IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

The Ed Show for Wednesday, April 20th, 2011

Guests: Scott Paul, Scott Keyes, Laura Flanders, Adam Green, Dominick Figurino

ED SCHULTZ, HOST:  Good evening, Americans.  And welcome to THE ED SHOW tonight from New York.

Well, Republican presidential candidates like Michele Bachmann say they are done talking about birth certificates?  And that‘s good.  But my guy Donald Trump has a new controversial subject for Republicans: bringing back jobs to America?

This is THE ED SHOW.  Let‘s get to work.



SCHULTZ (voice-over):  Paul Ryan‘s Wisconsin road show rolls on.



CONSITUENT:  It‘s a matter of there‘s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down.

REP. PAUL RYAN ®, WISCONSIN:  We do tax the top.



SCHULTZ:  Talk about a hometown crowd.

Tonight‘s “Takedown”: Bad news for the biggest bully in Jersey.


GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE ®, NEW JERSEY:  This is the crap I have to hear.


SCHULTZ:  And the Koch brothers caught in another scandal—cooking the vote.


SCHULTZ:  And this is the story that has me fired up tonight: A Republican—think about this—finally wants to bring jobs back to America?  It‘s my choice for the Republican nomination.  Here he is, Donald Trump.

The Donald took a couple of minutes away from asking for President Obama‘s birth certificate to talk about jobs with my colleague Savannah Guthrie.  Take a look.


SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC NEWS:  Would you raise taxes to attack the deficit?

DONALD TRUMP, CEO, TRUMP ORGANIZATION:  I don‘t think you have to.  And let me just tell you—if we get this economy going again, and we can do it by getting jobs, by bringing our jobs back, bringing them back.  Let the other countries worry about themselves.


SCHULTZ:  Wow.  Did you hear that?  I mean, I haven‘t heard a Republican candidate even mention bringing jobs back to America.

Now, we‘re not—job creation.  There‘s a difference here.  Bringing jobs back to America?

The Trumpster laid out his plan to squeeze China.


TRUMP:  My policy is very, very simple.  I would tell China very nicely, fellas, you‘re my friend.  I like you very much—I‘ve made a lot of money with China, by the way, a lot of money with China.  I would say we are going to put a 25 percent tax on all your products coming in and that‘s going to do a number of things.  Number one, as soon as they believe it‘s going to happen, they will behave so nicely because it will destroy their economy.


SCHULTZ:  You see, folks, I‘m looking for the beef with this guy.  That‘s what I‘m looking for.  I want something from Donald Trump other than birth certificates.

But you know what?  On that sound bite right there, that‘s about as detailed as any Republican gets when it comes to emerging markets.

Take a look at this chart.  Because this is where America is right now and this is where we have been, our road map that we have followed for the last 10 years.  Let‘s go back to 1999.

Now, where are the jobs?  Jobs going out of the United States—that‘s in red.  Job creation inside the United States, that‘s the blue.  So, when I hear a candidate say that we‘ve got to bring jobs back to America—ooh, you‘ve got my attention Mr. Trump.  Let‘s follow the line here.

Well, in 1999, it was Bill Clinton.  Then, of course, in 2000, her we go with the red line.  We‘re starting to push jobs overseas to other emerging markets.

And then, of course, after the Bush tax cuts went in.  Where did the revenue go?  Where did the job creation go?  The job creation went down, after all these big tax cuts were put into effect.

And the jobs went overseas.  It continued to climb to 1 million, to 1.5 million, to 2 million jobs a year going outside of the United States.

You want some numbers?  If you were to take factories with 25 or more employees, we sent 50,000 factories packing, 2.5 million jobs.  If you are a wage earner, if you are a union member, if you are a middle class American and you hear a candidate say that they are going to take this red and turn it into blue because that‘s exactly what Donald Trump is saying, that he can bring jobs back to America, that‘s his plan—I‘m all about it.

And the Republicans, you will never see this graph on FOX News.  It‘s not a story.  Outsourcing is something they just kick under the table.

But this is what has the Republicans have given us.  This is what they did to us.  They shipped jobs overseas and they, of course, did not coming up with the job creation that they said that they were going to come up with, with the tax cuts.

Now 2008, it didn‘t stop under President Obama and the Democrats.  It did not.  In fact, the Democrats got control of the House about right here on this graph.

So, when Donald Trump—and maybe this is his independent streak coming out of him—says that he wants to bring jobs back to America.  Man, I‘m all ears.  Americans are all ears on this one because I haven‘t heard a Republican or a Democrat say this is what we are going to do.

In fact, Republicans have blocked Democrats from doing anything to stop the bleeding of jobs being shipped out of this country.  Last fall, here are the numbers, the Republicans filibustered a bill to end tax deductions for U.S. companies who ship jobs overseas.  The bill would have imposed a new tax on products once made in the United States—but, of course, now manufactured by foreign workers.  And it‘s offered employers a two-year payroll tax holiday and jobs that were going to be brought back to the United States.

