updated 1/8/2014 1:17:14 PM ET 2014-01-08T18:17:14

THE ED SHOW
January 7, 2014

Guests: Katherine Hackett, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, Eugene Robinson, James Hoffa


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: With this toxic attitude that has been presented
by the Tea Partier --

SEN.RAND PAUL, (R) KENTUCKY: It does provide some disincentive to work.

SCHULTZ: And by Boehner.

BOEHNER: I`m not the expert.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I challenge any lawmaker to
live without an income.

SCHULTZ: Not everybody can control their employment situation.

OBAMA: The long-term unemployed are not lazy. They`re not lacking in
motivation.

PAUL: Some disincentive to work.

SCHULTZ: What we have is special circumstances in this country right now.

OBAMA: The aftermath of the worst economic crisis in generations.

SCHULTZ: In special circumstances, we need to do special thing to the
government.

OBAMA: Congress should make things right.

SCHULTZ: And I think this is a pivotal vote. I really do.

OBAMA: We`ve got to get this across the finish line without obstruction or
delay.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight folks. Thanks for watching the
Ed Show here on MSNBC.

Look what I`ve got behind me to start out tonight.

Holy smokes, we`ve got six Republicans, six good quality Americans who have
decided to actually associate with Democrats. Now, there`s -- for every
story, for every vote, for every action-reaction, there`s always the next
story in politics.

Now, these six senators voted procedurally with the Democrats today when it
comes to unemployment benefits, the extension of it.

Is this the only thing that they can vote with the Democrats on? I think
that this is possibly an opportunity for the Democrats to go out and say,
"Well, you voted with us on unemployment extensions, why can`t you do the
deal with us on the jobs package?"

That can`t be that heavy of a lift in Indiana, Senator Coats. How about in
Ohio, Mr. Portman? You mean to tell me that there would be some political
downfall if you were to vote for a jobs package or an infrastructure
package in the state of Ohio? Come on.

All I`m trying to tell you folks is I think there`s a heck of a lot more
where that came from today.

We start with good news this evening, 1.3 million Americans who lost their
unemployment benefits on December 28th, they`re breathing in just a little
bit better tonight.

Earlier today, the Senate approved a procedural measure to extend
unemployment insurance for just three months. Come on. Can you get on 90
days? The bill`s going to go up for a debate and, of course, the final
vote is expected later this week.

Now, six Republicans -- I just -- we can be kind of snarly (ph) about it
and say, "Well, they jump ship?" Wait a minute. Let`s get positive on
this. As I just said, you mean to tell me there`s nothing else out there
Senator Heller, Senator Collins, Senator Ayotte, Senator Murkowski.
There`s nothing else you can work with the Democrats on it all when it
comes to jobs and the economy? I just don`t buy it.

They voted with Democrats. Can you believe that? Now, I wonder if they`re
getting thrown out of the Kentucky fraternity for that.

Each of these senators happened to be from a state where, wait a minute,
the other senator from each one of these states happens to be a Democrat
who is voting for the bill.

You see bottom line here, folks, is that these senators, they don`t want
any heat on the home front. That`s what it boils down to. The remainder
of the Senate Republicans, well, they`re really in a different universe
when it comes to dealing with the Democrats.

Here`s what Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who trails in the polls in
Kentucky said before today`s votes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, (R) KENTUCKY, MINORITY LEADER: Remember, these are
the same folks who gave us the stimulus, who gave us tax increases, who
gave us ObamaCare. All of it was done in the name of helping a little guy,
in the name of greater equality.

So what they`d given us? It`s given us this mess and now, another call,
one more call for a government fix.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Hold on a second, folks. This is the same group that gave us the
stimulus which, of course, help create eight million jobs and pull us out
of the crapper back starting in February of 2009.

Let`s get the record straight. Tax increases? Excuse me? The Bush tax
cuts expired after the Democrats went along with them for another two
years. Obamacare, that`s a bad thing? No, no, no. That`s an old story,
Republicans. The website, it`s working pretty good.

House Speaker John Boehner couldn`t agree more with McConnell. He`s been
for a long time a local opponent of extending without offsets. They love
offsets. I ain`t going to pay for it. And, of course, the speaker is
already throwing cold water on the Senate bill.

Boehner released a statement saying without cuts and job incentives, the
House, they`re not going to be looking at this extension any time soon.
Boehner said, "Right now, the House is going to remain focused on growing
the economy in giving America`s unemployed the independence that only comes
from finding a good job."

I`ll tell you what. There`s a guy that speaks out of both side of his
mouth. On one hand, he talks like that. On the other hand, he does
nothing for job creation. In fact, in their big memo that had come out
last Friday, there was nothing in there about job creation.

