obama attempted to close the book on
that whole permanent bailout claim—there was the top Republican in the
House, John Boehner, rolling that very same talking point out again for the
umpteenth time.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), MINORITY LEADER: While the president says
he wants to reform Wall Street, the bill that we have in front of us will
actually provide permanent bailouts for Wall Street and enshrine too-big-
to-fail.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOWE: Permanent bailouts. If that‘s not over-the-top not true
enough for you, Mr. Boehner then doubled down.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOEHNER: This is not what the American people want. They want
sensible reforms that will fix the problem. They don‘t want a government
takeover of the entire private sector.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Not only is Wall Street reform a permanent bailout, it‘s also
a government takeover of the entire private sector.
You over there with the hot dog cart, that hot dog cart now belongs to
the Department of the Interior. Move it! The entire private sector?
Republicans tried the strategy of totally over-the-top, debunkable and
debunked but nevertheless repeated criticism when they tried to stop health
reform. They tried that. That was their strategy against health reform—
and you might remember, they lost.
Now, they‘re trying that same strategy with Wall Street reform, too.
And this time around Democrats are reacting differently. They‘re
apparently more than happy to call Republicans out on it.
Just minutes after President Obama‘s New York speech today, Senate
Democrats convened a strange press conference—a strange press conference
on Wall Street reform, that was strange because at their press conference
they showed video. They showed video presentations of Republicans saying
things that aren‘t true about Wall Street reform. They actually played
tape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), MINORITY LEADER: This bill not only
allows—not only allows for taxpayer-funded bailouts for Wall Street
banks, it actually institutionalizes them. We‘ve taken a good look at the
Dodd bill that came out of the banking committee on a party-line vote, and
one thing you can say for sure about it: it provides for an endless
taxpayer bailout of Wall Street banks. If you look at it carefully, it
will lead to endless taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street banks.
SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL), MAJORITY WHIP: So, if you listen to this
comment by the minority leader of the United States Senate, you wonder if
he‘s read the bill.
SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK: On the health care bill, we
allowed too many lies to get out there without rebuttal, because we thought
they were so obviously untrue. But we‘ve learned our lesson. And the
minute these things come out of the mouths of some of our Republican
colleagues, we rebut them and we rebut them again and again. And,
fortunately, these lies are not taking hold.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
MADDOW: No one knows exactly what‘s going to happen in November‘s
elections. Historically speaking Democrats should expect to lose some
seats.
Democrats appear, however, to have decided that good policy is good
politics. They didn‘t just decide they‘re going to rebut Republican
criticisms behind closed doors. They held a press conference to say
they‘re going to do this. They want to run publicly and emphatically on
fighting the Republicans, on not delaying stuff that needs to get done, and
on getting stuff done.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: No matter how hard you try
to distort and distract this debate, Wall Street reform is coming. No
matter how many secret meetings you hold with Wall Street lobbyists, we
know we answer to the American people. No matter how long you try to delay
the inevitable, we‘ll never let a crisis like this happen again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: The first vote on the Wall Street reform in the Senate is
already scheduled. At 5:00 p.m. on Monday, Democrats will bring Wall
Street reform to the floor. There will be a motion to break the Republican
filibuster and proceed to debate on the bill. And it will be the first
real test of the supposedly unified opposition to reforming Wall Street.
If Wall Street reform does get stopped, and I don‘t think it does get
stopped. If it actually goes ahead—if they are able to stop Wall Street
reform, it will not be because of the Democrats going along with the
Republican delay strategy, like they did on health care. If Republicans
are going to be able to stop Wall Street reform, they‘re not going to be
able to use the same suite of tactics they used to stop it with health
care.
Joining us now is Chris Hayes, Washington editor for “The Nation”
magazine.
Chris, thanks very much for joining us. Good to see you.
CHRIS HAYES, THE NATION: Great to be here, Rachel.
MADDOW: Where are your glasses?
HAYES: I left them in my bathroom.
(LAUGHTER)
HAYES: And I realized when I got in the car that I didn‘t have them.
So, you‘re out there somewhere.
MADDOW: Are you—can you not see distance? Or can you not see
things close up?
HAYES: I cannot see distance. But I am quite aware there‘s a camera
somewhere off in the horizon.
MADDOW: If I‘m trying to do anything subtle, I‘ll emphasize it a lot
--
HAYES: Please. Yes, perfect.
MADDOW: -- so you can tell what it is that I‘m doing.
HAYES: Perfect.
MADDOW: -- Chris.