Now, I just want to point out.  The Democrats tried to do something to reverse this, but they couldn‘t do it.

Now, America needs to know if Donald Trump supports taxing American companies who go shipping jobs overseas to do things on the cheap.  Americans also need to know where Trump stands when it comes to organized labor and collective bargaining.

This chart shows how middle class income has dropped at the same pace as union participation over the last 30 years.  And I‘m just telling you, I‘ve showed you this before, but I just love this graph because no politician has an answer for this.  I don‘t think any party has an answer for this.

Now, the green bars are the CEO pay.  Look at the CEO pay.  Wow!

Look at union membership in red and middle class share of the national income.  It has gone down over the last 30 years.  And this is where we are.

Now keep in mind, in that interview with Savannah Guthrie, Donald Trump said he didn‘t think you have to tax the rich people.

Well, here are some of the rich people right here.  He doesn‘t want to

you see, Trump loves to talk tough with China and Libya but doesn‘t have the guts to go after the top 2 percent.


Take a closer look at how he answered Savannah‘s question about raising taxes.


GUTHRIE:  Would you raise taxes to attack the deficit?

TRUMP:  I don‘t think you have to.


SCHULTZ:  What did he say?  I don‘t think you have to?

Can we hear that just one more time?  Here it is.  Let‘s watch that again.


GUTHRIE:  Would you raise taxes to attack the deficit?

TRUMP:  I don‘t think you have to.


SCHULTZ:  Well, there‘s one answer because that goes against most Americans right there.

Trump doesn‘t think that you have to raise taxes on people like him. 

That means Donald Trump disagrees with 72 percent of the American people.  That‘s right.  The new “Washington Post”/ABC News poll that‘s out says 72 percent of Americans want to see the taxes go up on the top 2 percent to bring more money into the Treasury, anybody who earns more than $250,000 a year.

Let‘s see how Trump fits in with the 80 percent who want to protect Medicare and Medicaid.


TRUMP:  I‘m very concerned about doing anything that‘s going to tinker too much with Medicare.  I protect the senior citizens.  Senior citizens are protected.  They are life blood as far as I‘m concerned.

I think Paul Ryan is too far out front with this issue.  I think he ought to sit back and relax.


SCHULTZ:  Sit back and relax.  You think people sitting at home with Medicare and Medicaid are sitting back and relaxing when they hear Mr. Ryan talk like that with a radical budget?  You know, you got to hand it to Trump.  The guy knows how to read a poll.

Trump has been pushing all this birther garbage because 48 percent of Iowa Republican voters believe the president was not born in the United States of America.

Trump has even backed Michele Bachmann into a corner on the birther issue.  Watch what she admitted to this morning.


GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS:  I got the president‘s certificate right here.  It‘s certified.  It‘s got a certification number.  It‘s got the registrar of the state signed.  It‘s got a seal on it and it says this copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN ®, MINNESOTA:  Well, then, that should settle it.


BACHMANN:  That‘s what should settle it.  I take the president at his word, and I think for any—again, I would have no problem, and, apparently, the president wouldn‘t either, introduce that.  We‘re done.

STEPHANOPOULOS:  So, this has been introduced.  So, this story is over?

BACHMANN:  Well, as long as someone introduces it, I guess it‘s over.

STEPHANOPOULOS:  It‘s right there.

BACHMANN:  Yes, there you go, because that is not the main issue facing the United States right now.  The main issue facing the United States is dealing with our debt and our deficit.


SCHULTZ:  So, Michele Bachmann has gone around the country for the last year and a half saying she wants to see President Obama‘s birth certificate.  But now that Donald Trump is being the media hog and he‘s getting all the attention—well, hell, she can‘t let that happen.  She‘s got to step in and say, well, I guess it‘s over.  I guess it‘s over.

Donald is kind of saying natured that story now and he, of course, has trumped up—for lack of a better term—everybody‘s emotion on the right as to whether this is going to be a valid issue or not.  Well, if you look at the polls in Iowa -- 48 percent of Republican voters think the president wasn‘t born in this country.  Trump‘s playing the right cards.

So, how do you shoot down your opponent if you are serious about winning the White House and the nomination?  Michele Bachmann, you have to finally discredit the birther movement.  And that‘s exactly what she did.  So I say that Trump is good being in the mix.

But let‘s get back to the job thing if we may.

Mr. Trump, if you really have a plan that you can give to the American people to bring back jobs to America, I tell you what—you are going to garnish a tremendous amount of love from the middle class.  The middle class that has been butchered by all this outsourcing we‘ve been talking about.  And, of course, the seniors who want their health plan protected.

