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

The Ed Show for Tuesday, January 15th, 2013

Read the transcript to the Tuesday show

January 15, 2013

Guests: Bob Shrum, Veronique Pozner, Rep. Gerald Connolly, Hilda Solis, Joan Walsh

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

What do you say we dive into crazy tonight? The call for civil war is
getting louder. I think it`s time for this country to have a real gut

This is THE ED SHOW -- let`s get to work.


EDWIN MEESE, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL: If he tried to override the
Second Amendment in any way, I believe it would be an impeachable offense.

SCHULTZ (voice-over): The president is set to release his plan on
guns. The majority of the country is behind him. But the rebel yell is
getting louder.

GLENN BECK, MEDIA PERSONALITY: There are many people in this country
that will want to bring on a civil war.

SCHULTZ: Tonight, my message to gun owners, with Bob Shrum and David

Plus, an exclusive interview with the mother of Newtown victim Noah
Pozner about what she expects to hear from the president tomorrow.

The Republican plan to destroy an American institution is right on

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m concerned about the Post Office.

SCHULTZ: Tonight, the latest in the long death of the Post Office.

Plus, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis on President Obama`s push for
immigration reform and what that means for the American worker.

And there has been a miracle in the desert. Arizona Governor Jan
Brewer is now in love with Obamacare.

GOV. JAN BREWER (R), ARIZONA: You know, it`s going to create jobs,
particularly our rural hospitals. And it`s a moral thing.


SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight, folks. Thanks for

The country demanded change in the wake of the Newtown shootings. One
month later, change is here.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and his state would deliver -- said his
state would deliver on immediate solutions to gun violence. Today, his
state legislature, including the Republican-controlled Senate, passed one
of the toughest gun reform laws in the country. The governor signed the
bill into law immediately.

The new measure bans high capacity magazines limiting clips to seven
rounds of ammunition.

The law changes the definition of assault weapons, making guns like
the Bushmaster illegal.

There are now background checks for all gun sales, including private
transactions. The law requires background checks for ammunition.

It also requires mandatory reporting of mental health threats.

Governor Cuomo said that his state wanted to send a message to the
rest of the country. Quick action on sensible gun laws is possible.


GOV. ANDREW CUOMO (D), NEW YORK: We can strike back, and we can
defend ourselves, but we`re going to do it intelligently. And we`re going
to do it prudently. And we`re going to put rules in place that actually
protect innocent people in society.


SCHULTZ: Legislative bodies like the one in New York are basically on
the move.

Tomorrow, it will be the president`s turn to show his hand. President
Obama will unveil several gun safety proposals, including a universal
background check law, a ban on high capacity magazines, and some type of
assault weapons ban.

Not everything will be left to the legislative branch. The president
will issue executive action on background check enforcement. He will also
call for increased federal research crime of firearm crime -- research of
firearm crime.

And these are all well within the power of the president of the United
States. But as President Obama said yesterday, some people will use these
measures to make gun owners fearful.


of some sensible, responsible legislation in this area fans this notion
that somehow here it comes. And that everybody`s guns are going to be
taken away.


SCHULTZ: When it comes to executive orders, President Obama is hardly
a tyrant. This president has issued the fewest executive orders of any
president in over a century. There will be no executive order on the
Second Amendment.

This hasn`t stopped the Obama haters from ramping up their resistance.
Tea Party Senator Rand Paul is driving the campaign of fear.


SEN. RAND PAUL (R), KING: I`m against having a king. I think having
a monarch is what we fought the American Revolution over. And someone who
wants to bypass the Constitution, bypass Congress, that`s someone who wants
to act like a king or a monarch.

I`ve been opposed to executive orders even with Republican president.
But one that wants to infringe on the Second Amendment, we will fight tooth
and nail. And I promise you, there will be no rock left unturned as far as
trying to stop him from usurping the Constitution.


SCHULTZ: Fight tooth and nail. Tell me, Senator, what does that
mean? What does fight tooth and nail mean? Do your words matter at all to
the people of this country?

Other lawmakers are joining the Rand Paul resistance. Congressman
Steve Stockman of Texas has threatened to impeach the president of the
United States over executive gun laws.

Former Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese got into the act. He
joined the conservative Web site Newsmax to push the big lie.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So if the president unilaterally overrides the
Second Amendment via executive order, would this be constitutional? Would
it be legal? And how should Congress respond?

MEESE: Well, it would not be legal. It would not be constitutional.
And indeed, if he tried to override the Second Amendment in any way, I
believe it would be an impeachable offense.