OK. All right. The first vote on Wall Street reform is on Monday. I
understand not giving into delay tactics and just pushing ahead, right?
HAYES: Yes.
MADDOW: That said, this is an issue that is good politics for
Democrats from a political standpoint. Is there actually a case to be made
that they shouldn‘t rush ahead—that they should draw this fight out all
summer?
HAYES: That‘s an interesting idea. I mean, I think the timeline is
such and the substantive policy changes are important enough that they need
to get it done, right? And I think they think, politically, an
accomplishment is better than something that doesn‘t get accomplished and
is blocked.
But I think you raise a good point. I think the other subtext that‘s
really important to note here is that it‘s not entirely clear to me that
everyone in the Democratic caucus is on board. And I think that part of
what you‘re seeing is a little bit of using the Republicans as the kind of
scapegoat for rallying the votes internal to the caucus. So, I‘m not quite
sure they would necessarily be able to get the votes even if they plunged
ahead.
MADDOW: And who do you think are potentially problematic Democratic
votes?
HAYES: Well, it‘s sort of the usual suspects. I mean, there‘s been
rumblings of Nelson out in Nebraska. That‘s the only name I‘ve heard, but
I‘ve also heard whisperings of people that I‘ve been talking to on the Hill
that they—that there‘s a lot of concern about the derivatives
legislation that came out yesterday because it‘s actually really hard. And
we‘re going to see whether it‘s going to survive into the final bill.
So, I think that setting up this conflict is productive and useful for
Dodd and the leadership because it‘s allowing them to kind of rally the
troops.
MADDOW: John Boehner, Chris, rolled out this new talking point today
that Wall Street reform represents, he said, “a government takeover of the
entire private sector.”
HAYES: Yes.
MADDOW: What is he—what‘s with this?
HAYES: This is a government-issued tie, just so everyone knows. I‘m
trying to prepare myself for the takeover of the entire private sector. I
stood in line for this.
No, I mean, look, I think—I literally think this is what happened.
I think John Boehner had one of those moments where his brain blanked and
he reached into some sort of like lizard brain part of Republican talking
points where everything is a government takeover of everything else when
the Democrats do it. And that‘s what came out.
But, look, this is—you know, this is the same—I mean, this is—
and Rick Perlstein will be on later. He can—he can walk you through the
august history of this fear of government takeover and encroachment, et
cetera, et cetera. I think if they can‘t convince people of this super
disingenuous claim that this institutionalizes bailouts, Boehner was
previewing the next claim which is that this is going to somehow, I don‘t
know, socialize the banking industry or whatever sort of, you know, status,
next critique they‘re going to offer.
MADDOW: I‘m sure it will be something about gay marriage if we let
this go on long enough.
HAYES: Yes.
MADDOW: Is there—this is maybe a crazy question—but is there
any chance that Republicans stop filibustering, that they stop
filibustering Wall Street reform, that they let it proceed with a majority
vote? I mean, in part it seems like they‘re edging toward a strategy in
which they say they actually do want maybe even a bipartisan vote on this.
Would that ever mean it‘s a 51-vote majority and not 60 -- or is that crazy
talk?
HAYES: Well, that‘s a really interesting question. Here‘s my
feeling.
My feeling is that what‘s happened is the norm in the institution has
been established, that there‘s no distinction between the procedural vote
and the vote on the legislation. And so, it‘s no longer become the case
that people out of a general sense that an issue should be debated will
vote procedurally to end a filibuster but vote against a bill. And what
that means is that everything ends up de facto, needing 60 votes for both.
And so, I don‘t see that norm being undone because I think—it‘s one
of these things where there‘s just kind of, you know, institutional
inertia. Now, that that‘s been established as what everybody does, it‘s
hard for me to see anybody walking that back.
MADDOW: I hear you.
Chris Hayes, Washington editor of “The Nation” magazine—I should
also mention I also just received a postcard in the mail yesterday
notifying me of my new gift subscription to “The Nation” courtesy of Chris
Hayes. Thank you very much for that, Chris.
HAYES: Congratulations.
MADDOW: If it was meant as a bribe, you get anything you want for it.
(LAUGHTER)
HAYES: Thanks, Rachel. Enjoy the magazine.
MADDOW: Oh, I will. I always do.
HAYES: OK. Bye.
MADDOW: All right. Still to come, puppet apology. Also, the man
with his own private football stadium who is pleading poverty in arguing
against regulation for his part of the financial industry—this story is
amazing.
And then later on, another politician proposes paying your doctor in
food. This proposal tastes just like chicken but it is not. It‘s
different food stuff.