It looks like Speaker Boehner has been attending the Rand Paul School of
Backward Thinking in Economics. Someone should tell the speaker that it`s
kind of hard to find a job if you don`t have enough money to get to the
next interview.

Meanwhile, President Obama met with a group of unemployed Americans today
to tell the story from the White House. After the meeting, the president
wasted no time setting the record straight on unemployment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: Unemployment insurance has been a vital economic life line. For a
lot of people, it`s the only source of income they`ve got to support their
families while they look for a new job. These aren`t folks who are just
sitting back, waiting for things to happen. They`re out there actively
looking for work. If we don`t provide the unemployment insurance, it makes
it harder for them to find a job.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: President Obama also stressed the importance of this extension on
our economic recovery and what it means.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: Independent economist have shown that extending emergency
unemployment insurance actually helps the economy, actually creates new
jobs when folks like Katherine have a little more to spend to turn up the
heat in her house or buy a few extra groceries. That means more spending
with businesses in our local community.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: So, Mr. President, let`s also call out Republicans for their
blatant obstruction. He did. In the past, extending unemployment benefits
has been a bipartisan issue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: In the past, both parties have repeatedly put partisanship and
ideology aside to offer some security for job seekers with no strings
attached.

It`s been done regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans were in the
White House. It`s been done regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans
controls Congress. And by the way, it`s been done multiple times when the
unemployment rate was significantly lower than it is today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And this is the one you`re going to like. The president called
out Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky. He slammed Senator Paul`s bogus talking
point that unemployment extension would make it harder to find a job.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: I`ve heard the argument that says extending unemployment insurance
will somehow hurt the unemployed because it saps their motivation to get a
new job.

I really want to -- I want to go after this for a second. You know, I --
that really sells the American short. I mean, a lot of people is pressing
(ph) the United States. I can`t name a time where I met an American who
would rather have an unemployment check than the pride of having a job.
The long term unemployed are not lazy. They`re not lacking in motivation.
They`re coping with the aftermath of the worst economic crisis in
generations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Yes, they are and that doesn`t register with the Republicans.
Congressional Democrats need to take a page out of President Obama`s
playbook and fight the Republicans on this extension every inch of the way.

There is no reason why Boehner shouldn`t bring this up for a vote. The
balls in his court, we`ve said it from the last month that it was going to
come down to one guy and the Democrats need to pressure him hard for a
clean vote.

Now, I want to go back to this Rand Paul comment that the president has
addressed, which I think is a vital point, because you have to hold the
Republicans their feet to the fire for what they say.

The senator from Kentucky has said within the last week that there are
studies, meaning plural, meaning more than one, not a singular but a
plural, that there are studies out there that says that long term
unemployment extension benefits is a disincentive for people to go out and
get a job.

Senator Paul, no else seems to be asking you about these studies, but I`d
like to. Where, where are these plural studies that says that we just got
a bunch of lazy couch potatoes in this country that all they want is the
check? They really don`t want the job. They`d rather sit home and watch
ESPN or something.

And then there`s the six Republicans that I want to go back to. Maybe
these six Republicans can ask Senator Rand Paul, if you`ll just send over
to their office the studies that he`s talking about because apparently,
these six senators didn`t get the studies that Rand Paul is talking about.
That`s because Rand Paul, again, is plagiarizing.

There are no "studies" that shows that the human spirit in this country is
diminished to the point where people don`t go out and look for a job if
they have an extension of unemployment benefits. There`s no research out
there that shows that.

In just a moment, we`re going to talk with an American who has been
impacted by her unemployment expiring. Her name is Katherine Hackett. She
met with the president and spoke at the White House today, today`s event.
Here`s what she said about her current situation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KATHERINE HACKETT, LOST UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE: Unemployment benefits have
been absolutely essential to cover my bare necessities. I have cut
expenses everywhere possible and I am not just sitting home enjoying the
good life. My cuts include heating my house to 58 degrees wearing a hat
and a coat to stay warm because oil is expensive. I have lost weight
because food is expensive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think.
Tonight`s question, "Do you think an unemployment extension will pass in
John Boehner`s House?"

Do you think it will pass in the House? Of course, it`s got to be brought
to the floor but do you think an unemployment extension will pass in the
House? Text A for Yes, text B for No to 67622. You can always go to our
blog at ed.msnbc.com. We`ll bring you the results later on the show.

Now, joining me now is the lady you just heard from, Katherine Hackett, who
met with President Obama today. Katherine, thank you for coming on the Ed
Show tonight. I really appreciate it. I think you`ve got a very important
story to tell America and thanks for being a part of our program tonight.

HACKETT: It`s my pleasure.

SCHULTZ: Katherine, what did you talked to the president about? What did
you tell him?

HACKETT: Well, in my letter or do you mean in -- today?

SCHULTZ: Today.