And you got to get on board with this tax increase for you and your country club guys because that‘s really what the American people want.  But you are playing with people‘s emotions when you sit there and say that you are going to bring jobs back to America because—number one, I haven‘t heard any Republicans say that.  I don‘t think the Democrats could be stronger on it, for sure.

But a plan to create jobs to bring them back?  The only way you can do that is go down the road of manufacturing, because we‘ve lost 50,000 factories in the last 10 years.  We‘ve lost almost 3 million jobs of factories in the last three.  Would you like to add 3 million jobs?

And I‘ll tell you what really people want to know right now, Mr.  Trump.  They want to know if you are a media whore or if you really want to do this job.  We know you‘ve been in sales your whole career.  We know that you can do the sell job.

But if you are playing with people‘s emotions now—you know, those 99-ers who got outsourced, you know, the high unemployment who were supposed to be accepting as the new normal?  Come on, man.  Give me some meat on the bone, will you?

Step to the plate.  Knock off all this birther stuff and let‘s get down to the devil in the details.  If you have got—that‘s the media sound bite that you have given so far—if you have got a plan to bring these jobs back to America, dammit, let‘s hear it—because there‘s people out there who are suffering.  Maybe you can actually add to this process.

Get your cell phones out, folks.  I want to know what you think. 

Tonight‘s question: will Republicans bring jobs back into the country?  Because they did vote against it you know.  Text “A” for yes, text “B” for no to 622639, and you can go to our new blog at  We‘ll bring you the results later on in the show.

Now, let‘s focus on the jobs now.

Joining me now is Scott Paul, founding executive director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing.

Scott, good to have you with us tonight.  It‘s great to have you on.

This is your profession—what has happened to manufacturing in this country, the factories that have been closed.  And I haven‘t heard any other candidates or anybody thinking about running for president say they want to bring jobs back.

Do you think Donald Trump really has a plan to bring back jobs?  And what would the best plan be, in your opinion?

SCOTT PAUL, ALLIANCE FOR AMERICAN MANUFACTURING:  Well, Ed, it‘s a good question.  He‘s talking about the right issue because jobs still top of mind for the American people.  The deficit matters.  But the deficit that matters the most to the American people is the jobs deficit.

And so, I‘m glad Trump is talking about it.  What he‘s proposed on China is actually something that Paul Krugman, you know, the liberal columnist for “The New York Times” proposed last year, a 25 percent tax—something similar to what President Obama has supported during the election, although, obviously, not since 2008, and that‘s unfortunate.

But I do think that we can bring these jobs back.  They‘re not going to come back on their own.  It‘s going to take a strategy.  And that‘s what we lack right now, Ed, and both Democrats and Republicans have come up short.  Republicans, as you indicated, have blocked a lot of this.  I don‘t think the president has been aggressive enough.

And I do think the American people are very hungry for concrete ideas on trade, tax, investment, skills, policies.  They are going to bring some of those good manufacturing jobs back to the United States.  These are the jobs that we need.  Not the 50,000 jobs that McDonald‘s is creating.

SCHULTZ:  See, I don‘t think that Mr. Trump is winging this at all.  I think that this is a strategy.  He has hit the hot button issue.  And when he says, to stimulate the economy, you got to bring the jobs back, he‘s going to get the attention of a lot of Americans.  I‘m one of them.

This is the issue.  You know, you can talk job creation, but if we‘re not making stuff again in this country, I don‘t believe that our economy is going to turn around, and I believe that we are going to be stuck in this cycle known as the new normal.

So, has any candidate so far laid out a manufacturing strategy to bring those jobs back?  And is Trump on to something that really could be the hot button issue to propel him even further?

PAUL:  Well, he‘s certainly going to drive the Republicans forward on this.  And we know from our own public opinion research that this appeals to Tea Party voters.  They want to see a manufacturing base in this country.


PAUL:  This appeals to Republicans who care about national security. 

They are very concerned about our defense industrial base.

Most of the rest of the Democrats—or the Republican candidates out there, you know, toe the multinational line on this and toe the Wall Street line.  And they don‘t talk about outsourcing.  They don‘t talk about bringing manufacturing back.  They have some idea of free markets that you confined in a textbook somewhere, but it doesn‘t exist when you are going up against China.

And that‘s the one thing that I think Trump brings.  He is talking about this issue in a way that you haven‘t seen a Republican talk about it in a very long time.

And, Ed, I will just say this.  You know, I wish Donald Trump would focus on a jobs plan and stay away from these other issues.  For all of Ross Perot‘s warts in 1992, he really drove a debate on the budget deficit, and it was obviously a debate that our country needed to have.  I hope we have a jobs debate.  I hope it‘s centered around manufacturing and China.  And I do think that Trump brings something to the equation there.