That‘s all coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: What you‘re looking at here is the oil rig off the coast of
Louisiana that caught fire two nights ago from which 11 workers are still
missing. Seventeen workers were medevaced off the site, some of them with
severe injuries. These shots were actually taken while the rig was still
afloat, although it was burning and at one point listing to the side.
Since then, today, this rig has sunk, creating what federal officials
say is the potential for a major oil spill. When it blew up, that rig was
doing exploratory oil drilling 50 miles of the coast of Louisiana.
You may recall that a decades‘ old moratorium on offshore drilling and
other parts of the country long considered to be too environmentally
fragile to bear the risk of offshore drilling, that moratorium was just
ended by President Obama. So happy Democratic president, happy huge
Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress—and Happy Earth Day.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: President Obama‘s speech in New York was the big A-list
headline on Wall Street reform today. But today‘s real legislative action
was about part of the financial sector that‘s fought really hard to not be
nationally regulated at all. And that‘s because what they do is something
that‘s commonly thought of as loansharking. They don‘t call themselves
loan sharks of course, they call themselves “payday lenders”—which makes
them sound less like cartoon villains but doesn‘t really change what they
actually are.
Here‘s how payday lenders market themselves.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(MUSIC)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She loves our quick and easy payday advance
services.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Between paydays, I go to my neighborhood Check
Into Cash.
(MUSIC)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: You‘ve got a cash crunch or a money mayday, you hip hop to
your payday lender and they‘ll give you cash. They give you cash as they
sort of advance on your next paycheck. And when your next paycheck comes
in, you better hope you can pay off that loan and the fee they charged you
for that loan—because if not, maybe then you‘ll be taking out another
loan. Roll the amount you couldn‘t pay back, plus that fee you couldn‘t
pay back, plus a new fee into a new bigger payday loan, and hope that maybe
on your next payday, you‘ll be able to pay back even more.
If on your next payday you can‘t pay back even more, why not just roll
it over again? Original loan amount, original fee, second fee, third fee,
roll it altogether. How much do you owe them now?
This is how payday lenders end up raking in up to 400 percent interest
on their loans. They make these little loans seem so simple—but just
like with loan sharks, just like with the most predatory credit cards, you
slip up, it rolls over, and pretty soon, you are very deep under water—
as in 400 percent annual interest under water.
According to the most generous estimates of how payday lending works,
only about 25 percent of payday-lending customers pay off their loans on
their next paycheck on time—which is exactly how these companies like
it. How else are you going to get somebody up to 400 percent interest
unless you can roll them over?
Payday lending is so bad that a few years ago, the military asked the
government to crack down on payday lending to our troops and cap interest
rates paid by members of the Armed Services because so many military
families and young soldiers were being preyed upon and financially ruined
by payday lending.
Congress did actually cap payday lending interest rates for troops.
But us civilians, we‘re still swimming with the sharks.
Now, this guy who came in at the very end of that commercial that we
showed you, his name is Allan Jones. He‘s the CEO of the first nationwide
payday lending chain, which is called Check Into Cash. Unlike his
customers, Allan Jones is not exactly living paycheck to paycheck.
According to “Tennessee Business Magazine” in 2005, Allan Jones was
one of the 20 richest people in the great state of Tennessee, worth maybe
half a billion dollars. Here‘s an aerial view of what we believe is his
400-acre spread in Cleveland, Tennessee, while it was still under
construction.
According to “Tennessee Business Magazine,” his home has, quote, “an
air-conditioned muscle car garage, highlighted by his $300,000 Maybach; an
on-site greenhouse with a full-time horticulturist; a three-story tree
house; and a regulation-sized football field with lights, a scoreboard and
supporting field house and stands.”
He has a full regulation-size fully-lit football field and stands in
his backyard. He once hosted the country‘s first private college football
game. Not private as in these were private colleges, but private as in it
was held in Allan‘s yard.
Want to see Allan Jones‘ boat? This is “The Janie,” named after his
wife. It‘s actually his second yacht. He bought this for a reported $24
million after his first yacht burned down. And at least for a while, you
could rent this yacht for $25,000 a day, plus expenses.
So, this is the face of payday lending. And he actually wants to be.
The reason that we have all this information about Allan Jones‘
ostentatious wealth is because he likes to show it off. Allan Jones is not
hiding his half billion dollar light under at a bushel. He‘s putting
himself in TV commercials.
He‘s blogging now about the poor payday lending industry and how it
shouldn‘t be regulated when financial reform happens. His argument is that
payday lenders are poor.