SCHULTZ: The constant representation of this lie is intensifying. A
number of people on the far right wing are preparing for civil war?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m telling you that if that happens, it`s going
to spark a civil war, and I`ll be glad to fire the first shot.

BECK: I unfortunately believe that there are many people in this
country that will want to bring on a civil war. And in that scenario, the
people will lose.

LOU DOBBS, FBN: Without our rights under the Second Amendment,
removing the rest of our Bill of Rights would be a lot easier.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Once we lose the Constitution, and we`re losing it
big, what is left? I mean, how do we keep these people in check?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 1776 will commence again if you try to take our


SCHULTZ: All low-rated right wing talkers begging for an audience and

Glenn Beck, are you going to sell some more subscriptions on that one?

A lot of this rhetoric has heated up on the Internet as well. Right
wing Web sites are calling for an armed revolution. The civil war talk is
a constant presence in conservative media.

Here comes gun nut Ted Nugent, recently telling police to resist the
imaginary executive. "I do believe that the heroes of law enforcement will
defy this order."

Country Western singer Charlie Daniels wrote a column for the
Christian Web site saying, "No matter what Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, and
the rest of the far left in America say, they want your guns. They want
them all."

Do you really believe that, folks? This is how crazy these people can
get. I think it`s time for a reality check in this country.

Sensible, responsible gun owners have a duty to push back against all
of this crazy talk. Assault weapons -- well, are the issue here. These
are military-issued killing machines.

Calling for regulations on assault weapons where we have been before
in this country is not a ban on all guns. Fifty-eight percent of
Americans, what do they do? Well, holy smokes, they support a ban on
assault weapons. But I guess we got to let North Dakota and Kentucky run
the country.

The only demographic against a ban is white men with no college
education. A college educated men and women, as well as nonwhites and
young people, they all support a ban. America is dividing as the
demographics in this country shift.

It`s time for the silent majority in this country to be heard. This
civil war rhetoric needs to stop before it turns to be even more dangerous.

I am a life-long hunter. Now, we all give our resume when we start
talking about guns. And this is one of the things that does bother me.

Why do we do that? Well, we do that because we want to qualify that
hey, I`m not a nut, and I believe in the Second Amendment. But I really do
think we can have some sensible gun laws in this country.

Attitude, society changes -- attitudes in society change over the
years. We don`t stay the same on a lot of issues. We move forward.

Now, I`m not concerned that my guns are going to be taken away. And I
would venture to say that of all the conservative hosts that you just saw
there, I have probably shot more deer and pheasants than any of those

This is not about tyranny. This is not about manhood in a screwy way.
This is about democracy. The people of New York have decided through a
representative government that they don`t like the Bushmaster. They don`t
want the Bushmaster out there.

And you know what? They also want some serious background checks.

That`s not an attack on the Second Amendment. That`s not an attack on
your personal freedoms. That is a change in the law. And that`s how we
run the country.

But Rand Paul, this Tea Party senator from Kentucky, who says that
basically, he`ll do anything.

Need a little bit more clarification there, Senator. Are you trying
to start a civil war? Because I think that is the question at this point.
The rhetoric has to stop.

Now, Rupert Murdoch tweeted something out today about maybe we`ll
finally get something done on gun laws. We`ll have that a little later on
in the show.

Tell your talk show hosts over there, your hosts of your big programs
over there to cool it and be responsible, because the Charlie Daniels of
the world and the Newt -- and the Ted Nugents of the world, they all pay
attention to that channel, and they all thrive on fear.

Where is the responsibility of broadcasters and talkers in this
country when this kind of garbage comes up? President Obama is doing what
the country wants him to do. This is where the people are. The election
results haven`t changed.

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

Tonight`s question: will threats from the far right derail the
president`s sensible gun reforms? Text A for yes. Text B for now to
622639. You can always go to our blog at We`ll bring
results later on in the show.

I`m joined tonight by Bob Shrum, professor of public policy at New
York University and contributor to "Daily Beast".

Also with us tonight, David Corn, MSNBC analyst and D.C. bureau chief
for "Mother Jones".

Gentlemen., good evening.


BOB SCHRUM, DAILY BEAST: Glad to be here.

SCHULTZ: We are covering the crazy tonight. Is that OK with you

CORN: You`re covering them pretty well.

SCHULTZ: Well, Dave, I don`t want to get in the way of any crazy talk
that you might have to add to this conversation. What do you say to these

CORN: Well, you just made a good point that broadcasters and talkers
have to sort of do what they can and make this debate a reasonable one.
I`m still waiting for anybody right of center, you know, political leader,
a thought leader, a columnist, you know, maybe Charles Krauthammer, anybody
to step up and say listen, there is a real debate to be had.