SCHULTZ:  Well, this must be the independent streak that is coming out in Donald Trump.  It crosses all party lines, and the middle class is out there thinking tonight.  You know, bringing jobs back.  That‘s a pretty doggone good idea.

Scott Paul, good to have you with us tonight.  I appreciate your time.

Remember to answer tonight‘s question at the bottom of the screen.  I want to know what you think.

Congressman Paul Ryan‘s plan to cut taxes for rich—folks, it isn‘t going over very well with his own constituents at a town hall meeting.  He‘s doing a number of them around Wisconsin.

And a year after the start of the Gulf Coast oil spill, some things have changed, but many things have not.  We‘ll talk with a fisherman who wants to know when help is going to arrive.

Stay with us.


SCHULTZ:  Be sure to check out our new blog at  It‘s getting better every day.  There, you‘re going to find links to, my radio Web site, Twitter and Facebook.  Let‘s hook up.

Congressman Paul Ryan gets the smackdown from his own constituents at a town hall meeting.  You won‘t want to miss it.  Stay with us.


SCHULTZ:  Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.  Thanks for watching tonight.

OK.  We‘ve got numbers all over the place.  Brand new poll out finds that 72 percent of Americans support raising taxes on those folks in this country who have incomes over $250,000 a year.  Now that‘s a heavy number, 72 percent.

Sixty-eight percent of independents are in favor of it.  And even 54 percent of Republicans are saying, you know what?  Maybe we ought to raise taxes on folks who make more than $250,000 a year.

Now, at a town hall meeting in Milton, Wisconsin—this gets interesting—Congressman Paul Ryan found out today, I guess you could say the hard way, when a constituent who described himself as a life-long conservative asked this question.


CONSTITUENT:  The middle class is disappearing right now.  During this time of prosperity, the top 1 percent was taking about 10 percent of the total annual income, but yet today, we are fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthiest expire?  And we‘re fighting to not raise the Social Security cap from $87,000?  I think we‘re wrong.

RYAN:  A couple of things, on the cap—


RYAN:  A couple of things.  I don‘t disagree with the premise of what

you‘re saying.  The question is: what‘s the best way to do this?  Is it to

is it to redistribute—



CONSTITUENT:  You have to lower spending.  But it‘s a matter of there‘s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down.

RYAN:  We do tax the top.


RYAN:  Let‘s remember—let‘s remember, most of our jobs come from successful small businesses.  Two-thirds of our jobs do.  You got to remember, these businesses pay taxes to individuals.

So, when you raise their tax rate to 44.8 percent, which is what the president is proposing, I would just fundamentally disagree, that‘s going to hurt job creation.


SCHULTZ:  You remember that old show “Password.”  The password is redistribute.  You know, and then the crowd—oh.  I think they‘re going to get it.

Folks, if the Bush tax cuts expired for the wealthy, their rate would go back to 39 percent.  Would that knock them out of business?  No.  That was the number under President Clinton.  Not 44.8 percent.

But the real story here is that Ryan is getting the smackdown from his own constituents.  Income, redistribution—look, they ain‘t buying that.  Hell, yes, absolutely income redistribution.

People understand what shared sacrifice is all about, and there‘s a guy right there who‘s been in Washington too long who has a big disconnect with the people who put him there.  It means the wealthy paying a bit more, just a bit more in these tough times would be a good thing to do.

Let‘s bring in host of “GRITtv” on Free Speech TV, Laura Flanders. 

And the “Think Progress” reporter who shot that video, Scott Keyes.

Scott, good to have you with us tonight.  Now, you talked—

SCOTT KEYES, THINKPROGRESS.ORG:  Thanks for having me, Ed.

SCHULTZ:  You bet.  You talked to the man who asked the question.  And you attended several of Paul Ryan‘s town hall meetings.  Give us a sense of what he is running into and the reaction in the crowd when you saw that.

KEYES:  Sure.  Now it was interesting.  There were overflow crowds at every single one of these town hall meetings that I attended.  But I‘ll tell you what is interesting about it is the fact that I‘ve been going to these town halls for almost a year now.  And typically, the type of people who show up are, you know, your diehard supporters of that congressman.

That just wasn‘t the case here in Wisconsin.  You know, Paul Ryan was getting an earful from his constituents who were really anxious and uncomfortable with a lot of these proposals he‘s got in his budget plan that he proposed to the Congress.

SCHULTZ:  Laura Flanders, what does this mean politically?  Is this the Democrats‘ Tea Party moment?

LAURA FLANDERS, HOST, GRITTV:  Well, you know, I wish I could say that.  But I think what we‘re seeing really is the majority of people who have not been silent, but they have been silenced.  There is nobody speaking for them.  That crowd saying, as you point out, yay to redistribution.  They are not people that anyone is talking to.

We in the media often talk about the Tea Parties.  There‘s an interest that is scaring folks about the far right.  They‘re the silly story.