This was his first blog post: “Despite rhetoric, payday lenders earn
minimum wage.” He says, quote, “It‘s a store that earns $8.96 each hour
they‘re open “raking it in?” Believe it or not, some elitist people in the
mainstream media think so. Break down the profits of the nation‘s largest
payday lender and it becomes clear that this industry isn‘t raking in heaps
of money.”
Jones then divided monthly earning statements from other payday
lending companies by the number of stores and the number of hours they‘re
open. He decides that the whole industry is only making minimum wage—or
less. This is hardly raking in the cash.
He says, “It‘s hard to feel like a predatory lender when you make
about the same wage as the average employee at Burger King—a company
which, by the way, netted $200 million last year. Whoppers are clearly
more profitable than payday loans.”
So, payday lending king Allan Jones, maybe going to have to sell the
Maybach, right? Or the yacht? Or the 433-acres in Jackson Hole, Wyoming?
Or maybe get back some of those campaign donations he‘s given over the
years to his friend and Senate banking committee member Bob Corker—maybe
just to make ends meet?
Right now, payday lenders like Allan Jones are not regulated by the
federal government at all. It‘s left to the states. Some states have
effectively banned payday lending. Some have capped interest rates that
payday lenders can charge, which has effectively driven them out of
business in their states. One of those states was North Carolina, home of
Senator Kay Hagan, who now says she wants to do the same thing for the
whole country.
Senator Hagan introduced a bill today which is called the Payday
Lending Limitation Act. And it would keep creditors from lending money to
borrowers have taken out payday loans six times in 12 months—people
caught in the trap, in other words. It would give borrowers more time to
pay back their debts and it would put the payday lending industry under
federal oversight.
The Community Financial Services Association of America represents
payday lenders, founded naturally by Allan Jones. They told us today, in
response to Kay Hagan‘s proposed legislation, quote, “We oppose this. It
limits consumer choice. We‘re regulated by the states like all nonbank
lenders. The federal government has bigger concerns than $345 loans.” At
400 percent interest.
And, you know, he has a point. That is not the kind of thinking that
puts Maybach‘s in Allan Jones‘ garage.
Next week, the Senate takes up financial reform in earnest. So, as
you watch the payday lending industry marshal its forces to plead poverty,
to try to stop the threat of them actually finally being regulated—just
remember this face and his private football stadium and 400 percent
interest to people who don‘t have enough money to make it to their next
paycheck.
We‘ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: So, you‘re walking down the street in Arizona. Observe a
group of people standing on the street or sitting on benches or walking
around or whatever. How do you know which of those people you should
reasonably suspect is in this country illegally?
Good news. California Republican Congressman Brian Bilbray has
thought about this. He has an idea.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. BRIAN BILBRAY ®, CALIFORNIA: We have the policies that there
are things that you indicate that even go beyond the color of your skin,
the hair, that looks at the fact—the way you dress.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Did you know that there‘s illegal-looking hair?
Personally, as a person who‘s never thought of myself as a good hair
person, whose mother immigrated here from another country, I will admit to
feeling self-conscious upon learning that there is illegal-looking hair.
The expert here, Congressman Bilbray, was on “HARDBALL” with Chris Matthews
last night and he‘s explaining here how law enforcement officials can
identify by sight but not by race, people who are worthy of suspicion.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILBRAY: They will look at the kind of dress you wear. There‘s
different type of attire. There‘s different type of—right down to the
shoes, right down to the clothes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: You can be shaken down for illegal-looking shoes? Should I
be more paranoid than normal?
Congressman Bilbray went on to describe that law enforcement would
decide who‘s in the country illegally mostly by behavior. You know, by
people acting illegal-ish.
He was weighing in on Arizona‘s strict immigration bill that was
passed by the State House and the State Senate. It‘s the Support our Law
Enforcement and Safety Neighborhoods Act, a very feel-good name for a bill
that, at its core, would make it a crime to not carry papers documenting
your citizenship or your immigration status.
Papers, please. Arizona police officers would be told that they
must stop and demand documentation from anyone they suspect to be an
illegal immigrant. Anyone caught without papers, arrested.
What counts as reasonable suspicion that somebody‘s an illegal
immigrant? Proponents of the law keep insisting it has nothing to do with
race. They‘ll just be looking out for, you know, your illegal-seeming hair
and shoes.
Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, who is up for re-election this fall,
has until Saturday to veto the bill or sign the bill or let it
automatically become state law without her signature.