You can be against some of the things that the president is proposing.
I happen to like them, but you can be against them. But that doesn`t mean
he is a dictator. It doesn`t mean we`re going towards civil war,
Armageddon. And to tamp down the fear factor that you have talked about.

And so far, I`ve heard a lot of silence. They`ve all been muffled.
Anybody on the right, when it comes to saying no to their own crazies, and
we`ll see how far the crazies good before anybody in the sort of moderate
right centrist position gets up there and says, hey, guys, you better cool
it soon.

SCHULTZ: Bob, what`s the responsibility of politicians here, elected

SHRUM: Oh, the responsibility of elected officials is very grave.
What people like Rand Paul are doing is feeding this paranoia. It`s a
paranoia that somehow or another assumes that our own government or the
U.N. or some other sinister force is going to come and take away our

You`re right. This is not about the rights of hunters. It`s not
about protecting hunters. You don`t need an AK-47 to go hunt dove.

It`s about paranoia. It`s about this fear.

And it`s also about profit. It`s about the profit that the NRA makes
by stirring this fear. It`s about the profit the gun manufacturers make.

And for politicians and public leaders to climb in bed with people
like Ted Nugent, to aid and abet that kind of conversation is -- it`s
despicable, and it`s also dangerous. You know, Ed --


SHRUM: -- I thought on the way over here about an ad in "The Dallas
Morning News" on November 22nd, 1963. It said, "Wanted for treason, the
president of the United States." That`s the day when we should have begun
dealing in a serious way with gun issues in this society. And that`s what
we need to do now.

SCHULTZ: David --

CORN: There is another example. You don`t have to go back to 1963.
We`re old enough on the panel here to remember the 1990s and the rise of
the militia movement. A lot of it was targeting the BATF and the
government in black helicopters. And what did that culminate in? The
attack in Oklahoma City.

So, you know, these actions, these words have consequences. I don`t
think Glenn Beck is going to go out there and set off a bomb. I don`t
think he has the cojones to do so.

But people listening to him talking about a civil war and dictators as
tyrant. And what do you do with a tyrant? This really only one way to
stop a tyrant, isn`t there? It doesn`t take a lot of imagination to hear
more deranged minds than some of these go too far.

SCHULTZ: And Rupert Murdoch tweeted today, "Hopefully, we`ll get some
real action on guns tomorrow, not just some staged managed stunt."

Well, can`t Murdoch take real action himself by telling his media
personalities to dial back the rhetoric? What do you think, Bob?

SHRUM: Sure. I mean, look, FOX News feeds this paranoia all the
time. FOX News trots out the party line.

I thought what David said earlier was very interesting about Charles
Krauthammer or somebody like that coming out and saying let`s have a
serious conversation.

The problem is there`s a bargain with the devil here. It`s the
religious right combined with the Tea Party combined with the NRA. And
they`re all in this together. And no one else in that coalition, even the
more moderate members of that coalition want to criticize one of the other
members because they fear that it will bring the thing apart.

SCHULTZ: David Corn, wouldn`t it be good to see a Republican lawmaker
step out and say we`ve got to end this conversation? This has gone over
the top, and we have a responsibility here. Where are the Republicans?
Where is the leadership?

CORN: You know, I`m kind of stunned that you don`t see this. And Bob
is right. He has all the dynamics accurately portrayed there.

I mean, what did we see on the campaign? We saw Mitt Romney embrace
Ted Nugent after Ted Nugent had spoken about using machine guns in a very
unconventional way on Hillary Clinton. I mean, and crude and threatening

And yet, there was no price to be paid in that sort of right of center
crazy world. He still got to hang out with the presidential candidate.

SCHULTZ: All right.

CORN: And if you don`t have that leadership at the top, it`s not
going to happen.

SCHULTZ: David Corn, Bob Shrum, great to have you with us tonight.
Thank you.

SHRUM: Thank you, Ed.

CORN: Thanks, Ed.

SCHULTZ: Remember to answer the question there at the bottom of the
screen tonight. Share your thoughts with us on Twitter and @EdShow and on
Facebook. We want to know what you think.

Coming up, it`s been one month since the tragedy struck Sandy Hook
Elementary School. Coming up, I will talk with the mother of one of the
Newtown victims. She will tell us about her proposals to curb gun
violence. Stay tuned.


SCHULTZ: Seventy-nine days after hurricane Sandy hit the Northeast,
the House has finally passed a complete relief bill. The $50 billion bill
in supplement aid to victims of superstorm Sandy received the necessary
votes within the last hour. The House passed with overwhelming Democratic
support and a minority of Republicans.