This is the real story.  The Americans who are no longer feeling there is a middle class to be part of.  It‘s the super rich versus everybody else and they want those jobs you were talking about in the last segment.

SCHULTZ:  And, Scott, I don‘t want to mischaracterize the attitude or the feeling of the people that were at that town hall meeting that you attended today, because the Tea Partiers were rude, disruptive, threatening.  I got a sense from watching the videotape that these were Ryan supporters who were trying to tell him, “Dude, you‘re on the wrong side of this issue.”  Was that the case?

KEYES:  Yes.  I mean, like—like you said, this guy who asked the question about, you know, why can‘t we be taxing the rich at a fairer rate, he is a self-described life-long conservative.  So, you know, this is exactly what we‘re seeing borne out in these polls like you mentioned.  The ABC News/”Washington Post” poll—


KEYES:  -- that found that strong majority of Republicans, independents, Democrats, the entire country wants to see, you know, a little bit higher rates on the rich to help close the budget deficit.

SCHULTZ:  And what when the subject of Medicare/Medicaid came up? 

What kind of response did he get there?

KEYES:  You know, there was a lot of anxiety I saw in the crowds.  The type—the people who were showing up were largely older folks.  You know, a lot of concern about -- 

FLANDERS:  Yes, I mean -- 

KEYES:  -- the type of things he was proposing.

FLANDERS:  It‘s the seniors that the Republicans have a problem with here.  It‘s the seniors not buying what Ryan is selling.

But we need to go back to the nature of this country right now.  There‘s some interesting research out of Duke University—Dan Ariely, we talked about it on my show—where most Americans, rich, poor, white, black, Republican, Democratic, want to see a more equal society.

When asked to identify their country just by wealth inequality, they think their country is Sweden, except taxes have them terrified.

SCHULTZ:  See?  But I don‘t think you can have an equal society when it comes to income.

FLANDERS:  More equal.

SCHULTZ:  No, no, but it‘s fairness.  This is not fair when you are cranking jobs, deregulation, ship them overseas.

FLANDERS:  It‘s not what this country was about.

SCHULTZ:  No, it‘s not.

FLANDERS:  The country was about independence from rich elites.  It was about having a society that functions with Joe Democrat able to play a role in their world.


FLANDERS:  And that‘s what you are hearing in that frustration.  This is a town with an average income of $22,000, an old Underground Railroad town.  This is a place that they‘re saying, we‘ve been forgotten by everybody.

SCHULTZ:  Scott Keyes, Laura Flanders, great to have you with us tonight.  I appreciate it so much.

KEYES:  Thanks, Ed.

SCHULTZ:  You bet.

JoAnne Kloppenburg asks for a recount in Wisconsin.  She did that today as the recall fight is heating up.  Today was a big day in the dairy state.

The people of New Jersey have spoken.  There‘s one word they associate with Governor Chris Christie more than any other word.  We‘ll tell you what it is in “The Takedown.”

Stay with us.


SCHULTZ:  And it‘s time for the Takedown.  New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.  I love to talk about this guy.  He‘s the great white hope for conservatives to turn everything around for the righties.  Now if you give a right winger a microphone, they are going to waste no time telling you how much they just love Chris Christie, the governor who is tough on the middle class. 


GLENN BECK, FOX NEWS ANCHOR:  Chris Christie, I‘ve been watching you from across the river.  I really like you. 

RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST:  Finally, we have an elected official acting like me. 

ANN COULTER, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR:  If Chris Christie were planning on running, he ought to deny it right now.  But the point is I don‘t care if he wants to run, his country needs him. 


SCHULTZ:  See, they love him.  They want him to be president.  Well, they must not be the residents of New Jersey, because they see it a lot differently.  A new poll in the Garden State shows that Christie‘s approval ratings have taken a dive.  Only 47 percent of New Jersey voters approve of the job that he is doing.  And that‘s down five points from February. 

And as for the righties who think Christie could be president, his own state doesn‘t even think so.  In a match up against President Obama, our current president, well, he will coast to an easy victory if it were held tonight over Christie in New Jersey, beating him by 52 to 39 percent.  Pretty solid margin. 

And when asked to describe the governor—in this poll, they ask, can you describe the governor in one word?  Those polled overwhelmingly chose the word “bully.” 

Now why in the world would you ever think that a guy who attacks public employees, who cuts 820 million dollars out of education, and then it‘s ruled unconstitutional by a court, fires 6,000 teachers, gives tax breaks to the top two percent, cuts a bunch other deals on the side, thinking it‘s going to help business in New Jersey—why in the world do you think that the middle class and the folks in New Jersey would believe that he‘s a bully? 

Maybe it‘s because he stands up to people in town hall meetings and disrespects everybody who disagrees with him.  The people of New Jersey are very smart.  They know he‘s a bully.  And that‘s the Takedown.

