Show: THE ED SHOW
Date: February 24, 2015
Guest: Jane Kleeb, Robert Kennedy Jr., Bob Shrum, John Nichols, Nina
Turner, Michio Kaku
ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed Show
live from New York.
Let`s get to work.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Tonight, TPP fast-track could face road blocks in Congress.
PRES. BARACK OBAMA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I`m asking both parties to
give me trade promotion authority...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Give us fast-track to TPP, well, what`s the TPP.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, (D) VERMONT: Bad trade agreements are one of the
reasons why the American middle class is disappearing.
MARCY KAPTUR, (D) OHIO: This is our moment to stop fast-track and the
outsourcing of millions of more jobs from this country.
SCHULTZ: And keystone isn`t it the only controversial pipeline project on
the map.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The constitution pipeline would connect gas rack (ph)
in Pennsylvania, the larger pipeline further north of New York.
BRUCE BAXTER, TREE FARMER: Taking away my development rights. They`re
taking away my farming rights.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As we work with the landowners and the local
governments and once with stakeholders, we will be refining the route.
RUSSELL HONICKER: We don`t need more (inaudible) we need to figure out
another way to live.
SCHULTZ: Plus, the search for life on another planet continuous. Well, a
science geek has a dire warning about our own.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can there be life elsewhere.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: An ocean that exist on beneath the icy shell of
Jupiter`s moon (inaudible).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And we use the habitable environment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight, folks. Thanks for watching.
We start with breaking news.
Moments ago, President Obama vetoed the Keystone XL Pipeline Bill.
The President releasing a statement moments ago saying that because of the
act of Congress conflicts with the established executive branch procedures
and cuts short thorough consideration of issues that could bear on our
national interest including our security, safety and environment. It has
earned my veto.
This is huge win, no doubt about it, for Nebraska landowners who still have
eminent domain issues and, of course, environmentalists around the country
are going to be applauding the President.
Keystone recently passed both Houses of Congress with bipartisan support.
John Boehner and Mitch McConnell aren`t happy with the President. They
wrote an append (ph) at the USA Today saying, "The allure of a appeasing
environmental extremists may be too powerful for the President to ignore
but the President is sadly mistaken if he things vetoing this bill will end
this fight, far from it we are just getting started."
Whatever that means, eminent domain issues could play out for another
couple of years in Nebraska.
After the President`s veto, Mitch McConnell said that the Senate will
consider a veto override on March 3rd.
On January 29th, the Senate was five votes shy of the 67 votes needed for
an override. But still, even if the Senate overrides this veto you can`t
build it because of eminent domain issues in Nebraska.
So what is going to happen? Let`s back up a little bit.
First of all, this is a serious statement by the President of the United
States that he is definitely serious and concerned about climate change and
willing to do something about it.
Secondly and I`m sure I`ll be corrected on this if I`m wrong, but I`m sure
he feels this way. Because he is the first President in a long time that
he`s lived up to what he is told the Native Americans that he was aware of
their concerns and that he would listen to them. This is a big message of
the country tonight despite the polling, despite what the House and Senate
does, the President is certainly committed to climate change and the jury
is still out for the rights of those landowners in Nebraska. Big win
tonight I think for the environment.
Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think.
Tonight`s question, "Does President Obama`s veto proved that he is serious
on climate change?" Text A for Yes, text B for No to 67622, leave a
comment in our blog at ed.msnbc.com.
Now, let`s turn now to Jane Kleeb the Executive Director of Bold Nebraska.
She joins us by phone tonight.
Jane, your thoughts on this, I mean, the President said what he -- he did
what he said he was going to do.
JANE KLEEB, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BOLD NEBRASKA: Yeah. So, you know,
President Obama absolutely stood up to the Republican Party which, you
know, used to stand for property rights, right? But now they do anything
that big oil comes knocking on their door to do. And, you know,
Representative Boehner and Mitch McConnell continuous to call us
extremists. They also called anarchist last week. And, Ed, you`ve the
farmers and ranchers.
They serve our country in the military. They`ve been growing food for
Americans for decades and yet, the Republicans all they can do is call us
names other than actually get to the values of the party which is really
about property rights.
SCHULTZ: What is TransCanada going to do now? I keep hearing stories that
they (inaudible) and offers keep going up to the landowners. Tell us about
that.
KLEEB: Yeah. So, TransCanada, even though a local judge has told
TransCanada they cannot use eminent domain until this case now brings --
goes back to the Nebraska Supreme Court.
Even with that ruling which is a big victory for landowners, TransCanada is
still knocking on the doors of landowners, harassing them, offering them
three times the amount of money that they originally offered. Landowners
are continuing stand strong, there`s over 100 landowners in Nebraska that
will not sign their land way (ph) to TransCanada.