This will be the second time in two weeks House Speaker John Boehner
has brought a bill to the floor without the majority support of his own
caucus and violated the so-called Hastert Rule.

Coming up, the GOP`s plan to destroy, eliminate, get rid of the Post
Office is right on target. I`ll ask Congressman Gerry Connolly of Virginia
if there`s any way to save it.

Then, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis is leaving the administration.
She`ll talk to us about the impact of immigration reform on our economy.

Share your thoughts with us on Facebook and on Twitter using #EdShow.
We`re coming right back.



But it`s also your day, Noah, my little man. I will miss your forceful and
purposeful little steps stomping through our house. I will miss your
perpetual smile, the twinkle in your dark, blue eyes framed by eyelashes
that would be the envy of any lady in this room. Most of all, I will miss
your visions of your future.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW.

That was Veronique Pozner, giving the eulogy at the funeral of her son

Noah Pozner was one of 20 children killed at Sandy Hook last month.
He was just 6 years old. Veronique and her family, as well as other
Newtown families, are fighting for reform in hopes of stopping another

And tomorrow, the president will unveil a set of proposals to curb gun
violence in this country. The president`s recommendations are said to
include universal background checks, a high capacity magazine ban, and a
renewal of the assault weapons ban.

NBC News has also learned that the president`s recommendation will
also touch on school security and mental health.

Joining me tonight is Veronique Pozner, mother of Noah.

Veronique, thank you for your time. Thank you for speaking up. I
think America needs to hear your voice in this very troubled time in this
country as the debate and the rhetoric is over the top in many respects.

Veronique, what -- what is your reaction to the proposals that you
have heard coming out of the White House in anticipation of what is going
to unfold tomorrow?

POZNER: I fully support tighter regulation. I think that`s evident
that we need reform. The problem is there are so many of those weapons
already in circulation.

And as we saw in Columbine and in the case of Sandy Hook, the
perpetrator was not the one who was licensed to own. He was not the permit
holder. He had access to the weapons. He was an auxiliary person that was
close to the person that did have a permit to hold the weapon.

And so, we also need tighter regulation on securing access to -- or
making gun owners more responsible to access to their firearms.

As far as magazine capacity, absolutely. I support that. But I think
it should be part of a broader set of reforms, including understanding what
creates the Adam Lanzas of this world.


POZNER: He is what is possible on the human continuum. And if we
seek to dehumanize him, we fail to understand what makes young men like
that tick. We do so at our peril.

And I was told in no uncertain terms that it would be a HIPAA
violation to disclose whether he was under psychiatric care, what
medications he may have been on, or any of his former school records. That
is all held under HIPAA law, and is not released or available for release -


POZNER: -- including results of autopsy.

And I feel that if we don`t gain a better understanding of what
creates that type of volcanic rage, that capacity to dehumanize. Access to
weapons certainly is part of the picture, but not the whole picture.

SCHULTZ: Veronique, has any part of this conversation in the last few
weeks of intense coverage, has it bothered you? For instance, when you
hear lawmakers say that they don`t have the votes for some kind of gun
legislation or gun measures, what is your reaction to that?

POZNER: Well, I think that`s a reality. I think that people hold
their rights to own weapons legally and responsibly very dear to their
hearts. That`s a fact. And there can be responsible gun ownership.

I`d like to see things enacted like palm print recognition technology,
and, again, accountability for the securing of firearms. I would like to
see mental health professionals ask the question of people that they`re
treating whom they know may be troubled in their thinking, do you have
access to firearms.

Lanza went to shooting ranges with the aiding and abetting of his
mother. She facilitated his access to those weapons. If he was under
treatment, were those questions asked?

Again, that`s part of a picture as well as, you know, school safety
certainly. I have to say that the presence of law enforcement personnel at
the school, at the new location, when I take my daughters, my daughters who
survived to school now, it certainly provides great comfort and

So I think school safety and the presence of law enforcement personnel
can create a huge deterrent.

SCHULTZ: Veronique, how determined are you to see changes in society?
Is this now a life-long mission for you?

POZNER: I`d like to say that, but I`m still sort of going day by day.


POZNER: Grief is a strange thing. It can blind side you. Sometimes
it`s a low level frequency, and sometimes it just makes you want to isolate
and not do much of anything.

So I`m still touch and go. But there are certain things, there are
certain red flags that are waving loud and clear to me, and that I feel
need to be addressed.

SCHULTZ: I have to ask you, what would you like our audience to know
about your son Noah?