HACKETT: Today, I thanked him for reading my letter because I really
didn`t think that letters to the president were looked at. But here I am
today and it`s been quite an experience. I see that he`s quite the
advocate for those of us who are looking for jobs. And I think he totally
understands that this is a great necessity to keep people like me going
while we are looking for a job which I do daily.

SCHULTZ: Katherine, what do you think has been your biggest stumbling
block getting back into the economy?

HACKETT: For me, it`s the jobs that I am able to do. There`s quite a few
stumbling blocks. I`m a nursing home administrator. There`s only 241
nursing homes in the state of Connecticut. So those jobs don`t come up
very often. I`m hoping that new jobs are made available through the
Affordable Care Act that I may qualify for.

SCHULTZ: What happens if you don`t get the extension? How does that
affect you looking for a job?

HACKETT: Well, I don`t know if anyone knows this but I guess for care cost
money, you need to have a cellphone so people can call you and offer you an
interview, you still need to eat and put heat in your oil tank, and that
has to come from somewhere.

SCHULTZ: I have to ask you, Senator Rand Paul says unemployment makes
people not want to work. What`s your response to that? He says it`s a
disincentive, that this is a disservice to workers to extend this. Your
response to that.

HACKETT: Right. That`s as far from the truth as possible. I don`t -- I
haven`t spoken to anybody. When you ask them what they do they say, "I sit
home and collect an unemployment check." People want to talk about what
they do to -- in the world that they are -- they have gifts and talents and
they want to use them. And that`s I think what -- if you ask anybody who
was unemployed, what they want to do.

SCHULTZ: Katherine Hackett, I appreciate you being on the Ed Show tonight.
Thanks to your time.

I want to bring in now Senator Deb Stabenow of Michigan. Senator, good to
have you with us tonight.

SEN. DEBBIE STABENOW, (D) MICHIGAN: And it`s good to be with you. And I
want to thank Katherine. I was there at the White House with the president
and Katherine and she was terrific today.

SCHULTZ: Well, are these the kinds of stories that the Democrats have to
tell the country?

STABENOW: Absolutely. And you know, Ed, in Michigan -- I mean I hear
these stories everyday from people. And we still have three people looking
for every one job available. And so, we agreed that we need to create
jobs. In fact we`d love that the Republicans would work with us to create
jobs. But in the meantime, today in Lansing, Michigan it`s 33 degrees
below zero wind chill.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

STABENOW: I want to make sure folks can pay for the heat and keep the
lights on and pay for their rent --

SCHULTZ: Well, I think this weather -- this weather no doubt is helping
the country focus on people who are on hard times in this economy right
now. I mean --

STABENOW: Right.

SCHULTZ: -- the lady that we were just interviewing, Ms. Hackett, she
wears a coat in her home --

STABENOW: Right.

SCHULTZ: -- so she can turn down the thermostat. I mean this is what
the Americans are doing. Now, what do you say to these six senators --
Republicans that voted with the Democrats today? Isn`t there anything else
they could vote with the Democrats on when it comes to an infrastructure
package or a jobs package? Doesn`t it strike you that all of a sudden it`s
this that -- this is the issue that they`re going to side with the
Democrats on? What about that?

STABENOW: Well, Ed, you know, we`re going to have an increased minimum
wage coming up very quickly. We`d sure love to their support for that.
We`re going to have bills that deal with manufacturing building on making
things in America. We`d love to have their votes on that as well. We
certainly welcome it as you said, rebuilding America with infrastructure,
job training, education.

SCHULTZ: And so --

STABENOW: There`s a whole range of things.

SCHULTZ: And so, do you think that there would be political downfall for
anyone of these six senators if they were to step up and say, "We need to
invest in infrastructure. We need to do a job package with the president."
Do you think that there would be political downfall that they would lose
their seat in the Senate if they were to go along with this?

STABENOW: You know, I think the American people and the people in their
states would say thank you. You know, they`re second tired of this,
they`re watching as things are going well in the stock market, a few people
doing very well, but an awful lot of people not yet feeling the recovery
and we need to be focus on them creating opportunity for everybody --

SCHULTZ: OK.

STABENOW: -- to have a fair shot.

SCHULTZ: And, Senator, how do you get John Boehner to bring it to the
floor over on the House side?

STABENOW: I think we need the American people speaking up. I mean
basically as you know we start to drum beat with your help. That`s what
got us to this vote today. And also, we need those six members to stick
with us, because we`re going to have to vote on one more procedural vote
before we get this done.

And then, it goes to the House and we need people across the country to
speak up and tell their story. We all have friends. We all have
neighbors. We have people we know through our church. People that we know
in the neighborhood who are looking for work.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

STABENOW: They want to work. And so they got to have a job.