SCHULTZ: And what about the veto override? Let say that they do twist a
few arms and get 67 override the President`s veto. It still can`t be
constructed until these issues playout, correct?
KLEEB: Yeah. I mean, even if they pulled some unicorn move in the House
and Senate and got enough votes to override the veto. The reality is, that
this pipeline will never be built.
There is now the huge illegal question in Nebraska about the pipeline route
and about eminent domain rights. That will take anywhere from a year to
three years. There`s still an ongoing fight in South Dakota where the
tribal nation (ph) are standing up for their rights (inaudible) in the
South Dakota TUC. So this pipeline would never get built even if they got
a permit today.
SCHULTZ: And quickly, your reaction to John Boehner and Mitch McConnell
saying that they`re going to keep on fighting. What is that mean?
KLEEB: You know, they actually have already started some parliamentary
procedures just, you know, minutes after the President vetoed the bill in
the Senate. They are essentially kind of figure out if they`re going to,
you know, use this, attach it to a most passed bill or if they`re going to
tried to essentially hold the override a veto vote so they continue a new
cycle because this is great for the Republican based, and it`s great for
their donors like the Koch brothers and Americans for Prosperity.
So, you know, we`ll be there every step of the way, Ed.
SCHULTZ: OK.
KLEEB: We`ll continue to fight because we know that this is the best thing
for our land and waters to get this rejected.
SCHULTZ: Jane Kleeb, Bold Nebraska, thanks for your time tonight. I
appreciate it.
And there is news on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the House will likely
vote on fast-track authority from the President next week. If the bill
passes Congress it would be free and of course free the way for the
President to finalize the TPP. It means the deal could be done in almost
no time.
Earlier this month, the Australian Trade Minister said that the deal could
be weeks away.
If fast-track is granted by Congress it would be bad for workers, bad for
the economy across the board. The President knows that labor leaders, and
unions are against the deal and he says that he needs to convince the
American people that TPP is a good thing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: Those experiences that arose over the last 20 years those aren`t
easily forgotten, and the burden of proof is on us, then to be very
transparent and explicit in terms of what it is that we`re trying to
accomplish.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Delivering in some ways but not delivering this time. The
President has not delivered. The White House has been silent on the
details of the TPP. Sources are telling neither the President has been
mislead by Trade Representative Froman but the President thinks he is too
far down the road right now to change his position on TPP.
Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said, "The burden is on the White House to
demonstrate that this is good for American paychecks."
One twist here, the Congressional Black Caucus could make or break this
vote. If they split away from the President defeating fast-track is a real
possibility.
Then you have the Republicans. A lot of Republicans are against the TPP
for sovereignty issues. Roughly 20 House member Republicans are against
the TPP because they actually think that it is bad for the country and it
is. Roughly 40 House members are against the TPP just because the
President of United States wants the authority and they don`t want to give
it to him, 218 votes are required to pass fast-track.
According to Reuters their analysis shows 195 members have strong or
moderate backing for the trade deals. Fast-track is 23 votes shy at this
moment for passage in the House. The opposition crosses party lines which
is strange in itself.
This really needs to get to the President`s desk from the standpoint, the
message that this is not good for American job. And this is the reason
(ph) these kids for outsourcing which of course we don`t need.
For more, let me bring in Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur of Ohio.
Congresswoman, good to have you with us tonight.
KAPTUR: It`s a pleasure.
SCHULTZ: What do you make of the number, the analysis that`s out there
about where people are in Congress on this? Does this really right on the
shoulders of the Congressional Black Caucus as this is unfolding?
KAPTUR: I think that the Congressional Black Caucus is one element and
also every member of Congress has live through these trade agreements going
all the way back to NAFTA and the President`s come and go.
Those who bear the results of the outsourcing jobs in their communities,
this has been felt coast to coast.
Americans wrecked up a lost of over 47,500,000 jobs just since NAFTA`s
passage. Imagine that in every decade over the last three decade and we
have $9.5 trillion in trade deficit that means more imports coming in here
than exports going out.
Those who in favor more of these trade deals are living in an altered
reality because the average American has paid heavily for trade deals that
don`t work in the interest of the United States of America.
SCHULTZ: So there are really no good track records here or whatsoever on
our trading history. So why do you think the President`s off-base (ph) on
this?
KAPTUR: I think that President`s advisers are misleading him. And the
President is a lawyer, so he respects the legal process. But you see the
agreement is not able to be read by any member. We have to go into a room,
they gave a little us a little piece of it but it is need in the whole
section.
These deals are so important. They`re like treaties. They should not be
brought up under fast-track which means Congress can demand, can`t really
examine...
SCHULTZ: Yeah.
KAPTUR: ... can`t understand the full implications of this. And I think,
you know, President`s got a few other things on his plate. And what
generally happens is the outsourcers gain ascendancy in this kind of very
secretive process.