There have been protests all week including nine college students
who chained themselves to the fence outside the old state capitol building
on Tuesday. They said would refuse to leave until the governor vetoed the
bill.
Police cut their chains and arrested them on charges of
disorderly conduct. When they were let out at about 1:00 in the morning,
more than 100 supporters were waiting for them.
Also opposing the “you don‘t look American” bill are members of
Congress, clergy, local and national newspaper editorial boards, civil
rights groups, human rights groups, law enforcement organizations - all
calling on Gov. Brewer to not make history here, to veto this bill.
The man who sponsored the bill is Republican State Senator
Russell Pearce. Once upon a time, not that long ago, Senator Russell
Pearce was considered in Arizona to be a bit of a political outlier,
someone thought to be too way out on the fringe even for members of his own
party.
For example, in 2006, then-State Representative Pearce forwarded
his supporters an article that was written by a white supremacist group
called the National Alliance. The article accuses the media of pushing the
view of, quote, “A world in which every voice proclaims the equality of the
races, the inerrant nature of the Jewish holocaust tale, the wickedness of
attempting to halt the flood of non-white aliens pouring across our
borders.”
Russell Pearce sent that out to his supporters by E-mail. He did
eventually apologize for that, said he hadn‘t read it closely before he
sent it on. But before Arizonians could forget about the anti-Semitic,
creepy E-mail, Mr. Pearce attended an anti-immigration rally, not in a
racist, white-supremacist kind of way.
No, this was an honest, wholesome, bigotry-free political get-
together where a politician like Russell Pearce could hang out with his
supporters and his constituents and like-minded folks who really are not
racist at all. They just care about the issue.
See, here he is with some guy who has what looks like a lot of
patriotic flair on his lapels, just hanging out at the rally. Arizona
State legislator, Russell Pearce and - who‘s he hugging? Oh, yes. That‘s
noted white supremacist J.T. Ready, seen here at a proud Neo-Nazi rally in
Omaha, next to all the guys in swastikas.
Again, Gov. Brewer has until Saturday to decide whether or not to
sign the anti-immigration “papers, please” bill literally written by the
anti-Semitic E-mail forwarding, picture-with-a-Neo-Nazi-guy guy. Good luck
with your decision, governor.
Joining us now is the vice mayor of great city of Phoenix,
Arizona, Michael Nowakowski. Mr. Nowakowski, thanks very much for joining
us. Appreciate your time.
MICHAEL NOWAKOWSKI, VICE MAYOR, PHOENIX ARIZONA: Thank you, Rachel,
for having me on the show.
MADDOW: Let me ask you what your proposed - what your position is on
this proposed bill, what impact you think it would have on the City of
Phoenix.
NOWAKOWSKI: You know, I‘m against the bill. The economic impact on
our city is just going to be outrageous. I mean, we have people that are
boycotting the State of Arizona. We have a governor in Sonora saying not -
asking the citizens of Mexico not to come shop on our border towns.
And that would ruin those border towns because that‘s where most
of the grocery - the Mexican citizens cross over the border to buy their
groceries in the United States.
MADDOW: In just the last 10 minutes, Mr. Nowakowski, we learned that
Gov. Brewer just gave a press announcement. She just announced her plan
that she says to deal with the issue of illegal immigration.
According to what we‘ve just been told, the governor focused on
National Guard patrols, aerial surveillance, $10 million support for local
law enforcement in the border region. She made no mention of the pending
legislation.
Do you think that Gov. Brewer is going to sign this bill? Do you
think she‘s going to veto it? Do you have any indication of how it‘s going
to go?
NOWAKOWSKI: You know, I believe she‘s going to sign it. But if she
listens to all those young people and listens to the community, she‘ll veto
that bill. And if she‘s thinking of the best interest of Arizona, she‘ll
veto that bill.
MADDOW: I know, sir, that you sent a letter to the Phoenix City
manager requesting that everyone, regardless of ethnicity, show proof of
citizenship to avoid racial profiling charges when stopped by police. What
was the idea behind that letter? What‘s your proposal there?
NOWAKOWSKI: You know, Rachel, we‘re going to get sued. Someone is
going to end up suing us because we‘re going to break federal law on racial
profiling. I want to break this - if the governor signs this law into
effect, we‘re going to break state law for not arresting or asking
individuals for their citizenship.
So we need to be fair. How do you - how do you identify an
undocumented individual or an illegal alien? Does it - like the
Congressman said, by their shoes? By the way they dress? No way. There‘s
no way can you tell an individual.
