Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff give you, guys, the best independent coverage.
Speaker 3: That is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 4: But enough with that, let's get to the show.
Speaker 5: Hey, guys, welcome to Crystal Kyle and friends. Very excited
Speaker 5: about the episode we have for you today. Thank you, guys.
Speaker 5: I'll find it pretty interesting.
Speaker 1: I got to sit down for thirty minutes with Senator
Speaker 1: Sanders and talk about all the things, from how he
Speaker 1: views the Biden administration, how I view the Biden administration,
Speaker 1: whether the Progressives are doing enough, his change in role
Speaker 1: from sort of perpetual outsider status to now being in
Speaker 1: the room, and what that's been like.
Speaker 5: So it's pretty interesting talking to him.
Speaker 6: Yeah, So this episode is a little bit bittersweet for
Speaker 6: me because I mean, I love the fact that you
Speaker 6: got to talk to Bernie, and I have full faith
Speaker 6: and confidence in your abilities. I know you're going to
Speaker 6: do an amazing job, but I'm not in this interview,
Speaker 6: and there's a reason why I'm not in this interview.
Speaker 6: So I mean, you could probably give the timeline better
Speaker 6: than me. But they reached out to you and basically said, yeah,
Speaker 6: we'll do an interview under the condition it's only you.
Speaker 4: Correct.
Speaker 5: Yes, So that was that we actually didn't reach out
Speaker 5: to them.
Speaker 6: I'm going to say that, but I feel like months
Speaker 6: ago you did reach out to them and invite them,
Speaker 6: and and now like months later they finally responded and
Speaker 6: they were like, sure, but only you.
Speaker 5: I actually can't.
Speaker 1: You're probably right because probably at the beginning, at the
Speaker 1: beginning of the podcast, they probably did reach out to
Speaker 1: but it has been that request long expired, so they
Speaker 1: reached out. The Senator was very frustrated with the media
Speaker 1: not asking him a single decent question, so I think
Speaker 1: they wanted to have a place where they thought they'd
Speaker 1: get a more substantive discussion.
Speaker 5: I've interviewed him a couple times before, and.
Speaker 1: For whatever reason, that was the very first thing they
Speaker 1: led with when they reached out to me. It was like,
Speaker 1: I want to do this interview, but really want it
Speaker 1: to be just you. They were also kind of open
Speaker 1: on whether it would live here or with breaking points.
Speaker 1: So it wasn't just you that they didn't want. It
Speaker 1: was also Sager made you.
Speaker 6: Made it seem like it was relatively non negotiable that
Speaker 6: they wanted to talk to you. Yea, it was very
Speaker 6: It was like a hard line kind of like, sure,
Speaker 6: we'll do it, but this is the condition. Yes, yes,
Speaker 6: so you know am I but heered over that. Yes,
Speaker 6: I'm very buttered over that. I mean, I supported Bernie
Speaker 6: more than anybody in twenty sixteen, more than anybody in
Speaker 6: twenty twenty. I got him on Joe Rogan. That's you know,
Speaker 6: you could talk to Fashakir, his campaign manager. I'm the
Speaker 6: one who set all that up.
Speaker 5: Yeah, So I think that's fair to.
Speaker 6: Sort of be thrown under the bus in a way,
Speaker 6: whether it's Saga or me. I mean, Sager, he'll he'll
Speaker 6: even tell you he's more Bernie's ideological enemy than I am. Yeah,
Speaker 6: And so to be somebody who's more ideologically aligned with
Speaker 6: him and supported him as much as I did, and
Speaker 6: for him to just be like, I'm gonna.
Speaker 4: Kick you off your own show, that's stunge.
Speaker 6: I didn't like that I was talking to corn about it,
Speaker 6: and he was like, really, why would he do that?
Speaker 6: I was like, I don't fucking know, So you tell me.
Speaker 6: I mean, your theory was like, Oh, it's just he
Speaker 6: likes you and so he wants to do it with
Speaker 6: only you. My theory's more, for whatever reason, he doesn't
Speaker 6: want to involve me or Sager. In the case of me,
Speaker 6: maybe it's be as I called him a cuck repeatedly,
Speaker 6: if he saw.
Speaker 4: That could be which but I kind of doubt he
Speaker 4: saw that, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: I honestly, I mean, it's very hard to say what
Speaker 1: the behind the scenes looks like. I honestly would be
Speaker 1: surprised if it was like personal to you or personal
Speaker 1: to Sager.