SCHULTZ: How tight are the Democrats on this? Those who opposed it? How
convinced are they and how stern are they going to be on this?
KAPTUR: We are fighting with every ounce of strength in us, because we
know what it`s done to this country. America`s lost over two-thirds of her
manufacturing jobs and now her service jobs, call centers, all kinds of
operations have been outsourced to other countries.
Why can`t we have trade deals that create jobs in United States of
America...
SCHULTZ: Would this hurt Ohio?
KAPTUR: ... in the close markets of the world?
SCHULTZ: Would this hurt Ohio?
KAPTUR: There hasn`t been a trade deal yet that helped Ohio when you look
at the bottom line. They`ve all taken jobs away from us.
SCHULTZ: Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, good to have you with us
tonight. I appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
KAPTUR: Thank you.
SCHULTZ: Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the
screen. Share your thoughts with us on Twitter, @edshow on Facebook. We
always want to know what you think.
Coming up. There`s another pipeline fight being wave in America. This one
threatens to ruin the pristine stretch of land here on the North East. And
if it passes, Americans won`t even benefit from it.
That`s ahead. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.
There`s another pipeline, some were calling it the Keystone Pipeline of
natural gas.
Most Americans haven`t even heard of it. However, the debate is all too
familiar.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BAXTER: Taking away my development rights. They`re taking away my farming
rights. People won`t say put the pipe in, I can`t sell the land anymore.
I can (inaudible) trees, I can`t plant trees here.
So, they`re warding (ph) my development rights, all for the cost of about
one year`s worth of property taxes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That these are good paying jobs, and we`ve been working
on this for like three years to get this approval so we can get a shovel in
the ground and go to work.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a temporary solution for energy. And we need
to live thinking about future generations and not immediately 50 jobs
somewhere here or there.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Sound familiar? The regulatory process for the constitution
pipeline is almost three years old.
The $700 million project aims to go to 124 mile pipeline to transport
natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Fields in Northeast Pennsylvania
through the forest and waterways of Central, New York.
Proponent say the pipeline would create over a thousand constructions jobs
and yield millions in local taxes. They claimed it would provide enough
gas to power about 3 million homes in the New York and Boston areas at
lower rates.
Opponents of the project say that it would cost irreversible ecological
damage and it leave property vulnerable to invasive species of plants and
insects and alter the hydrology of the wetlands.
Of the hundreds of landowners affected of the pipeline, about 85 percent
have accepted payments in exchange for easement agreements. About 100
landowners have not agreed to deals.
The pipeline company has been granted eminent domain authority and it`s
expected to take action against those holding out.
We`ve heard the story before, now it`s time to speak up.
The public comment period on the constitution construction has been
extended until this Friday, February 27th.
Joining me tonight for on this is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Founder and
President of the Water Keeper Alliance. Mr. Kennedy, I appreciate it.
Good to have you with us tonight.
ROBERT F. KENNEDY, WATER KEEPER ALLIANCE: Thanks for having me, Ed.
SCHULTZ: What`s the danger here? Where is the risk?
KENNEDY: Well, there is an environmental issue and also there is a, I
think, almost a larger issue of our democracy. The growing power of the
oil industry to influence our democracy and some of those people that you
showed in the clip were people who are landowners, who are -- who woke up
one day and found oil industry people on their property saying, we`re going
to put a pipeline through your property. We`re going to condemn it using
eminent domain. We`re going to take it away from you and you have nothing
to say about it because the government of Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission has found has given us a permit that transfers -- the federal
authority, the sacred (ph) authority of eminent domain to a private company
to make money for themselves. And as you`ve said, this is not about
something that`s going to benefit the American public.
This gas -- the terminus of this gas pipeline is right in New York. And
all of -- they`ve say that they`re going to ship this gas in New England
but all of the gas pipelines that leave right New York, that go towards New
England are constrained. They don`t have room for more gas.
So it`s very, very clear that this company is actually building this
pipeline so they can ship gas to (inaudible) process it at LNG facility and
then ship it to Europe and Asia. That`s the same issue...
SCHULTZ: So we`re not going to see residents of New York and Boston and
the northeast potion of United States are not going to see lower rates on
natural gas because of this pipeline?
KENNEDY: No. There is no way that that`s going to happen. What this
pipeline is about is about enriching a few billionaires by impoverishing
the people of New York State. And the bullying that we`ve seen go along
with this and the corruption, you know, Eagle Ford is really a rogue
agency, it`s a classic, captive agency. It issued this permit illegally.
The Clean Water Act clearly requires that you cannot perk (ph) has no
authority to issue this -- it`s called a certificate of public convenience
and necessity which gives the local oil company and the pipeline company
eminent domain to condemn other private property, owner`s property.