I mean, Hispanics come from all different walks of life. You
have light color, dark hair, curly hair - it‘s what they call a mix of all
different cultures. So the only way - the only way is by racially
profiling people.
So I‘m asking our city manager to ask the police officers at the
City of Phoenix to ask everyone, everyone for their proof of citizenship.
So this way, we can‘t get sued for racial profiling. We don‘t have the
funding. We just took a $240 million budget cut and we just don‘t have the
funding to deal with all these lawsuits that could potentially happen.
MADDOW: Mr. Nowakowski, I know that Phoenix is a very diverse city.
My dad spent some time growing up in Arizona. I‘ve spent some time in
Phoenix and I feel like it‘s both racially diverse and politically diverse.
One thing that‘s puzzled me is why conservatives are OK with the
idea of demanding papers, please, from everybody, of having such an
intrusive law enforcement mandate.
Police officers aren‘t even allowed judgment in this. They are
mandated under threat of being sued that they must stop people and demand
documentation from them. It‘s such a big government proposal.
One of the things that surprised me is I haven‘t heard more
resistance on the right to just this in terms of its intrusiveness. Has
that sort of objection arisen at the local level?
NOWAKOWSKI: You know, at the local level, we just had our county
attorney, Rick Romley, which is a very strong Republican, ask the governor
to veto the bill. You know, so we have Republicans. We have Democrats.
We have Independents and business owners asking the governor, please, to
veto the bill.
And now, I‘m here asking her here, please, to veto the bill,
because it‘s not good for the State of Arizona and especially not good for
the City of Phoenix.
MADDOW: Phoenix Vice Mayor Michael Nowakowski, thank you very much
for your time tonight, sir. Really appreciate your perspective on this.
NOWAKOWSKI: Well, thank you, Rachel.
MADDOW: I will confess that when I first heard other people describe
Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sue Lowden‘s idea to barter for health
care, I wasn‘t completely overwhelmed by the hilarity of it.
Then I saw her talk about it, then I was overwhelmed by the
hilarity of it. But now, there‘s this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SUE LOWDEN ®, REPUBLICAN SENATE CANDIDATE: Bring a chicken to the
doctor. Bring a chicken to the doctor. Bring a chicken to the doctor.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Yes, I didn‘t get any work done today. Turns out Sue Lowden
is not the only politician when thinks we could fix this darn health care
system if we‘d all start paying the podiatrist with burlap bags full of
parsnips. There are more proposals like this. We‘re getting to the bottom
of it with the dancing chicken ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sue Lowden‘s modest health
care proposal continues to reverberate in a couple ways. For one thing,
it‘s now art - YouTube sensation quality mash-up art.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LOWDEN: You know, before we all started having health care in the
olden days, our grandparents - they would bring a chicken to the doctor.
They would say, “I‘ll paint your house.”
They would do - I mean, that‘s the old days of what people would
do to get health care with their doctors. Doctors are very sympathetic
people. I‘m not backing down from that system. To bring a chicken to the
doctor.
(MUSIC)
Bring a chicken to the doctor. Bring a chicken to the doctor.
Bring a chicken to the doctor. Bring a chicken to the doctor. Bring a
chicken to the doctor. I‘m not backing down from that system.
Bring a chicken to the doctor. Bring a chicken to the doctor.
Bring a chicken to the doctor. I‘m not backing down from that system.
Let‘s change the system and talk about what the possibilities are. Bring a
chicken to the doctor. Bring a chicken to the doctor. Bring a chicken to
the doctor. I‘m not backing down from that system.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: That was a very talented chicken. I bet she could get a
boatload of Lipitor for it at the old poultry for medication general store.
But it has also been brought to our attention by the folks at
“Talking Points Memo” and “The Nashville Scene” that Sue “Pay Your Doctor
in Chickens” Lowden isn‘t the only Republican searching for a GOP
alternative for health reform, a GOP alternative based on paying for
medical care with food stuffs.
This is the most amazing thing. The first man you‘re going to
see in this clip is a Tennessee Republican in the state legislature. His
name is Mike Bell. The second man in the clip is Democrat Joe Towns.
And in this brief piece of state legislative perfection, it is
Joe Towns who is probably playing the role of the man who says what you are
thinking.
REP. MIKE BELL (R-TN): We‘ve got communities all over the state.
I‘ve got one close to me that is a Mennonite community, some of the
healthiest people you have ever seen. They pay cash when they go to the
doctor.