Speaker 5: I think it was more. I mean, this is specula.
Speaker 1: I have no idea, right, All I know is that
Speaker 1: it was presented to me is like, we want to
Speaker 1: do this interview and give you a good chunk of time,
Speaker 1: but it's we want it to be a one on
Speaker 1: one and like that's a stipulation. So they were open
Speaker 1: on which platform, they were open on how we promote it.
Speaker 1: You know, you'll see the conversation like it's definitely not
Speaker 1: a softball interview and we it's wide right and all
Speaker 1: that stuff. So they were open on all of those pieces.
Speaker 1: Came the studio, which I also appreciated because it makes
Speaker 1: for a better conversation. But that was like the one
Speaker 1: thing they were hard on is it needs to be
Speaker 1: one on one.
Speaker 6: The other possibility, like you pointed out, I don't know
Speaker 6: how much I buy this, But the other possibility is
Speaker 6: that maybe his uh hit like his manager or agent
Speaker 6: or his commas person doesn't like me or saga and
Speaker 6: was like we just wanted to be only you.
Speaker 4: So that's another possibility.
Speaker 1: Or the sent or knows that the senator has a
Speaker 1: certain like knows who I am. I know he knows
Speaker 1: who you are to but had you know, a certain
Speaker 1: comfortable he had been just had me in mind.
Speaker 4: So he was on my show during the campaign.
Speaker 6: Yeah, and that was more I think what happened there
Speaker 6: was Flashakir the campaign manager. I set up the Rogan interview,
Speaker 6: and then they felt like the right thing to do
Speaker 6: is to give Kyle interview. I didn't even ask for
Speaker 6: an interview because I didn't do interviews. Then I didn't
Speaker 6: even really want an interview, but they were like, do
Speaker 6: an interview. Because oh, basically like, let me pay you
Speaker 6: back for the rogan for getting Yeah, and so you
Speaker 6: know the one thing. Yeah, this is obvious, everybody will
Speaker 6: know this, but they gave me fifteen minutes and it
Speaker 6: was like, in out quick interview, I asked like four
Speaker 6: fucking questions.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 5: But you know, especially because he's not a short winded person.
Speaker 6: Yeah, so you just get. But that's the thing that's
Speaker 6: a little frustrating is that you do get the sense
Speaker 6: that it's sort of looked down his nose at certain people.
Speaker 6: And I think he does have this contradictory belief where
Speaker 6: he talks all the time about oh, we love independent
Speaker 6: media and we want independent media to grow, and it's like, well,
Speaker 6: all the people who were part of the Justice Democrats
Speaker 6: and we're in the squad, we're more than happy to
Speaker 6: go on all these left wing shows when we were
Speaker 6: helping them get elected. And now that they are elected
Speaker 6: and now that they're not really fulfilling your mission, it's
Speaker 6: like all.
Speaker 4: Of a sudden when we get tiny bit critical of
Speaker 4: them gone.
Speaker 6: And so it's like you don't really actually want a
Speaker 6: thriving into pendent media because that actually does mean more
Speaker 6: tough questions for you, and you're willing to dismiss or
Speaker 6: overlook or not pay attention to and not go on
Speaker 6: any of the shows that were huge supporters of you.
Speaker 6: So I kind of think it's bullshit. Right Wing media
Speaker 6: always has right wing politicians and they feed each other,
Speaker 6: they echo each other's arguments, and there's like a bond
Speaker 6: there and on the left. I mean, that's not the case.
Speaker 6: But you know what, at this point I should really
Speaker 6: stop complaining because the fact of the matter is I
Speaker 6: don't want to have any sort of relationship with any
Speaker 6: of these people, you know, whether it's politicians, whether it's
Speaker 6: other people in the media space. I mean, I've seen
Speaker 6: what happens in the past and recently with stuff like that,
Speaker 6: and it's like it's just a drain and it's a waste,
Speaker 6: and it's mental energy wasted, and it's just it's not
Speaker 6: worth it.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, I think why it's important is because there's two
Speaker 1: ways for media to really matter and have an impact,
Speaker 1: which is, you know, the goal of media is to
Speaker 1: matter and have an impact ultimately.
Speaker 5: One is just to have a large audience, right which
Speaker 5: you have.