They can`t do that until the state of New York issues a water quality
certification that says that the 289 water bodies, the river, streams and
lakes that this pipeline is going to cross will not be permanently harmed
by the pipeline.
The state has -- had issue that the public comment period is still going on
for that so any eminent domain permit is the illegal but perk (ph) when had
an issue with anyway.
SCHULTZ: OK.
KENNEDY: And the company that sued 120 people in the Catskill (ph) have
said or in central New Yorkers said "No, we don`t want that pipeline going
through our house, through our kitchen, near our backyard where our
children play or through our farm fields or whatever. We don`t want it".
And yet the company goes on says we don`t care what you want. That`s the
most economic root for us and we`re taking it.
SCHULTZ: OK. So what about the tax dollars that they keep referring to
and how the local governments and local entities are going to be able
benefiting from this?
KENNEDY: Well, again, it`s a short-term benefit. It`s a very, very short-
term benefit and, you know, we live in democracy, the locality is -- they
have a choice and local Americans, you know, the right to private property,
you know, as Thomas Jefferson said, "It is the basis of American Democracy"
and you can`t give private companies. We`re going to do no public benefit
for the American people long-term public.
SCHULTZ: Yeah.
KENNEDY: . I think they permanently give land away that belongs to a
private a property owner to a private company so they can enriched itself
(inaudible)...
SCHULTZ: So, do you think that you can stop this pipeline base on that?
Do you think that eminent domain is going to overpower these land owners,
these last 100 that are standing tall?
KENNEDY: We are hoping that it won`t. We`re using the courts, we`re
challenging the decision, water keeper and the local river keepers are
challenging the decision of the federal court to allow eminent domain to go
forward and have perk (ph) the regulatory agency that simply hand over
already to an oil company, to an oil and gas company to steal people, to
bulldoze people`s private property rights.
SCHULTZ: OK. Robert Kennedy Jr., great to have with us tonight, I
appreciate it so much. We`ll continue to follow the story it`s one that
hasn`t got a whole lot of national attention. There`s no question about
that, but judging from the pictures that you just saw, it looks like the
people clearly are engage in this and we will follow it. Thank so much.
Coming up, the latest out of California after passenger train derailed this
morning injuring dozens. And later, it`s a big day for two Midwest power
players with eyes in the White House. Rapid Response Panel tackles today`s
top politics and headlines.
But next, your question Ask Ed live coming up. We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: And we`re back.
We`re following the breaking news in California where a train has derailed
in Oxnard, California 80 miles outside of Los Angeles.
Police say a vehicle carrying a trailer hit a Metrolink train bound for Los
Angeles. 51 people were injured including 28 who were transported to
nearby hospitals. The National Transportation Safety Board is sending a
team to investigate the accident.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie delivered his 6th State of the State
Address today. Outlining his 2016 budget proposal and what he hopes will
be the answer to New Jersey`s fiscal woes.
The governor announced an accord that has been reach one of the biggest
attractors in the state and that is the Teachers Union, the New Jersey
Education Association. Christie also promises administration will
contribute $1.3 billion to the pension system, that`s nearly double the
current year`s contribution but still far below with the law requires.
The New Jersey judge ruled Monday that the full contribution should be more
than $3 billion must be made and an additional 1.57 billion must be paid
into the current budget. Christie lots of gravitas (ph) and lot of
(inaudible). I wonder if he thought the state would be where it is today,
when he took over six years ago.
With just a few hours left to cast their ballots in Chicago. The Chicago
voters are rising to the polls to elect the Mayor, whoever it`s going to
be.
Rahm Emanuel`s hoping for reelection but he`s reputation as mayor "Mr. 1-
Percent" could present a challenge. A run-off is possible if Emanuel fall
short of the 50 plus one percent needed to clinch his second term, the poll
close tonight at 7:00 Central.
And a new survey released today says that President Obama healthcare law
has drastically reduced the number of uninsured Americans. The Gallup-
Healthways, Well-Being Index found that in 2014, the number of adults with
out health insurance dropped to its lower level in seven years. And the
trend is likely to continue as 55 percent of those polls say the plan --
they plan to go ahead and get coverage in order to avoid paying tax
penalties.
We loved hearing from our viewers and our Ask Ed segment. Tonight first
question comes from Julie (ph), she want`s to know, "Do you think
Republicans will shutdown the funding that Homeland Security so the
President can act on immigration?"
No, I don`t. I think that those going to be clean bill and I think the
Republicans will find a way to fight immigration for instance this time in
the court down in Texas. But they`ve got other fish to fry. They don`t
want to mess around with the security of the country.
Been a lot of talk back and forth and horse trade and talk in everything
else, but believe me there`s going to be a clean bill and I think that
McConnell said something to that nature today.
Stick around Rapid Response Panel is next. We`ll be right back at the Ed
Show.
MARY THOMPSON, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Mary Thompson with your CNBC Market
Wrap.