SCHULTZ: You`re confident this will pass to the Senate. You`re confident
that the vote later this week won`t be a problem.

STABENOW: Well, I`m hopeful. I mean --

SCHULTZ: OK.

STABENOW: -- I`m not sure I would say I`m confident. We`ve got to get
those six members to vote with us one more time.

SCHULTZ: All right. Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan great to have you
with us on the Ed Show tonight. Thank you so much.

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen.
Share your thoughts with us on Twitter at Ed Show. Tweet up tonight. Do
you think that those six Republicans could maybe find something else to
work with the Democrats on not only this?

Coming up, Darrell Issa`s icy outlook on postal workers braving what
they`re calling the polar vortex. I`ve been living in cold weather for 30
years, I never heard of this vortex stuff, but whatever.

Still ahead, fast tracking of trade agreement could ruin middle class jobs
in America. Lawmakers haven`t learned their lesson from the NAFTA. We`ll
educate them stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Time now for the Trenders. Social media action with the Ed
Nation team, thank you so much. This is where you can find us if you want
to be a part of the action, facebook.com/edshow, twitter.com/edshow, and
ed.msnbc.com. On the radio, we`re there Monday through Friday, noon to
three, SiriusXM 127, radio website, wegoted.com.

Social media nation always talking to us. You`re deciding, we`re
reporting. Here our today`s top Trenders, voted on by you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, I think I might grow a beard.

SCHULTZ: The number three Trender, hair raising.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What happened?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, I haven`t shaved in two weeks.

JAMES CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: My wife says she likes it, so
there.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They`ll be here today.

SCHULTZ: Jay Carney`s new look has the press core buzzing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jay Carney came out sporting a beard.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is that a new look or something?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And did he gave an explanation why he grew the beard on
his vacation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Your beard has a twitter handle already.

SCHULTZ: The number two Trender, wild card.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All 13 episodes of Netflix`s House Of Cards Season 2
are coming February 14th.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome back.

SCHULTZ: A Conservative writer condemns the president`s Netflix addiction.

OBAMA: I`m just wondering if we brought the advance copies of House of
Cards.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have no patience for useless things.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You really want to do a little (inaudible)?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I won`t submit myself to this sort of exposure again.

OBAMA: I wish things were that ruthlessly efficient. I was like Kevin
Spacey, I mean, this guy`s getting a lot of stuff done.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t know whether to be proud or terrified.

SCHULTZ: And today`s top Trender, epic mail.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Old man winterer strengthening his grip on much of
the country.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Even the sub zero temperatures did not stay these
couriers from their appointed rounds. The mail still gets delivered.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t really get that cold.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I layer up and then wear gloves, and wear something
over your ears.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He took the uniform off a skeleton to stay warm..

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not very many people can handle doing this.

SCHULTZ: While mail carriers brave (ph) the elements, Darrell Issa gives
them the cold shoulder.

Republicans like Congressman Darrell Issa have been trying to take down the
postal service for a long time.

REP. DARRELL ISSA, (R) CALIFORNIA: I`m concerned about the post office.
It`s going to lose $10 billion.

Reducing the size of labor, have the new facilities, less facilities, right
size to post office.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Darrell Issa, I`ll tell you, he is a fly in the
ointment, isn`t he?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Joining me now is Frederic Rolando. He is the president of the
National Association of Letter Carriers. Mr. Rolando, good to have you
with us tonight.

Mail carriers are out in this extreme weather while private companies like
JetBlue and the aviation industry are cancelling services. What does that
say about the postal workers? The job that they have gone in recent days,
yet, they`re constantly under attack about privatization?

FREDERIC ROLANDO, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LETTER CARRIERS: Yeah. Thank
you, Ed. It`s good to be here.

The postal service is out in the elements everyday and every neighborhood,
six days a week. And what Darrell Issa`s trying to do here, it undermines
the ability of the postal service to meet the demands of modern shipping
and communication demands that would instead be met by private firms that
would be there for profit rather than for service.

We certainly don`t believe that the budget should be balanced on the back
of military veterans but the remedy is certainly not the elimination of
80,000 some jobs that offer a great opportunity to employ veterans. The
postal service is the second largest employer of veterans.

SCHULTZ: And now, is this what the elimination of Saturday delivery would
do that would affect 80,000 veterans, you think?

ROLANDO: Yeah, with 80,000 jobs and like I said, we are the second largest
employer of veterans of postal service, second only to the defense
department.

SCHULTZ: But can we come to the conclusion that there`ll be a lot of
veterans that would be affected by this?

ROLANDO: Absolutely.

SCHULTZ: Okay. And Saturday delivery, what would it do to your bottom
line? I mean, if you take a way, the pre-funding which was mandated by the
Congress back in 2006, does the postal service make sense financially and
does Saturday delivery contribute to that?