Speaker 1: The other, though, is you have to have sort of
Speaker 1: like elite awareness of what's going on in that space
Speaker 1: if you're looking to influence policymakers and the people who
Speaker 1: you know run this country and run the world. And
Speaker 1: so it helps a lot in that latter category to
Speaker 1: have people like Bernie Sanders or AOC or any member
Speaker 1: of Congress who you know is going on those platforms
Speaker 1: and sort of bridging that divide between alternative media and
Speaker 1: these elite spaces, because otherwise they just they pretend like
Speaker 1: the large audiences don't exist. They pretend like the whole
Speaker 1: space and genre and whatever is like irrelevant and doesn't
Speaker 1: doesn't exist at all, even as we get higher views
Speaker 1: than CNN or higher views that MSNBC or whatever. So
Speaker 1: that's part of why I think it matters this conversation
Speaker 1: about whether left politicians are actually engaging with these spaces.
Speaker 6: Yeah, so what I want to do is, well, we'll
Speaker 6: have the interview here and then I want to respond
Speaker 6: to it, break it down, get your thoughts on it,
Speaker 6: and then also you know, I'll tell everybody had I
Speaker 6: been there, which I wanted to be there, had I
Speaker 6: been there, the questions I would have asked.
Speaker 1: Well, we also should say you gave me that list
Speaker 1: of questions beforehand too, of things that you were thinking of,
Speaker 1: and I think a lot.
Speaker 5: I mean, there are a lot.
Speaker 1: Of things that either you or I were interested in
Speaker 1: and would have asked, but definitely informed the interview some
Speaker 1: of the things that you sent.
Speaker 6: So yeah, that's why I ultimately, I mean, I'm not
Speaker 6: gonna lie to everybody. My initial reaction when I was
Speaker 6: told he wants to come on your show, but kick
Speaker 6: you off, my reaction was like, fuck him, No, I
Speaker 6: don't want him on the show. How about that? That
Speaker 6: was my initial reaction. But when I'm not as emotional
Speaker 6: and I'm a little more calm and rational about it, Yes,
Speaker 6: you think through it and you realize number one, you're
Speaker 6: a phenomenal interviewer and you're gonna ask great questions. And
Speaker 6: number two, yeah, I could write down a bunch of
Speaker 6: questions that I would have asked and give you the list,
Speaker 6: and you can determine which you think are fair and
Speaker 6: which ones you think maybe aren't, and then you'll know
Speaker 6: incorporate that into your question. So even though I'm not there,
Speaker 6: I am some percentage there because some of the questions
Speaker 6: were inspired by some of the things that I showed you.
Speaker 6: So you know, when I'm more calm and rational about it. Yes,
Speaker 6: we ended up doing what is the right thing, and
Speaker 6: you sat down and interviewed him. But yes, I'm not
Speaker 6: gonna lie the irrational lizard. Part of my brain was like,
Speaker 6: you can go fuck himself. You're not coming on my
Speaker 6: show and kicking me off, fuck out of here.
Speaker 5: Fair?
Speaker 1: All right with that, we will bring you Seda Sanders.
Speaker 1: He wanted to talk about the Reconciliation Bill, which is
Speaker 1: what he's been spending a lot of time on. But
Speaker 1: we got into media, we got into Trump, we got
Speaker 1: into the coal miners strike, we got into the plant
Speaker 1: closing in West Virginia, and quite a bit of back
Speaker 1: and forth on Biden and what progressives could do with
Speaker 1: their leverage. Let's take a look, Senator Sanders. So great
Speaker 1: to see you, Sarah, thanks for joining us with you.
Speaker 5: Absolutely.
Speaker 1: Let's dive right into the nitty gritty of what you've
Speaker 1: been spending most of your time on, which is this
Speaker 1: budget bill. What's in it that you're excited about, what
Speaker 1: do you think is going to be most consequential, and
Speaker 1: are there things that you were disappointed didn't make it
Speaker 1: in well?
Speaker 3: First thought, thank you very much for asking that question,
Speaker 3: because you would be astounded as to how little interest
Speaker 3: there is in the inside the beltwagh media call about
Speaker 3: those issues every day. I'm hounded, what's the process, When
Speaker 3: is it going to be done? What about this one?
Speaker 3: They just forget to ask? What's in the bill? Now? Is?