Stocks end with gain, the Dow climbs to 92 points, the S&P add 5 and the
NASDAQ finish the day with the gain of 7.
Fed Chair Janet Yellen testified earlier before the Senate banking
committee. She said policymakers were no hurry to raise interest rates as
wage growth turning sluggish and inflation is below targets.
And some Dow`s gains are due to shares Home Depot. It was nearly 4
percent. Its profit worth 36 percent beating estimates, revenue also came
in ahead of forecast.
That`s it from CNBC, first in business worldwide.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. JOHN KASICH, (R) OHIO: I do want the country as much as I can really
in a humble way to tell people about what`s happened in Ohio. And what`s
happened in Ohio has been incredibly good.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Yeah, sure has. Thanks to the automobile loan program. Welcome
back to the Ed Show.
John Kasich, Governor of Ohio, is eager to get a national platform and then
tonight, State of the State Address, the governor plans to flown Ohio`s
recovery as his own triumph.
Over the weekend, he gave a preview to his speech.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KASICH: What works for us in Ohio? We are running surpluses of 2 billion.
We are structurally balanced. I`ve cut the taxes in Ohio, the legislature
and I, by the largest tax cut in our history. That`s kind of conservatism.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: Kasich`s conservative anthem completely (inaudible) to President
Obama`s automobile loan program. And the government funded rescue game of
course Ohio`s recovery a great jumps start. Thousands of jobs are created
and thousands were saved.
Governor Kasich received criticism from Republicans for taking the
ObamaCare of Medicaid expansion and make no mistake. He is a conservative
as much as they come. His deep tax cuts left Ohio communities in the cold.
Kasich signed union-busting a legislation to limit collective bargaining
with the teachers and the firefighters throughout the state although that
was overturned by the people by an issue of measure. And of course John
Kasich wants to appear middle of the road in front of a national audience
but he may be the slipper in all of this.
Joining me tonight in our Rapid Response Panel Bob Shrum, Democratic
Strategies and Professor of Politics at USC, John Nichols, Washington
Correspondent of the Nation with us tonight and also former State Senator
of Ohio Nina Turner.
Nina, you first, what do you make of all these accolades that Kasich given
himself.
NINA TURNER FORMER OHIO STATE SENATOR: Never let the truth getting away of
a good story. I mean...
SCHULTZ: Does the state have a surplus?
TURNER: Yeah. The state has a surplus but on the backs of local
governments. The state has a surplus but on the backs of poor people and
middle class people, absolutely, poverty is up and medium income is down.
SCHULTZ: What happened to Cleveland?
TURNER: Well, Cleveland is one example but all cities but for example
Cleveland has $60 million less than it had before Governor Kasich became
the Governor, $1 billion worth for cities and towns across the state of
Ohio lost in local government funding. That is a lot and that impacts the
bottom line of government which is service.
SCHULTZ: Bob Shrum, is John Kasich maybe a slipper? He is not getting a
whole lot of national attention but he`s got the media democracy (ph)
former host overall the other network. He knows how to win elections.
What`s wrong with this guy?
BOB SHRUM, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, I mean, what`s wrong from my
perspective is the first with his claims about Ohio, our economic lunacy.
The jobs are not created by a bunch of surpluses. They were created by the
economic recovery program, by the (inaudible) by what the President did.
But he is -- if he could get to a general election, he might be a very
intriguing candidate because he looks a little moderate. I mean, he is
very conservative actually but he looks a little moderate, you cited of the
Medicaid expansion. And -- but in Republican primaries, he is going to
have to move very far to the right to try to get that nomination and then
he`ll be far less formidable candidate.
SCHULTZ: John Nichols, Kasich wants to elevate an agenda that endangers
unions and he has tried that before hasn`t had the success of Walker,
what`s it mean?
JOHN NICHOLS, WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT THE NATION: Well, and there`s a
question that Kasich has a better story to tell than Scott Walker.
Scott Walker took on the unions and unlike Ohio he was able to pursue his
agenda all the way through. It has resulted in surpluses. It hasn`t given
Wisconsin a good bottom line.
And so, the truth of the matter is that there`s a reality developing in the
Republican field that I think it`s a pretty ugly one. And that is, that
you sort of get your points by having bitten down unions, by having gone
hard against unions and that measure Walker is the winner.
SCHULTZ: What about that, Nina Turner? I mean, Kasich win against unions
and lost?
TURNER: He did. I mean, the people in Ohio overwhelmingly as you know
because you came to Ohio with working...
SCHULTZ: ... after that, was he workable?
TURNER: I mean, he definitely was humbled by that experience and he said
so. But there`s a difference between what you say and what you do. So
although he has not going after unions, when you look at the budget as it
is exist right now, taxes are going up on 60 percent of the folks who pay
taxes in the state of Ohio. Meanwhile, the top 1 percent, they`re getting
extra $12,000 a year in breaks (ph), you are balancing the budget for
people.