POZNER: He was a rambunctious typical little 6-year-old boy. He
loved to tease his sisters. He loved -- he was inquisitive.

He loved to figure out things. He loved Legos. He loved to play
outside. He loved nature.

And I`m very grateful that a lot of people have donated trees in
Israel for him. He`s had an awful lot of trees planted for him there. And
I`m very grateful for that, because he would love that.

SCHULTZ: Veronique Pozner, thank you for joining us and sharing your
story tonight and your thoughts here on THE ED SHOW. We appreciate it so

You`re watching THE ED SHOW on MSNBC. We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: We have done this story before, and I`m going to give you an
update tonight. Thanks for staying with us here on THE ED SHOW. One of
the nation`s biggest employers could go under by the end of the year. The
Republican effort to kill the United States Postal Service, well, folks,
it`s right on schedule, just the way they wanted it.

We promised to follow this story and this issue. And today we got
some more bad news. The Postal Service lost a record 16 billion dollars
last fiscal year. That`s about 42 million dollars per day. But remember,
the Postal Service was set up to lose money.

Here is how. In 2006, Republicans passed a law in the lame duck
session of the Congress to drive the Postal Service out of business.
That`s the only conclusion you can come to. They created a no-win
situation. The Post Office was making money then. Republicans came along
and created an economic burden no other agency or private company has had
to bear in the history of this country. That says a lot, doesn`t it?

The Republicans forced the Post Office to contribute 5.5 billion
dollars to the retirement and health care fund every year. The fund
extends, gosh, 40 years into the future. Some of the retirees haven`t even
been hired yet. The United States Postal Service doesn`t cost you a dime.
That`s right. It doesn`t cost you a dime.

It gets zero federal tax dollars. Congressman Darrell Issa, he lives
in a different world. He is the leading Republican in charge to end
Saturday mail delivery and cut jobs.


REP. DARRELL ISSA (R), CALIFORNIA: I think the American people look
at the Post Office as something they don`t use very much, but would like to
have it still around.


SCHULTZ: Really? They don`t use it very much. Darrell Issa acts
like the Postal Service is just a luxury and always has been. Americans
depend on the postal service to deliver things like medicine, absentee
ballots. Fed-Ex and UPS, they couldn`t get into some of these
neighborhoods hit hard by Hurricane Sandy. U.S. letter carriers delivered.

But Republicans think the Postal Service should do even more.


ISSA: Like any business, UPS, Fed-Ex, the Post Office, it can live
within its means if it makes appropriate changes.


SCHULTZ: How can he say that? How can he say that with a straight
face and have any integrity whatsoever? The Post Office is already
required to live within its means. It pays for itself. I challenge the
congressman from California to name any other business that could stay open
under this business model, enforced by the Republicans.

The Postal Service has cut costs by 15 billion dollars since 2006,
trying to keep up with these regulations that were imposed on them by a
Republican lame duck session of the Congress. We`ve lost almost 170,000
jobs in the process, and a lot more are coming. We need Congress to get
the Postal Service a much better deal.

So far, the only related legislation that I`m aware of on the docket
are four bills asking to name Post Offices after famous people.

Let`s bring in Congressman Gerald Connolly of Virginia tonight.
Congressman, good to have you with us.

REP. GERALD CONNOLLY (D), VIRGINIA: Great to be back with you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: This story bothers me, because this is the government
getting in the way of an operation that was successful. Why did the lame
duck session of the Congress do this in 2006?

CONNOLLY: You know, I think Republicans really don`t like the Post
Office because it`s very big. It`s quasi governmental. And it`s
unionized. And what is ironic about their opposition and their
determination to engineer it to fail, as you said, is that it is the only
service to be provided the American people mandated in the Constitution of
the United States, which they say they believe in.

You can look it up in Article I, Section Eight. The Post Office is
right there in the Constitution of the United States. And I think we have
a sacred obligation to make it work and to create a new business model.
They`re resisting that because they want it to fail.

SCHULTZ: Why can`t someone -- and I`ll ask you -- in the Congress
bring forth a bill that will reverse this entire law? Now what is
happening here is that they have to fund health care and retirement
benefits for the next 75 years in a 10-year window.

CONNOLLY: You got it.

SCHULTZ: Darrell Issa would never run a business like that. No
business would have a business model like that. This is set up to fail.
So why don`t the Democrats -- these are hard-working folks. Why doesn`t
somebody come up with a bill to reverse this entire things?