One year after the worst oil spill in U.S. history, Congress has done nothing but take BP‘s money.  Well, we‘ll talk to a Gulf Coast businessman who wants to know why. 

Wonder what Governor Scott Walker is thinking now that five Republican state senators are facing a recall.  Down the road, buddy.  You‘re next.  That‘s next.


SCHULTZ:  Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.  Thanks for watching tonight.  We‘re still on Wisconsin.  I‘m not going to get off this story because I think fundamentally this is one of the biggest stories in America.  This is change.  This is change you can believe in. 

And in Wisconsin today, Wisconsin State Supreme Court Candidate Joanne Kloppenburg asked for the recount.  That‘s a big event in the race, of course, against incumbent Supreme Court Justice David Prosser, who thinks he won. 

And the fight to recall Wisconsin senators, I tell you, it is still heating up and very alive.  Democrats have enough signatures to force a recall election on a fifth Republican state senator, Alberta Darling.  Now Governor Scott Walker says the recalls really have been driven by people around the Madison area and Milwaukee. 

Hold the phone on that, governor.  Let me show you this.  Those signatures are coming from senate districts not just from Madison.  Here‘s a map.  The stars show where the five Republican state senators are going to be up for recall. 

See that?  The circle is Madison.  No.  Once again, Walker is wrong.  A few Democrats have also been targeted for recall.  And the organizers say they have enough signatures to file on them tomorrow from the other side, against Democratic State Senators Dave Hansen, Jim Halpern and also Robert Wirch. 

Well, all of them, of course, were members of the Wisconsin 14.  So that, of course, makes them a target by the righties.  Let‘s bring in co-founder of the Progress Change Campaign Committee, Adam Green, who has been boots on the ground and delivered a lot of infrastructure to all of this in the state of Wisconsin, and has a lot of members of his group in Wisconsin. 

Five Republicans facing recalls so far.  Adam, is this a good number? 

And may I ask why not all eight?  What do you think? 

ADAM GREEN, PROGRESSIVE CHANGE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE:  It‘s a fantastic number.  There are about six prime targets, five down, one to go.  And then two bonus targets, folks in deeply conservative districts, but where it looks actually attainable that we can recall them. 

It‘s a great sign of momentum, absolutely.  As you said, I want to thank all of our 25,000 members on the ground in Wisconsin who have really been volunteering hard for this effort. 

SCHULTZ:  What resources is it going to take?  What kind an effort is it going to take to finish the job?  Now on some of the Democratic senators that you are supporting, and, of course, wanting to get a recall on the Republicans, there have been enough signatures and beyond to get verified.  So we know that there‘s going to be at least five elections.  But what kind of resources are going to be put in this to finish the job, to fight off the Kochs? 

GREEN:  Well, millions of dollars.  Our organization, together with Democracy for America, has already raised over 800,000 dollars and spent that money on TV ads.  The TV ad, of course, being  We‘re running it every week. 

Other groups, labor organizations, other grassroots organizations are very involved in this fight.  And, of course, thousands of local Wisconsinites are volunteering and shipping in for the cause. 

I would point out one thing regarding the Republican effort to recall Democratic senators.  There‘s actually going to be a really important conference call that the local Democratic party, state party chair Mike Tate is holding tomorrow morning at 10:30 Eastern, 9:30 local in Wisconsin. 

What they are going to be talking about are some very serious charges.  They are calling the Republican recall racket, where they are going to be alleging really fraud and really, in some cases, illegal practices that the Republicans are using as they try to limp across the finish line with a lack of grassroots support that they are making up for by cutting corners.  It‘s going to be a really important announcement. 

SCHULTZ:  What can you tell us about those allegations?  What do you know?

GREEN:  Well, it spans the gamut, from having convicted felons out there, you know, trying to collect signatures.  But the thing that I‘m actually more concerned about is the outright fraud.  Someone from the state party was talking to me tonight, saying that in one case, they would say, hey, do you support Dave Hansen, who is the Democratic senator?  Want to see him on the ballot?  Sign here. 

Now, of course, “want to see him on the ballot” is code for “want to recall him.”  But it doesn‘t sound like that when you say do you support Dave Hansen.  That‘s an outright example of fraud.  Lots of reports across the state have been coming in. 

And that‘s a stark contrast to the genuine grassroots effort that‘s been on our side to recall the Republicans. 

SCHULTZ:  And what about these three Democrats that are being targeted by the Republicans.  Is there a chance they could be recalled?  Are they in danger of losing their seat, in your opinion? 

GREEN:  Is there a chance?  If it gets to a ballot, absolutely.  But step one is, you know, making sure that no fraud is used to prompt a recall.  And step two is really the grassroots campaign.  That‘s where we have a huge advantage. 