SCHULTZ: And, Bob Shrum, I think that`s the moderation that you`re talking
about? I mean, he loses to unions. He comes back. He`s a little bit more
workable.
SHRUM: Right.
SCHULTZ: He takes a Medicaid, the expansion under Obamacare because he`s
popular. The numbers are what they are so let`s just play with this a
little bit.
If he is the guy for the Republicans, how hard is it going to be to win
Ohio for Hillary Clinton? In the latest Quinnipiac poll, Hillary Clinton
is in statistical hit with John Kasich. Is Kasich the next Republic hope
for that state, what do you make of those numbers?
SHRUM: Well, listen, he obviously runs better in Ohio than any other
Republican, that`s no surprise. He is pretty popular in the state, just
want a big reelection. But he what he would have to do to get the
nomination I think would make him far less viable in a general reelection
in terms of competing against Hillary Clinton.
Look, what folks are saying a minute ago is absolutely right. What John
Nichols said is absolutely right.
Scott Walker is the winner of this anti-union derby. He is the winner
among the conservative-based of the Republican Party right now.
In the new PPP poll, he`s at 25 percent in first place. Jeb Bush is in
third place and that conservative-based. This year may deny (ph) what`s
always happen in the Republican Party before which is they nominate the
front runner the next person in line.
SCHULTZ: OK.
SHRUM: They may instead nominate Scott Walker.
SCHULTZ: All right. Well, let`s go to Scott Walker. He is the other
presidential hopeful for the Republicans and it was a big day in Wisconsin
today. This is the scene in Madison, Wisconsin today. Protest outside the
capitol legislature (ph) is on a fast-track to make Wisconsin a right-to-
work state.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For breaking (ph) the call.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This bill, this mess that they are bringing upon the
state of Wisconsin is nothing more than a way to legalized and divide and
conquer us within our workplaces.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: John Nichols, a protest looks great but the Democrats...
NICHOLS: Yeah.
SCHULTZ: ... are -- they have no power right now. I mean, depending on
what the governor wants to do and what the Republican legislature wants to
do, this is slam dunk, isn`t it?
NICHOLS: It looks like, Ed. Although we should be very clear that there
are some Republicans who are wavering and this is a very mature protest.
There were thousands of people out today. They went into the capitol. You
can see that many on the rotunda though (ph). They went to the offices,
they are very focused on basically three or four Republicans trying to
shift them.
But the truth of the matter is that, this is classic Scott Walker. Scott
Walker said this issue wouldn`t come to the legislature. He said it was on
his agenda. He said he was going to stop this thing. Now, they popped on
a Friday morning, on Friday afternoon Scott Walker said he was going to
sign it. Two days into this week, today, they have the hearing on it.
Tonight, they`re going to have a committee vote. Tomorrow, they`re having
a State Senate vote.
They are rushing this thing through not because it`s popular in Wisconsin,
not because it would win a referendum in Wisconsin...
SCHULTZ: Yeah.
NICHOLS: ... but because they are giving Scott Walker an issue to use in
his presidential race.
SCHULTZ: And this bill is written right out of the ALEC playbook. I
mean...
TURNER: Yes. This deception, Ed, he said -- and, you know, that after
what John, he said it wasn`t good right then because he was running for
reelection but again, he deceived the people. And to drop down wages, we
understand that when unions are strong, wages are up not just for union
workers but for all workers.
It is never the right thing to mess with people`s wages, you know,
livelihoods, and how folks out there and the dead of winter saying that
this is wrong. This is wrong in Wisconsin. This is wrong all over the
country, Ed. It is wrong to drop down wages.
SCHULTZ: It`s wrong but, Bob Shrum, he`s winning the battle. The -- what
you call the -- and a union-busting derby that`s taking place. I mean,
it`s almost like they don`t care about the job numbers. They don`t care
about the budget...
SHRUM: Right.
SCHULTZ: ... just knockout the democratic base so we don`t have to compete
against him in the next election.
SHRUM: Yeah. What all he cares about is the Republican base.
TURNER: Yeah.
SHRUM: He is running for President. He has done this not only with
unions. As John said, he took a completely contrary position during the
election. He`s done this, for example, on the issue of choice when he said
during the election. He actually broadcast and ad claiming that he signed
the bill that left the decision to a woman and her doctor.
He`s now endorsed the person of (inaudible), many is all in for it. And
that would outrun not only abortion but many forms of birth control.
So this guy cares about one thing and one thing only. That`s getting the
nomination of the Republican Party. I think he will be pushed very far to
the right, wouldn`t be a great general election candidate.