ROLANDO: The postal service is currently making an operational profit.
There is no undisputed evidence that eliminating Saturday mail delivery
would save one penny. In fact, there`s evidence that it would actually
cost money.

Any legislation that doesn`t address the pre-funding mandate is going to do
nothing but attack workers and attack the service that is provided to the
American people.

SCHULTZ: Well, it would seem to me that the postal workers of this country
in these extreme conditions need a pat on the back instead of somebody in
Washington who`s trying to ditch their job to come up with some kind of a
scheme so they can privatize it so the private sector can make a bunch of
money, but yet there`s no guarantee that there`s going to be service
everyday. Your folks --

ROLANDO: Yes.

SCHULTZ: -- have delivered the mail for a lack of a better term,
correct?

ROLANDO: Correct. We used no tax dollars. We make an operational profit.
We`re probably the richest broke company you`re ever going to read about.
We`ve got $50 billion put away that we have no access to in this pre-
funding account. We have surpluses in both pension accounts. We have an
amazing delivery network -- universal delivery network that is right for
America`s e-commerce market that`s growing everyday.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ROLANDO: And these packages and letters are delivered by the most trusted
federal employees in the United States. I think we have a great future.

SCHULTZ: Fredric Rolando, great to have you with us tonight, sir, I
appreciate your time.

You know, often times we see citizens in this country go up to veterans in
uniform and say, "You know, I just want to thank you for what you do."
I`ve seen people on airplanes give up their seats in first class so that
guy or a woman that has the uniform on doing what they`re doing for the
country.

You know, it might be good right now if you were to say to your postal
worker, very good chance that that is a veteran, "Thanks for everything you
do. I know it`s kind of chilly out."

Coming up, Boeing has decided to stay in Washington State but Conservatives
are still pushing for the corporate tax cuts.

Still ahead, the Obama administration is heading down the wrong track
towards fast track authority of the TPP. James Harper will tell us. This
boat fast track needs to be stopped. It`s a fraud. You only see it in
here on the Ed Show.

But I`m taking your questions next on Ask Ed Live. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Love hearing from the viewers.
Love your questions. Here we go, Ask Ed Live.

Our first question comes from well, Mary. She wants to know why is there
such a disconnect between Conservative values and what they actually do --
I -- unemployment benefits.

Bottom line here, Mary, is that they want to get reelected and they don`t
want to become a target. And that kind of gets in the way of what they
really believe.

I think that there are a lot of Republicans that really do want to help the
unemployed but they can`t do it because of the pressure from all these
special interest groups that will end up targeting them. At the end of the
day, you see these Congressional members on the right. They want to keep
their job.

Our next question comes from Colleen. She wants to know -- she says, "Cool
hat! Where did you get it? You look like a character in "Fargo"."
Actually, I auditioned for Fargo but they liked the other guy with red
hair.

So it`s a lot of cold weather, OK? So today and since 2013 was the year of
the selfie, I was kind of fooling around with the phone on a corner on my
way to work today here in New York and it was cold. So I did a selfie and
I put that out on my Twitter account.

People are calling me a communist, telling me I got that hat from Russia,
and that`s what the Soviets wear and everything else. You kidding me? You
know where I got that hat? I got that hat in Duxford, England where they
use to fly the B-17s out to attack the Germans in World War II. That was
in a gift shop -- in an American gift shop in England.

It`s a good hat. I like it. Tory (ph) came to work today. He had the
Russian hat on. That sucker is warm. Let me tell you, I was going to ask
him for it. Maybe I`ll show you that tomorrow.

Stick around, Rapid Response Panel coming up next.

JACKIE DEANGELIS, CNBC ANCHOR: I`m Jackie DeAngelis with your CNBC Market
Wrap. The Dow jumping 105 points today, the S and P up 11, and the NASDAQ
rising 39.

One factor helping push stock higher is today`s economic data showing that
the trade deficit fell in November to its lowest level in four years.

One decliner today, JPMorgan Chase, they will pay $1.7 billion to settle
charges related to the Ponzi scheme operated by Bernie Madoff. The
government says that the company ignored obvious warning signs of
suspicious activity.

That`s it from CNBC, first in business world wide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. It`s clear, trickled down economics
doesn`t work, Conservatives, they just don`t get it, they don`t buy it.

The latest economist to troll these waters is Boston University Professor
Laurence Kotlikoff. Now, he wrote, I thought a very interesting op-ed in
New York Times and argued that the corporate tax is economically self-
defeating and in order to create jobs workers. Workers should lobby to
eliminate the corporate income tax?

Right. He say, it`s all about the incentives. Businesses will go wherever
it`s cheaper. To make his point, the professor points to the recent
showdown between a Seattle-based Machinists Union and the Boeing
Corporation. Boeing threaten to move operations and build its brand new
777-X liner aircraft jet, some place where it`s going to be cheaper to
produce.