They work out arrangements with the hospitals if their children
have to be hospitalized. They pay their bills. We‘ve got other people who
do the same. And again, this is an individual choice that we‘re talking
about, representative towns.
REP. JOE TOWNS (D-TN): So you‘re saying that they pay cash?
BELL: Absolutely.
TOWNS: For organ transplants and cancer and heart cases? They‘re
paying cash?
BELL: I said they were paying cash or working out other arrangements.
I know for a fact - I know somebody in the medical field who has been paid
with vegetables from the Mennonite community just south of me.
I saw somebody else shaking their heads when they see - they know
of other communities around the state who do the same.
TOWNS: Well, that‘s an anomaly. That‘s not how the system works.
That‘s not a capitalistic system. I can‘t take a sack of vegetables down
to the utility company to pay my utility bill and my house note. Nobody‘s
going to take vegetables for a payment in the world.
That‘s an anomaly. We can‘t run a country on vegetables and
horse trading like we used to. The country doesn‘t run that way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: You know, if you combine the currency proposed to pay for
medical care by Republican Sue Lowden and Republican Mike Bell, you are
halfway to making a very nice chicken soup. Which would probably do more
to cure what ails you than trying to convince Kaiser Permanente to accept
some gingersnaps in exchange for your echo cardiogram.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MADDOW: So a quick correction. Last night, we reported on the
Supreme Court justices and their apparent lack of understanding about the
basics of computers and E-mail and pagers and the like.
Since there are no cameras in the Supreme Court, we decided the
best way to dramatize the transcript was Supreme Court finger puppets.
See, there‘s the teeny, tiny little puppet head of Chief Justice John
Roberts.
Right at the end of the piece, we quoted Justice Antonin Scalia
exclaiming with incredulity that wireless communication doesn‘t just go
from electronic bing to electronic bing, it goes through wireless service
provider.
While you were hearing that quote from Justice Scalia, though, we
accidentally showed this little guy, Justice Samuel Alito, which is in fact
a totally different dogmatic, right-wing Supreme Court justice - totally
different puppet.
If you‘re wondering, Justice Scalia‘s freakishly tiny finger
puppet head looks like this. See? Different. If you combine them with
Kennedy and Roberts, you can see that I only need five more until I have
them all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: An extraordinary admission from the chair of the Republican
National Committee speaking Tuesday at De Paul University. Michael Steele
told students, quote, “For the last 40-plus years, we,” meaning the
Republican Party, “had a southern strategy that alienated many minority
voters by focusing on the white male vote in the south.”
What makes those words remarkable is they come from the leader of
a Republican Party that‘s long denied employing a race-based southern
strategy to win elections. Despite the fact that Republicans gained votes
in the south during Richard Nixon‘s 1968 presidential campaign and turned
to southern states into reliable Republican electoral votes, the party has
not usually acknowledged that it had anything to do with the calculated
whites-only appeal.
To quote Pat Buchanan, a self-acknowledged a co-architect of the
Nixon strategy, quote, “The charge that we built our Republican coalition
on race is a lie.” Not according to RNC Chairman Michael Steele, it‘s not.
Mr. Steele also alleged that Republicans used their southern
strategy for decades, well into the Reagan years and beyond. That view at
odds even with Republicans who have tried to address the party‘s history of
race and politics.
Former RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman, for example, told the NCAAP in
2005 that the Republican Party had alienated voters and had even tried to,
quote, “benefit politically from racial polarization.”
But Mr. Mehlman said that had happened in the ‘70s, ‘80s and
‘90s. He promised that the Republican Party was, as of the 2000‘s,
committed to inclusion.
But in Michael Steele telling this week, Republicans have pursued
a southern strategy, he said, for 40 years, which would be right up through
the 2008 election. Not a shocking assertion that the Republican Party
might have capitalized on racial polarization in search of power during its
history. But it is a doo-woop moment to hear the chairman of the party now
admit it in public.
Joining us now is Rick Perlstein, senior fellow at the Campaign
for America‘s Future and author, most recently, of the book “Nixon Land:
The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America.” Rick, it‘s great
to have you on the show. Thanks for joining us.
RICK PERLSTEIN, AUTHOR, “NIXON LAND”: Oh, glad to be here, Rachel.
MADDOW: The southern strategy is something that gets talked about in
politics a lot. But the details are always a little wooly. What really
was it specifically?
PERLSTEIN: It was something very, very specific, actually. Not a lot
of people remember that basically, after the new deal, black voters in
cities like Chicago, New York, Cleveland, were actually considered the
swing voters in American politics. There were enough of them who kept this
kind of vestigial Republican loyalty from the Civil War years and the idea
that the Republican Party was the party that freed the slaves.