And you know, Ed, I realized this isn`t going to happen but I think Scott
Walker`s pretty lucky. He doesn`t face a recall election in Wisconsin now
because more and more he`s revealed his two colors.
SCHULTZ: I think their election burned out in Wisconsin, he one of three
for four years. I don`t think that`s going to happen but I know what
you`re saying, the timing is everything.
Look, when you look at the model of what the conservatives want to do to
drill down on the democratic base, the social networking, the door to door
stop, all the things that unions have been able to do. So what are these
unions now doing in Wisconsin, John Nichols, to, you know, reinvigorate the
troops, so to speak, and get people back in, I hear that they`re dropping
union dues and I hear that they`re doing a door to door there. What do you
know?
NICHOLS: Well, look, they`re looking to the reality that 2016 is a
presidential year. Wisconsin is a whipsaw state and Bob knows what that
means.
In a off-year election, the Republicans do well because it turnouts a bit
down and a presidential year turnout goes up. And there`s an interesting
thing in Wisconsin. We talk about whether governor could win in Ohio.
Governor Scott Walker, there is polls in Wisconsin that show he hasn`t
doing that well...
SCHULTZ: Right.
NICHOLS: ... as a presidential candidate.
And so, this is something to understand about the circumstance of the
unions. They know they`re getting hit hard, they know they`re taking hits.
But, I think they`re thinking very smart about 2016 and 2018. And I think
they also starting to recognize that as PolitiFact said today, Scott Walker
seems to have a different stand when he`s in a gubernatorial race than when
he is in a presidential race.
SCHULTZ: Interesting take. All right. Bob Shrum, John Nichols, Nina
Turner, great to have you with us tonight. Thank you so much.
SHRUM: Thank you.
SCHULTZ: Coming up, the future of space exploration. Why astrophysicist
Stephen Hawking believes it is the key to human survival. And the one
personality trait (ph) he says could end civilization. Very uplifting,
isn`t?
Stay with us. We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCHULTZ: Two-minute drill tonight, up first. Here we go.
The fine trend (ph) Marshawn Lynch looking to trademark his famous phase.
The Seahawks running back repeatedly told reporters at Super Bowl Media
Day, "I`m just here so I don`t get fine. I`m just here so I don`t fine."
And now, he is cashing in.
The Seattle Times reports that Lynch filed an application with the U.S.
Patent and Trade Office for the phrase. His Beast Mode clothing line plans
to be online and use of apparel within the next month.
Good move.
On the baseball, on the diamond, a new prospect from Cuba`s making waves.
Imagine this, you`re 19 years old that this happens, the Boston Red Sox
have signed a 19-year old, Yoan Moncada. The team agreed to a $31 million
signing bonus. He`s a switch-hitting great infielder.
It`s a big blow to the New York Yankees who were courting Moncada as early
as last week. And also he has been reports that Red Sox legend Louis Tiant
was from Cuba help seal the deal for Boston.
And finally, the heir of the throne, check him out. 10-year old LeBron
James Jr. shows he takes after the old man on the hard court.
Take a look at these moves from a youth basketball tournament last weekend
in New Orleans.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(Crosstalk)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: From long range, King James took the Instagram to congratulate
his son`s team on the tournament win. And we`ll have to wait a few years
to see where a junior will be taking his talents.
Stick around, lot more coming up on the Ed Show. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FELICITY JONES AS JANE HAWKING: I want us to be together for as long as
we`ve got. And if that`s not very long, well, then that`s just how it is.
It`ll have to do.
EDDIE REDMAYNE AS STEPHEN HAWKING: You don`t know what`s coming. It`ll
affect everything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHULTZ: It is true. We don`t know wants coming. The real life Stephen
Walking has a new theory about the end of the world. The British
astrophysicist warns if humans do not check our aggressive ways, we will be
doomed.
Hawking was asked by a group at the London Science Museum, which of our
species shortcomings he`d like to fix.
Discovery news reports Hawking responded saying, "The human failing I would
most like to correct is aggression. It may have had survival advantage in
caveman days to get more food, territory or partner with whom to reproduce,
but now it threatens to destroy us all".
Hawking noted aggressive behavior along with the -- along the side of the
nuclear power that we have, nuclear weapons could end civilization, some
humans already looking to find other planets to inhabit if the earth is
destroyed, really? We`re all looking to get the hell out of here before it
happens.
Joining me tonight Michio Kaku is a Professor of Physics in City University
in New York. Great to have you with us and I want to congratulate you
again on your book. You`re the author of "The Future of the Mind". It was
number best seller on the New York Times best seller that was last year.
And now it is out today on paperback.
MICHIO KAKU, PROFESSOR OF PHYSICS, CITY UNIVERSITY OF N.Y.: That`s right.
SCHULTZ: Congratulation.
KAKU: Thank you.
SCHULTZ: What`s your reaction to Stephen Hawking on what he is saying?