Well, some people took debate, 22 states came after Boeing to relocate
their facilities after a series of contract concessions. Boeing and the
workers finally came to an agreement to a contract to keep the assembly of
these jets in the Northwestern portion of the United States in the
(inaudible) Seattle area.

Not only is the professor, in my opinion, overwhelmingly simplifying this
whole thing, he didn`t deal with the facts.

A report released last month by the Center for Effective Government
concluded there`s no relationship, none whatsoever between cutting tax
rates on corporations and profits in job growth. Corporations don`t seek
out lower tax rates to hire more people. They do it to boost profits. And
these profits basically are not being shared with American workers. This
is the issue income inequality.

The professor would make up for the lost revenue by simply passing the
burden on to the American worker and the shareholders, really? The
professor wants to replace any lost of somewhat higher personal income tax
rates.

And the same old Republican argument is here again in this piece of work.
Large profitable corporations should pay no taxes while average Americans
should shoulder the burden of the income tax?

Another suggestion is to make shareholders pay income taxes on their
companies` profits as they accrue.

You know what this is folks? This is a trap, an economic trap as I see it.
If shareholders are taxed and the corporations aren`t, the shareholders
would just vote for the next guy coming down the political pipe who is
proposing, "Hey, I`ll slash your shareholder tax rates if you vote for me."
then what happens to the treasury?

Joining me now for our Rapid Response Panel, Eugene Robinson, MSNBC
Political Analyst and Columnist for the Washington Pos and E.J. Dionne,
MSNBC Contributor and Columnist for the Washington Post. Gentlemen, great
to have you with us tonight.

Eugene, you first. Take us through a world where corporations don`t pay
any tax at all. Can we trust them that they would reinvest in workers and
America all of a sudden would have maybe four percent unemployment? What
do you think?

EUGENE ROBINSON, THE WASHINGTON POST: Well, Ed, you could argue that we`re
almost there already, right, because so many corporations that saying a
significant task.

So -- but actually, that`s not a world I want to go to and corporations
should pay taxes for obvious reasons. They wouldn`t be successful without
the infrastructure and without the educated workers and without all these
other things that the state helps to provide. And so, they have to pay for
that. They have to pay to support that and I think the argument, if you
could somehow tax shareholders, I don`t quite know how that would work.
But I assume the books would be fiddled so that there were no profits on
paper, therefore, no tax that would be paid.

SCHULTZ: Well, that`s a very interesting point because you see, if you
invest in one of these corporations that`s out there making a dollar, doing
well, turning a good return on investment, "Oh,by the way, your taxes on
those shares are going to be going up." That`s how I read this gentleman`s
article.

But there`s no support out there whatsoever. A research that says that
this would trickle down to the point where we would lower our unemployment
and all of this good will would end up in the back pockets of all of the
workers in this country.

D.J., what would a -- E.J. Dionne, what would a world where the
shareholders would have to foot the bill and not the corporations? What
would that look like?

E.J. DIONNE, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: I think it would be a mess actually. I
mean, the corporations -- the corporate tax in 2012 provided $242 billion
to the Federal Treasury. That`s 10 percent. Now, that`s down from 30
percent.

So, the corporations used to pay a lot more to support the government that
you`ll be shift all of those taxes on individuals and citizens for tax
justice and the tax justice network did some good work on this idea. And
they make the point both of them that if you just get rid of the corporate
tax, what you`re going to do is you`re going to have a lot of wealthy
people creating Shell corporation in like in trying to funnel (ph) as much
money through those there`s already a small incentive that way now but
there`d be a huge incentive.

And so, it would end up cutting taxes on them and there`s this notion that
the corporate tax is actually warned by the workers. Actually, there`s a
Treasury Department study that shows that about 82 percent of it is born by
the owners of capital. So this is really an indirect way of cutting taxes
--

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: -- on the very wealthy. So, I don`t think we want to go down
that road.

SCHULTZ: It takes money to buy whisky that`s why there`s not a bar on
every corner in America. I mean, somebody`s got to pay the freight.

And so, the shareholders would end up voting for someone who would be out
there on the campaign trail to say, "You know what? I think your
shareholder tax and your investment in the market, they`re taking your
money, you vote for me and then what happens to the treasury."

I think that corporate tax rates -- I`m not sure if they need to be
increased, Eugene Robinson, I just think that if everybody were to
contribute in 25 -- over 25 percent of them were to pay something into the
treasury, we might have a different treasury.