We saw after the Scott Walker incident, the Supreme Court candidate on the Democratic side jumped 30 points in the polls.  That was a reflection of real grassroots energy on the ground.  The Republicans don‘t have that.  My prediction is that we‘ll recall at least six Republicans.  We have two bonus shots.  I don‘t think they‘ll recall any Democrats. 

SCHULTZ:  What has Scott Walker been doing all along.  I mean, sources have told me that he‘s working over a lot of Republicans around the country to raise money to defend the shakedown. 

GREEN:  Yeah, look, the Koch brothers are likely intimately involved in this effort.  It‘s worth noting that the Republicans actually have defied state election law by refusing to disclose their donors.  That‘s illegal. 

The Republicans there have gone to D.C. and gone to a bunch of big money donors.  Again, in stark contrast, there have been grassroots contributions coming from around Wisconsin and the country to fund the Democratic effort.  So this is people power versus corporate power.  We‘re going to win. 

SCHULTZ:  It is a story to follow, no doubt, and one that every American should pay attention to.  Adam Green, good to have you with us tonight.  Thanks so much.

The Koch Brothers tell their employees who to vote for, and it‘s all legal thanks to the Supreme Court decision supported by the Koch Brothers.  That‘s all coming up.  We‘ll explain. 


SCHULTZ:  Thanks for staying with us tonight here on THE ED SHOW.  To put this story into context, let‘s just go back for a moment to the fall of 2010.  The country was gearing up for the midterm elections.  The debate was pretty heated.  Things were—everybody hot and bothered about what the heck is going on, and is there going to be a shift in Congress. 

So imagine during that time period the head of your company sends you a letter.  You are sitting at work and you get this letter.  And the letter tells you who to vote for.  And if you don‘t heed the company‘s advice, there‘s going to be some consequences for you and for your family. 

So what would you do?  Well, that‘s the situation that 50,000 American workers found themselves in last November.  And they all happened to work for the same company, Koch Industries.  It‘s just the latest way that the billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch have furthered their right wing agenda. 

Let‘s get everybody on the same page.  It‘s all detailed in a report from “The Nation” magazine this week.  “The Nation” obtained a Koch Industries election packet, sent to employees living in the state of Washington.  And here‘s what president and CEO David Robertson wrote, “as Koch Company employees, we have a lot at stake in the upcoming election.  Each of us is likely to be affected by the outcome on November 2nd.  That is why, for the first time ever, we are mailing several helpful items to the home address of every U.S. employee.”

Now, is this going to be helpful?  To some people, they might think, OK, this is kind of cool.  I don‘t even have to think.  I‘ll just do what the company tells me. 

Well, a list of region specific, company approved candidates was in that mailing, mostly Republican, I might add.  So here you have your boss telling you this is how we want you to vote.  And they‘re not telling you what‘s going to happen if you don‘t vote that way. 

Would you feel good about a company promotion if the word got out that you didn‘t vote the way the Koch Brothers wanted you to vote?  This is about brow beating in the workplace.  That‘s what this is all about. 

This is about transparency?  No, this isn‘t about transparency at all.  And this sets up, I think, a threatening situation in the workplace.  And it also sets up the possibility of retribution, because if you are having coffee in the workplace and you just happen to say that you voted for Joe Smith, instead of Willy Anderson, holy smokes. 

And if the Kochs were on the Anderson support team, who knows what‘s going to happen to you.  Now, I wonder if these new Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Alito—if they thought this was calling balls and strikes, if they thought that this was maybe advocacy work from the Supreme Court, because that‘s exactly what the hell it is. 

It puts employees in an untenable position to speak their mind in the workplace or maybe anywhere.  Having a couple of cool ones after work and maybe an employee who has a grudge against you—hear‘s it—hey, he didn‘t vote the company line.  Well, we‘re going to have to deal with that in the workplace. 

That is unfair.  It is wrong.  It is un-American.  And it‘s unconscionable that the Koch Brothers would go so far to brow beat their employees. 

There‘s the company‘s newsletter.  Articles painting the Koch boys as the underdogs?  Underdogs worth about 22 billion dollars each?  Cut me some slack, will you? 

Now you are probably wondering, is this legal?  Can the Koch Brothers

can they get away with this stuff?  Could my company do this to me?  And the answer is yes, yes and yes, thanks to Citizens United, which, by the way, was brought to you by, in part, by the Koch Brothers. 

You are looking at the Gulf Coast businessman who says life is far from back to normal a year after the BP oil spill.  Fisherman Dominick Figurino joins us to talk about the assistance many have not received.  Stay with us.


SCHULTZ:  Finally tonight, it‘s been one year since the Deepwater Horizon Oil Rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, leading to the worst oil spill in United States history.  In the past year, Congress has failed to pass a single law related to the oil spill.  In fact, Republicans in the House are trying to pass bills that would speed up the permitting process for new offshore drilling. 