KAKU: Well, you know, we use to throw rocks at each other when we were
caveman and cavewoman. Now, we can throw nuclear weapons at each other.
And nuclear weapons are proliferating in the most dangerous hotspots in the
world, the Korean Peninsula, the Middle East, the India, a Pakistan
boarder. That`s keeps you up at night wondering whether or not somebody
with an itchy trigger finger could setup a nuclear war and just engulf all
of humanity. It is really upsetting.
SCHULTZ: It`s, but it`s also understandable isn`t it? I mean, it`s
conceivable to think about how this could happen as technology advances.
KAKU: That`s right. And some people wonder well, how come alien life in
outer space don`t land on the White House land and announce their
existence. Maybe they, too, discovered nuclear weapons and maybe they
could not negotiate peace and could tame their aggressive tendencies. And
maybe that`s why they don`t visit us.
SCHULTZ: Do you believe theirs life in outer space?
KAKU: Oh, I think it`s definite. I think one out of every 20 star in the
galaxy have an earth like planet going around it, one in 20. So when you
look at the sky at night somebody could be looking back at you.
SCHULTZ: What about NASA`s interest in the possible mission to Jupiter`s
moon. What`s happening here?
KAKU: This is a potential game changer. You know, we`ve spend billions of
dollars looking for little green men on Mars, we find nothing not even
microbial life on Mars. We afford to get every square inch of Martian real
estate. But you see the icy moons of Jupiter and Saturn have oceans.
Oceans underneath the ice, so instead of looking for little green men
perhaps we should be looking for aquatic life forms underneath the icy
cover of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, that`s a game changer.
SCHULTZ: If you were totally resource, if you had anything at your
disposal to do what you wanted to do with outer space, where would you go,
what would you try to accomplish?
KAKU: Well, you know, Mars is tempting target, you know, because we are
going to be having a large booster rocket in the next decade. Perhaps by
the mid-2030s, we may have enough capability to reach the red planet. And
in the long-term I think we should be a two planets species.
It`s too dangerous to put various species on just one planet. There`s no
rush of course, but we should become a two planet species. It`s an
insurance policy basically.
SCHULTZ: Who would want to live on a planet with no oxygen? I mean,
that`s kind of a boring life isn`t it? I mean, you got to have oxygen or
we can`t make it.
KAKU: Well, we would have to terraform the planet, OK? Meaning that we
would have to inject greenhouse gasses to create a greenhouse effect on
Mars, milk the ice caps, get water flowing again after 3 billion years and
perhaps seeded with genetically engineered algae so that we`ll have a
Garden of Eden on Mars. Of course, this will take centuries to do.
SCHULTZ: NASA is working to reconfigure the International Space Station
for commercial crew missions. Is this a good idea?
KAKU: Well, you know, right now we hitchhike on the Russian booster, OK?
And, you know, that mean the space program is at the mercy of international
geopolitics involving Russia. And we have to reduce the cost of space
travel.
If you had reusable commercial spacecraft, you could reduce the cost by
factor of two to five maybe. If you can simply reused this booster rockets
because, you know, it cost about $10,000 to put a pound of anything in
orbit. That`s prohibitive.
We do not have access to outer space because it simply too expensive, $20
million for any citizen to orbit the earth on the International Space
Station -- $20 million that`s what it cost.
SCHULTZ: That`s an expensive ticket. Is there much conversation amongst
our government officials of what our next move is with space?
I mean, you know, we`re trying to get equal pay wage and we`re trying to,
you know, do a better job with education and healthcare and everything else
and here we`re talking about another world.
KAKU: Yeah. Well, you know, NASA is being criticizes being the agency to
nowhere. I mean it spins wheels but it doesn`t do anything, doesn`t go
anywhere. However, the thinking now it seems to chorales (ph) around Mars
that perhaps will bypass the moon and go under the red planet. But it`s a
long-term process, you know, like you mentioned, Mars is not a hospitable
planet. There`s no oxygen, it`s below freezing, its a frozen dessert. But
it could be our future in the long-term.
SCHULTZ: What`s the next book?
KAKU: I might publish it once, would have to come up with another book. I
haven`t thought about it yet but I`ll think of one.
SCHULTZ: Sure you have -- you don`t want to announce it here.
I think NASA`s one of the greatest things ever happen to this country. I
mean, laser technology, the medical advances that had been made...
KAKU: Computer (inaudible)...
SCHULTZ: ... GPS, everything. I mean, that just -- that`s an easy one.
Professor Kaku, thanks for your time tonight.
KAKU: Thank you.
SCHULTZ: Always great to have you. I appreciate it.
And that is the Ed Show, I`m Ed Schultz.
PoliticsNation 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 2015 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.>
The Ed Show for Tuesday, February 24th, 2015
Read the transcript to the Tuesday show