ROBINSON: Yeah and we would have a different treasury and I -- look, I
don`t think there are many people believe corporate tax rates in this
country need to be increased. I think you could be in fact make a good
argument that you could even reduce them a bit if you could close some of
the loopholes and some of the corporate welfare and essentially make sure
that corporations did pay a certain level of tax, you would probably get
that $242 billion and the rate would look better and --

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ROBINSON: -- and maybe there would be an incentive for some companies to
stick around or even to grow that don`t have that incentive now.

But, I just don`t see any sense in the argument that getting rid of the
corporate tax rate would somehow be good for the country. I think that
would be even be awful.

SCHULTZ: All right, gentlemen. Two award winning Journalist with us
tonight, Eugene Robinson and E.J. Dionne on what your take on unemployment
benefits.

Today, I think was a pretty interesting vote in the Senate. E.J., what
does this mean that six Republicans said, "You know what, we better do
something."?

DIONNE: I mean it really shows that the conversation is changing in a good
direction that the core issues are changing. You already see Republicans
is saying, what we got to start talking about inequality and poverty now.
We may take issue with whether they putting serious things on the table.
But the whole conversation is moving way from cutting government and, you
know, and low taxes to saying, "Wait a minute. We really got to do
something for people who are hurting."

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: And I think these six Republicans senators looked at the economy
in the country and said, "We don`t want to be on the wrong side of this."
And so, I think this is a very good sign even though we got ways to go
before this actually passes both Houses.

SCHULTZ: So, Eugene Robinson, just how ruthless is John Boehner?

ROBINSON: How ruthless is John Boehner? Well --

SCHULTZ: That`s really what it comes down too. Well, if he brings it to
the floor that many law makers tell me they`ll bring it to the floor real
fast.

ROBINSON: Yeah, of course, because Republicans have voted in the past
along with Democrats to extend unemployment benefits at the time of, you
know, in bad economic times.

You know, and I think the real question about John Boehner is if will he go
with this establishment instincts or will he placate the Tea Party side of
the party that Republican establishment I think does not want to spend the
whole year in this fight on the wrong side of this fight -- on the wrong
side of the equality question. As the party that would not extend
unemployment benefits for all these people. But, can Boehner pull it off,
can he find some construction that allows him to embrace them.

SCHULTZ: All right. Eugene Robinson, E.J. Dionne, I know both of you have
long underwear (ph) on but we won`t go there, you know, it`s a little
chilly out tonight. All right.

DIONNE: Just got a warm cuffs (ph).

ROBINSON: How do you know that, Ed?

SCHULTZ: Well, you were shivering like a squirrel there, E.J, just a
minute ago when you`re answering that question. I think you`re still cold.
Gentlemen, good to have you with us tonight. Thank you so much.

Coming up, a GOP Senate candidate wants to get Washington moving literally?
A corn husker lands in Pretenders tonight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: And in Pretenders tonight, the moving man, Ben Sasse. The
Republican Senate candidate from Nebraska says he can solve all the red
lock (ph) in Washington with one simple solution. All he need is a flat
dead truck.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN SASSE, (R) NEBRASKA: That`s it. The way to cure the incredible
ineffectiveness and dysfunction of both parties in Washington.

We moved the capital to Nebraska, where they experience family,
conservative values, living within a budget, and pulling together, not
pulling apart.

Let`s move the capital to Nebraska.

And leave the lobbyist and the influence peddlers back east.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And of course they can spend some of that $18 million that
Senator Ben Nelson got during the Bush tax cuts for Homeland security.
It`s all in Nebraska, right?

The Ed goes on to tell the Conservative values and labels ObamaCare as the
worst law in history. The Republican who recommends wheeling the Capitol
into a corn field has labeled himself a D.C outsider, and would like to
keep it that way.

There`s only one problem.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SASSE: I tried turning around the biggest failing organization of all, the
US government.

I served President Bush as Assistant Secretary of Health.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Hello? He`s anything but an outsider. And idea that is probably
bad as there as you could get, could only come from someone who is a former
Bush administration official.

Ben Sasse is going no where fast. If he thinks Washington is going to go
anywhere for him, he can keep on pretending.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. This is the story for the folks who
take a shower after work.

In this era where bipartisanship on Capitol Hill seems pretty much dead,
it`s almost unthinkable to imagine support for fast track authority.

Well, we`re seeing it right now. Nothing gets through Congress quickly
except for some reason a trade deal which is terrible for American workers
is being considered for fast track authority.

The Obama Administration is considering legislation to allow Trans-Pacific
Partnership or the TPP to speed through Capitol Hill with little debate and
no amendments, actually no debate.

This is the wrong time for the United States to be entering into an
international trade agreement and it isn`t hard to prove why.

New Year`s day was the 20th anniversary of the North American Free Trade
Agreement or NAFTA. Americans have lost nearly 700,000 jobs since the deal
between the United States, Mexico and Canada was ratified using fast track
authority on trade.