CONNOLLY: You know, when we marked up Darrell Issa`s so-called Postal
Reform Bill, which passed out of committee on a party line vote, we had an
amendment, led by Steven Lynch of Massachusetts, to do just that, to pull
back on that prepayment requirement and to refund the Postal Service for
the overpayments they`ve been making since the passage of the 2006 law.

That was defeated in a party line vote. That`s the single most
important thing you can do to relieve the Post Office of a huge financial
burden. Of the 15.9 billion dollars you cited that they lost, 11.1 billion
is attribute to this onerous prepayment provision.

SCHULTZ: That, of course, is 11 billion dollars that they can`t use
to be competitive with the private sector.

CONNOLLY: That`s right.

SCHULTZ: -- that they can`t -- to service rural areas in the country
and upgrade their infrastructure. And there is some serious money involved
in this decision. UPS spent more than 123,000 dollars lobbying Republicans
before the 2006 vote. It hasn`t lobbied since. Fed Ex is considered a
heavy hitter on Capitol Hill. It spent more than 645,000 dollars on
Republicans just last year.

CONNOLLY: And you know, Ed, the bill you cite, bad enough this
prepayment thing, but it also proscribes the Postal Service from getting
into any kind of other line of business.

SCHULTZ: Limit their business. Yes. They limit the scope of what
they can do to operationally compete.

CONNOLLY: That`s right.

SCHULTZ: And you know who it`s going to hurt, congressman -- and you
know this. I know this. Tell our audience. It`s small businesses in
rural America that are going to get nailed on this.

CONNOLLY: We need to create a new business model, but the 2006
legislation won`t let us do it. They`re doing it in Europe and making a

SCHULTZ: Congressman Gerald Connolly, thanks for sticking up for the

CONNOLLY: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: It`s the right thing to do. There is a moral component to
this as well. There is a lot more coming up in the next half hour of THE
ED SHOW. Stay with us.


we can get immigration reform done.


SCHULTZ: The Obama immigration push is on. But what will that mean
for American workers? Labor Secretary Hilda Solis joins us next.

A conservative businessman pulls a stunt to fleece his liberal
clients. We`ll tell you why this guy`s smooth move backfired.

And it`s a miracle in the desert. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is
talking like a Democrat.


GOV. JAN BREWER (R), ARIZONA: You know, it`s going to create jobs.
It`s going to keep -- particularly our rural hospitals. And it`s a moral


SCHULTZ: The story of Jan Brewer`s enlightenment is ahead.

And I have a related personal announcement I don`t want you to miss.



comprehensive immigration reform, that requires significant bipartisan


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. White House Press Secretary
Jay Carney today talking about the need for bipartisan support for
immigration reform. Let`s face it, most Republicans can`t stand the idea
of comprehensive immigration reform. But they can`t afford to ignore it
any longer.

The election was a wake-up call. The White House said Senator Marco
Rubio`s latest comments on immigration reform bode well for the possibility
of cooperation. Republicans have been no friend to wage earners,
particularly over the past four years. To them, immigration reform has the
potential to put more votes in the Democratic column.

But if Republicans ignore the issue, they risk losing even more
Hispanic voters and minority voters across the board. This might finally
be the time for something that is long overdue. And it could be great for
the American economy.

The tech industry wants to reform because it would stop the brain
drain of highly skilled workers. Putting undocumented laborers on the
books is a good thing because it pumps dollars into the economy.

I am joined tonight by Hilda Solis, secretary of labor, who is leaving
that position, but in my opinion has done a fabulous job.


SCHULTZ: You`ve been a tremendous advocate across the board for not
just labor, but for the environment, green jobs, women`s rights.

SOLIS: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: The lot. Hilda, what about immigration reform and what it
would mean to the Treasury? How many more Americans -- how many more
people would we get on the rolls, paying taxes in this country, if it were
done properly?

SOLIS: Well, if people were thinking rationally, we would look at
putting money back into our Treasury, in the Social Security fund, in the
Medicare and Medicaid fund, because people would be brought out of the
shadows. You`re talking about billions of dollars. In fact, what the
president has done right now by allowing individuals from deferred action,
the Dreamers, to be able to be a part of our system here, they`re going to
be contributors. They`re going to have a work permit. They`re going to be
able to contribute to us.

That money will go into our Treasury. They will be abiding citizens,
citizens -- potential citizens. But more importantly, what will happen for
those many -- 12 million and others -- they`re not all Latino, by the way.
They come from different countries.


SOLIS: So let`s talk that. Let`s talk about fairness in the
workplace. Let`s make sure that people are treated well in our country.
And I agree that, yes, we have to attract the very intelligent and those
individuals that are at the high earning capacities in the STEM research
areas. Fine. But we also have to talk about the belly of our economy.