And BP, the company at the heart of the spill, has contributed 35,000 dollars to House and Senate Republicans.  Only one Democrat received a donation of 3,000 dollars.  But while politicians are getting paid, many small businesses in the Gulf are wondering, you know, what the heck happened to their compensation? 

Attorney Ken Feinberg is in charge of the independent fund set up to reimburse the businesses damaged by the spill.  He says his firm has done its job well. 


KEN FEINBERG, ATTORNEY:  We have received 857,000 claims in nine months from all 50 states.  And we‘ve gone through those claims.  We‘ve gone through 75 percent of those claims.  And have notified claimants, either we‘ll pay you, we‘ve paid you, your claim is deficient or it‘s denied. 


SCHULTZ:  Joining me tonight is one of the Gulf Coast businessmen who has questions about the claims process.  Dominick Figurino has been fishing the Gulf all his life, and so has his family for many generations.  He also owns and operates Dominick‘s Seafood. 

Mr. Figurino, good to have you with us tonight.  How did this oil spill affect you and your company? 

DOMINICK FIGURINO, DOMINICK‘S SEAFOOD:  Well, we‘ve—we continued to fish through the problems last year.  We didn‘t join the vessel of opportunity program.  And I elected to continue fishing and keep my employment going here in the factory and on my boats. 

We had to move around quite a bit last year.  We fished in spots that were not first preferred in Florida.  We fished Texas quite a bit last year, western Louisiana. 

We had a big increase in fuel costs last year.  And one of the biggest things we‘re fighting is public perception.  Even if we catch a lot of shrimp, the matter of moving it is really in question now. 

SCHULTZ:  What‘s the claims process been for you? 

FIGURINO:  A nightmare.  To be honest with you, Dominick‘s Seafood collected nothing in ‘10 at all.  I was paid a very small fee roughly in about January, which equaled my utilities in my business here. 

I have six Gulf trawlers.  It varied.  I had one million-dollar boat that received as little as 1,000 dollars.  All I hear is promises they‘re going to clear it up, clear it up.  They have yet to do it. 

SCHULTZ:  I believe that the people of the Gulf Coast were told by some members of the Senate that the businesses would be made whole.  What‘s your response to that a year later? 

FIGURINO:  Well, I wonder when they‘re going to start. 

SCHULTZ:  You have not been made whole and you have been hurt financially by this, correct? 

FIGURINO:  That‘s very correct. 

SCHULTZ:  And how—

FIGURINO:  It‘s been really a—excuse me? 

SCHULTZ:  Go ahead.  Go ahead. 

FIGURINO:  It‘s been a true devastation.  We‘ve worked hard against imported shrimp and so forth.  And we‘ve done a lot of marketing campaigns in the last three or four years.  We feel like we were put back ten years. 

And I listen to Mr. Feinberg and his methodology.  And I just don‘t understand some issues.  The last deal when he explained his methodology, he explained to us what kind of damage that we should expect in ‘11 and what we should expect in ‘12 when we should be back to normal.  The part that I don‘t understand is where were his marketing surveys? 

SCHULTZ:  Well, he‘s been on record saying that if a claimant who didn‘t get paid is waiting and waiting and waiting, there‘s something wrong about the claim.  What‘s your response to that? 

FIGURINO:  I listened to his interview very well last night.  First thing I‘d like to say to Mr. Feinberg is I‘m a taxpaying gentleman.  I paid taxes all my years—I paid my tax bill Monday morning like every other American in this world.  I have all my life.  That‘s my first message to Mr. Feinberg. 

Second off, you know, he promises the world, but he hasn‘t yet to deliver.  We haven‘t seen the money.  We wonder why.  I have a—normally, I have a CPA firm that runs a reviewed financial statement for my company.  I have a second firm.  This is my normal procedure of business prior to the oil spill.  I run audited financial statements.  I paid my income taxes and I have every one of my tax returns. 

That‘s what Mr. Feinberg was faced—was handed it from me.  And I just don‘t understand why he keeps saying that.  He can‘t say that on my regard, because he‘s been furnished the proper documentation unless he‘s lost my documentation. 

SCHULTZ:  Mr. Figurino, we‘re going to contact Mr. Feinberg and ask him about your business and why you haven‘t been made whole.  And we will follow up on that.  I appreciate your time tonight.  Thanks for joining us, and we‘ll come back to you. 

Tonight our survey, I asked, will Republicans bring jobs back into the country?  Five percent of you said yes; 95 percent of you said no.

That‘s THE ED SHOW.  I‘m Ed Schultz.  We‘ll see you back here tomorrow night.  You can get more on THE ED SHOW on our new blog at  “THE LAST WORD” with Lawrence O‘Donnell starts right now.  We‘ll see you tomorrow night.



Copyright 2011 CQ-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 CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,

copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>