That the idea that you had to get enough of these voters away
from their economic commitment to the Democratic Party into the Republican
in the presidential election basically determined how states like Ohio and
Illinois and New York would go.
And what started happening in 1964, first with Barry Goldwater
and then with 1968, was the Republicans basically made a very conscious
decision that if they appealed to white voters in the south, they didn‘t
need these black voters in the north anymore.
So there literally was, we don‘t need black voters anymore. So
how can we get white voters instead? It was very, very specific and very
deliberate. They knew exactly what they were doing.
MADDOW: Did architects of the southern strategy express regret or
remorse for it at all in the way that Michael Steele seemed to this week?
PERLSTEIN: Well, the fascinating thing about it is, it seems to
happen at regular intervals. I mean, one of the architects of it in the
Nixon years was a guy named Harry Dent. And after he retried, he became a
preacher and he apologized for it right before he died.
Lee Atwater became Republican Party chair. He apologized for it
kind of when he was on his death bed. You can almost say when these guys
get ready to meet their maker, they tend to man up and own up to the
strategy. Even Ken Mehlman was kind of out the door and, you know, kind of
writing his resume for history when he said it was happening.
So you know, it says interesting things about, you know, what we
can expect from Michael Steele, whether he‘s, you know, heading out the
door or whether he is trying to extend his tenure by, you know, basically
setting up a deal where if you kick me out, maybe it‘s just because I was a
truth-teller on this civil rights issue.
MADDOW: Rick, you have written epic, seminal histories of modern
conservative politics.
PERLSTEIN: Thank you.
MADDOW: Is there a revisionism effort among conservatives who pretend
this didn‘t happen? Will what Michael Steele said be upsetting to people
who want to say that this never actually existed in history?
PERLSTEIN: Oh, it will be profoundly upsetting. I mean, we saw from
Pat Buchanan, like you say, the idea of - basically, you know, even Glenn
Beck now is trying to claim Martin Luther King is his forebear.
You know, the idea of the civil rights movement, the idea that
African-Americans were oppressed and had to be liberated is very essential
to basically every American‘s conception of what a moral citizenship looks
like. So it‘s very awkward for the Republicans to try and kind of deal
with this as it comes up every five, 10 years.
MADDOW: Rick Perlstein, senior fellow at the Campaign for America‘s
Future and the author of “Nixon Land,” which is required reading for
everybody in the whole country. Thank you so much for joining us tonight,
Rick. It‘s good to see you.
PERLSTEIN: Love to be here.
MADDOW: Coming up on “COUNTDOWN,” Michael Moore on the fight for
financial reform and lots of other topics. Next on this show, smack dab at
the beginning of baseball season, a very exciting day for football and for
robots and for football-playing robots. Stick around.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: All day long, there‘s been these little bursts of crowd noise
outside my office window here at Rockefeller Center - right outside my
window, because tonight is the NFL draft. That‘s across the street from
our office.
Today was the build up to the NFL draft. It was very, very
exciting by proxy to be in my office while everybody was making that much
noise. So we sent Kent Jones out to check it out.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENT JONES, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Rachel. Inside Radio City
Music Hall, thousands of people are waiting to see which college football
stars are going to end up with their favorite pro-team, so it‘s a very big
deal.
But out here, since last night, me and my guys have been getting
our football buzz on for two days. Yes, that‘s right. Now, I‘m not sure
what‘s going to happen in the next two days, but I do know this - my
beloved Kansas City Chiefs -
(BOOING)
Will still be the chiefs. I (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: Thank you, Kent. If any NFL team in the draft is looking for
a kicker, we do have an excellent “Moment of Geek” prospect from San
Francisco. His name is Ziggy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fire in the hole.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wow.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MADDOW: It‘s good. Ziggy is a 340-pound compressed nitrogen-powered
football-kicking robot, built for the robo games, Robo Expo. And if you‘re
wondering, Ziggy is accurate. Maybe not Adam Vinatieri accurate, but
pretty accurate.
Watch him again. Owners, before you pass on Ziggy, consider this
he will never drink. He will never hang out in clubs. He will never
change his name to Ochocinco. He‘s clutch - I mean, literally he‘s got a
clutch.
That does it for us tonight. We‘ll see you again tomorrow night.
“COUNTDOWN” starts right now. Have a good one.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END
Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
WATCH 'THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW' WEEKDAYS AT 9:00 P.M. ON MSNBC.