Right now, you have 50 million Latinos, Hispanics that are here, that
are voters. Many of them have families that are from different status,
some that are documented, some that are not. If we bring them out, give
them a systemized process to go through, with no criminal backgrounds,
paying their taxes, learning English, getting in the back of the line, just
think of what that would mean to our economy.

SCHULTZ: Well, today Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz said
comprehensive has become a code word for amnesty. Are republicans going to
insist on a piecemeal approach?

SOLIS: I`ve heard that, but I think the president and the folks that
I work with in the White House have an understanding that we have to talk
about the totality. The totality means a process of legalization. We
started out already with deferred action for the Dreamers. That`s very
important. These are contributors. These people are going to be able to
contribute to our society.

The only home they know is the U.S. of A. In fact, many of them have
served in our military. Some of the families that I represented as a
congresswoman, they fought for these wars that we sent our young people out
to. And what did we give them? In many ways, we did not give them
citizenship, posthumous citizenship.

SCHULTZ: So this would be a big boost for the economy?

SOLIS: Absolutely.

SCHULTZ: And this would also open the avenue for more union
membership in this country? Or do you disagree with me on that?

SOLIS: Well, it depends on different sectors. More than that, you
would see more entrepreneurs. Right now, the fastest growing segment of
our population in the business industry are Latinas, women-owned
businesses. And we haven`t even touched on that.

When you look at the 20-year span of where we`re going, these are
people who are going to contribute. This is their only home. This is
where they claim that they have a capacity to be a part of the American
dream. That`s what brought my parents here. They`re immigrants. They`re
immigrants too.

SCHULTZ: You were at the Detroit Auto Show.


SCHULTZ: This is a great time for America when it comes to
manufacturing right now. It is on the rebound, isn`t it?

SOLIS: A renaissance, a renaissance. And the fact that the president
made a decisive priority to say that we`re going to build out from the
middle class, we`re going to restore the integrity, we`re going to make
products here, we`re going to be competitive, we`re going to create hybrid
vehicles, renewable energy, invest here and give the capacity for that to

Now we can compete with people in Japan, in China, Mexico. Those jobs
are coming back. We can do it. We proved it there. Now we can do it in
other areas of manufacturing.

SCHULTZ: Hilda Solis, thank you for joining us tonight, labor
secretary of the Obama administration. Thank you so much.

Coming up, a Utah smoothie shop pulls a conservative friendly P.R.
stunt. I`ll tell you about the liberal tax, and why it`s a dud. Stay


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. His name is George Burnett, a
pro oil activist and small business owner, is trying to save America one
smoothie at a time. You see, Burnett is known to the locals as the "I Love
Drilling" guy. He is using his new smoothie shop to take a stand against
liberal spending.


GEORGE BURNETT, PRO-OIL ACTIVIST: I`m very open about it. I`m very
public about it, you know, that I`m going to charge them a little bit more.
And I have liberals come in and pay the extra dollar surcharge.


SCHULTZ: That`s right. Burnett`s I Love Drilling Juice and Smoothie
Bar in Vernal, Utah, is charging liberals a dollar more than conservatives
for a 16 ounce smoothie. I thought conservatives hated taxes. Burnett
said this liberal tax exists to make a point.


BURNETT: We have a fiscal problem in this country. We`ve got to deal
with it or we don`t have a country. So to kind of help make that point a
little bit, I charge them just a little bit more.


SCHULTZ: Yeah, it`s all our fault. To add insult to injury, Burnett
donates the extra dollar to the conservative cause like the Heritage
Foundation. Jim DeMint will like that. But Vernal, Utah, is located in
solid red county, folks. I mean, 90 percent Of the residents there voted
for Mitt Romney. Less than nine percent voted for Barack Obama. Burnett`s
controversial pricing is getting him free publicity and lots of love from
local Republicans.

But his stunt will not single-handedly fund Jim DeMint and the
Heritage Foundation. At a dollar per liberals, let`s add it all up.


BURNETT: Actually, all three liberals have been happy to pay it.


SCHULTZ: There you go. Heritage Foundation, good luck with the three
extra bucks. Don`t spend it -- well, yeah, go ahead, spend it in one

Tonight in our survey, I asked you will threats from the far right
derail the president`s sensible gun reforms. Twenty two percent of you say
yes; 78 percent of you say no.