Now, jobs have been shipped across boarders and the middle class is
deteriorating in this country. And I think it`s interesting to point out
as Ellen Grace (ph) did on my radio show today, half the workforce in
America makes $11 an hour or less.

In Texas, workers and union affiliates from 2,500 companies filed petitions
with the United States` Department of Labor for training or temporary
assistance due to job loss because of NAFTA. This help doesn`t come close
to matching the good paying jobs which left the country.

Fast track to the TPP will mirror. I guarantee you will mirror the
problems NAFTA brought to this country. It will not only hurt workers but
their families. But it will also hurt American consumers with watered down
safety provisions for food and other products. We can also drive up
prescription drug prices which would counter what is happening with
Obamacare right now. It could hurt the environment and reduce internet
freedom.

America needs to be paying attention to the TPP. Now there`s a 175 law
makers that have signed on to a letter to ship it over to the White House
to say, "Wake up, hello? This is not good for workers. Stay tuned."

James Hoffa, General President of International Brotherhood of the
Teamsters joins me tonight. Mr. Hoffa good to have you with us.

JAMES HOFFA, GENERAL PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS:
How are you Ed?

SCHULTZ: Well, very good sir. This is the heavy lift I think for 2014 for
workers. Are there enough lawmakers to realize that fast track is really a
bad idea and could rely on what has happened with NAFTA. What do you
think?

HOFFA: Well, you got to look at what happened with NAFTA, this is not what
could happen. We lost over, I think a million jobs. They got NAFTA, the
workers got chopped (ph). Everybody knows that and now we`re reenacting
that all over again. What`s going on here? How could it be that they`re
talking about fast track and no one really knows what`s in the agreement?

Now grant they`re going to say over negotiating it but there is a text,
there is something that`s been out there, why isn`t that put out to the
public? Why does the New York Times get it? Why don`t you have it, why
don`t we talk about on this program? And how could anybody agree fast
track unless they`ve seen the text to the agreement?

So and really, they`re getting the cart before the horse. So I don`t think
and we`re talking to congressmen every where that basically this is wrong
thing to do, let`s find out what the agreement is. But this is a pig in a
poke because once they sign on the fast track then it`s enough for down
vote, who knows a year form now.

We don`t need that right now. We don`t need anymore mistakes like NAFTA.

SCHULTZ: OK, President Obama has control over the trade negotiators. This
one take us right to the White House, doesn`t it?

HOFFA: Yeah, it`s their agreement and, you know, we`ve said, you know, its
time to have a good agreement. We need agreements that put Americans to
work not to send our jobs overseas. You know, I always say, "You want to
see American jobs? Go to Mexico, they are all right there on the border."
They`re not -- they didn`t disappear but they went from Iowa and Michigan
and Wisconsin and they disappear right on down then. That`s Whirlpool,
that`s Mr. Coffee, that`s secure, your air conditioning, that`s Square D.
I can name a hundred countries --

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

HOFFA: -- companies that closed down and moved across the border. We
don`t want that happening again.

What we`ve got to do is to get this agreement back on and to stop fast
track, make people -- let`s start talking about the bill. You know, some
of these bills want to eliminate by America. And I guarantee that`s in
there.

Can you imagine -- no we can`t defy American products that were banned from
having that in agreement, that`s wrong. Can you imagine Vietnam filing a
lawsuit to change our environmental laws here in the United States? That
could be on the agreement. These are the kind of things we`ve got to talk
about and make sure that don`t happen.

SCHULTZ: Do think that if there was debate in the halls of Congress that
fast track was not given and amendments were put to it that this would
fail, that this would not follow the steps of NAFTA?

HOFFA: Well, I`m hoping so, we keep saying that. The problem is when this
happens the Republicans get on board and there`s enough of the Democrats
when we call business Democrats. There are allied to say, "Hey, there`s
nothing wrong with that." There are people in this town that think NAFTA
was a good idea. Do you believe that?

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

HOFFA: I mean you can`t believe the way people talk and they don`t
understand the laws and the agony that`s caused out there of a million jobs
disappearing. That`s why we have high unemployment. These bad trade
agreements and a bad economy.

SCHULTZ: Mr. Hoffa good to have you with us tonight. Congratulations by
the way on Michigan state winning the Rose Bowl. You had to be smiling at
that one.

HOFFA: Well, it was a wonderful victory. Go green.

SCHULTZ: Meaning (inaudible). Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.

Tonight, were going to stay on the TPP and this fast track. And I think
the President has done wonderful things but this is something that he needs
to explain to the American people. And they`re going to point to the trade
and they`re going to point to the amount of exports. But the imports it`s
not a level playing field.

That`s the Ed Show. I`m Ed Schultz.

Politics Nation with Reverend Al Sharpton starts right now. Good evening,
Rev.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END

Copyright 2014 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.>