Coming up, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer must have been watching THE ED
SHOW. She has finally come around on an important part of Obamacare. And
a personal note next. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: And in the Big Finish tonight, it has been a long seven
months for my wife Wendy Schultz and her battle with ovarian cancer. After
major surgery in July, followed by 18 weeks of intense chemotherapy, Wendy
had a C.T. scan on Friday, and the news came today that she is cancer-free.
I know that she wants to thank all of you who have been so gracious with
your prayers and support.

And I can tell you my wife, who is not a very public person, through
me is telling you that she is deeply touched and appreciates it. And
through all of this, we have learned a lot as a family about sticking
together, and also what people go through who don`t have insurance. And
I`ll have that commentary and remarks on that tomorrow night.

And that brings us to our final story tonight. Arizona Governor Jan
Brewer hasn`t been shy about showing her contempt for President Obama and
his health care law. But now the finger-wagging governor says that her
state will expand Medicaid as outlined by the law.


BREWER: It`s going to create jobs. It`s going to keep --
particularly our rural hospitals. And it`s a moral thing. We`ve got
people that need insurance. And we`re paying for it. But the taxpayers
are paying for it now.

So when you put everything down side by side, it`s the right thing to
do. It just is impossible to think of doing anything else. Why would I
want to send two billion dollars to New York or New Jersey or back east to
anywhere where they would just squander it, or give it to Colorado?


SCHULTZ: For more, let`s turn to Joan Walsh, editor at large,
"Salon." You know, I just wrote down a comment. "Impossible to think of
doing anything else." My goodness, have they had a change of heart, these
Republican governors. What do you make of it?

JOAN WALSH, "SALON": Well, first of all, I just want to say that`s
great news about Wendy, Ed. I`m so happy.

SCHULTZ: Thank you, Joan.

WALSH: You know, they`ve had a change of heart. And it`s a good
thing for the people of Arizona. There are only a few of them. But it`s
interesting, Ed, because it happens to be Susana Martinez in New Mexico and
Brian Sandoval in Nevada. So you have western states. You have growing
states. you have got Latino states.

So I`ve got to say there is a political element. God bless her. It`s
good to pay attention to politics sometimes. Arizona will be a blue state.
And she is facing reality. She has a lot of uninsured employed people
there. When we talk about this program, we`re talking about the working
poor, the working class who are working, but cannot get insurance through
their employer.

Latinos are more likely to be in that situation than a lot of others
of us. And so she is seeing the truth. She is calling it a moral
decision. And I`m happy for that. I think we`ll see a few more governors
before we`re through.

SCHULTZ: Well, it`s interesting. A favorite talking point by the
Republicans has been that government spending does not create jobs. And I
think that Jan Brewer pretty much took care of that bullet point. What do
you think?

WALSH: Yeah, I was going to point that out. Yes. She wants that two
billion. It creates jobs. It`s good for the state of Arizona. She
doesn`t want it going somewhere else. No, they know that. They`re not
stupid. Most of them aren`t stupid. They have turned on this point
because it doesn`t serve them.

But you`re starting to see them splinter. Michele Bachmann cannot get
a co-sponsor for her bill to repeal, quote, Obamacare. That didn`t happen
two years ago. You`re starting to see some governors and some people in
Congress, some Republicans, the northeastern Republicans, realize that the
Tea Party is going to ride them out of their own party if they don`t change
their politics, and get a little bit more tactical about this.

So I think you`re going to see other cracks like this.

SCHULTZ: Well, 10 states are currently saying no to Medicaid
expansion. Why do you think these governors are blocking this? Does it
lack the political component of the three states that you mentioned? And I
think you`re spot-on on that.

WALSH: Well, you know, you`ve got Texas and you`ve got Florida. So
you do have some big, diverse states that have -- not the same
demographics, but comparable demographics. And you`ve got governors in
those states who I think are paying attention to possibly having national -
- you know, having national ambitions.

I don`t think Jan Brewer -- well, I won`t speak for her. But, you now
-- and I think that there are still some people who think that playing to
that Tea Party national base is going to help them with their future. But
clearly it`s a terrible thing for the people of Texas and the people of
Florida. And you may see that they -- that it turns around in those states

SCHULTZ: Slowly but surely they come around to what the people want,
despite all the political rhetoric. Isn`t that interesting? The good news
is just how many people it`s going to help in these states. And that`s
really what this is all about.

WALSH: Exactly.

SCHULTZ: And the more people that get covered, the better outcomes
we`re going to have. And that`s what is going to bring the cost down over
time. Joan Walsh --

WALSH: For everybody.

SCHULTZ: -- great to have you with us tonight. Thank you.

That is THE ED SHOW. I`m Ed Schultz. "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts
right now. Good evening, Rachel.


Copyright 2013 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.>