Speaker 3: I think many people may know. I have indicated in
Speaker 3: my view that this bill is the most consequential piece
Speaker 3: of legislation for working families since the nineteen thirties FDR,
Speaker 3: the New Deal. Okay, what's in it? Well, first thought,
Speaker 3: at a time of massive income and wealth inequality, you know,
Speaker 3: what we actually do. We demand that the wealthiest people
Speaker 3: in this country and large profitable corporations who in some
Speaker 3: years are paying zero in federal taxes start paying their
Speaker 3: fair share of taxes. So that in itself is a
Speaker 3: fairly radical statement. Number two, what we do, and I
Speaker 3: have to tell you this is still a work in progress.
Speaker 3: We've got to get the budget thing done, then we've
Speaker 3: got to get the reconciliation bill done. Number two, what
Speaker 3: we do is take a look at what's going on
Speaker 3: with children in America. You know, we don't talk about
Speaker 3: that in this country. Everyone talks about the future generation.
Speaker 3: They love America, but they ignored the needs of the children.
Speaker 3: We have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any
Speaker 3: major country, almost any major country in terms of children.
Speaker 3: We address that in a very frontal way, very broadway.
Speaker 3: What we do is provide a expand a chrial tax credit.
Speaker 3: Every working class family in America as kids will get
Speaker 3: to check for three hundred dollars a month. We think
Speaker 3: that that in itself will cut childhood poverty in the
Speaker 3: United States of America in half. How's that? And then
Speaker 3: on top of that, we understand that our childcare system
Speaker 3: is totally sysfunctional. Right, people are spending twenty five thirty
Speaker 3: percent of their incomes while they go to work on childcare.
Speaker 3: The premise that we're operating on the now is that
Speaker 3: nobody in America should pay more than seven percent of
Speaker 3: his or income for childcare. You'd step forward. In addition
Speaker 3: to that, we put a lot of money into children's
Speaker 3: nutrition program, so big focus on the needs of our kids.
Speaker 3: The United States is the only major country on Earth
Speaker 3: not to provide paid family and medically right. There are
Speaker 3: women today who give birth you have to go back
Speaker 3: to work in a week because they don't have any
Speaker 3: paid leave we end that, and that's a significant step forward.
Speaker 3: Right now, driving over here from the Capitol, it's a
Speaker 3: ten minute drive, you see people who are homeless, living
Speaker 3: intents all over the city. We are putting an unprecedented
Speaker 3: amount of money into building low income and affordable housing.
Speaker 3: We are dealing with the existential threat to this planet
Speaker 3: of climate, and we're putting hundreds and hundreds of billions
Speaker 3: of dollars into transforming our energy system. Creating a Civilian
Speaker 3: Climate Core will put hundreds of thousands of young people
Speaker 3: to work transforming our energy system, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 3: And we are dealing in terms of Medicare. You got
Speaker 3: a lot of folks in Vermont, around this country, people
Speaker 3: who can't afford ventures, can't afford hearing aids, can't affoid eyeglasses.
Speaker 3: We're going to expand Medicare. Those are just some of
Speaker 3: the provisions which I think are transformative for American society.
Speaker 1: Is there still a possibility of the Medicare age being
Speaker 1: lowered as part of this? That's still on the table.
Speaker 1: So I wanted to ask you said this obviously work
Speaker 1: in progress. Still, do you have red lines in terms
Speaker 1: of certain programs that must be there in order to
Speaker 1: garner your support certain dollar amount, a threshold that it
Speaker 1: must meet.
Speaker 3: Well, I have a lot of red lines with Soto
Speaker 3: forty nine other members, right, So I mean what makes
Speaker 3: this very very difficult. I hope everybody appreciates this. The
Speaker 3: Senator is split fifty to fifty. We will have zero
Speaker 3: Republican support for this type of legislation. Then we're interested
Speaker 3: to giving tax breaks to billionaires and throwing working people
Speaker 3: off of the Affordable Care Act. So they're not there.
Speaker 3: We got fifty people. Everybody knows it is a very
Speaker 3: diverse caucus of philosophically, people have very different ideas. So
Speaker 3: my job is to try to put it together. But
Speaker 3: I think all of these basic principles are going to
Speaker 3: be included. I didn't even mention making community colleges, tuition free,
Speaker 3: taking on the pharmaceutical industries of Medica negotiates crisis. But
Speaker 3: all of those basic principles will be in the legislation. Now,
Speaker 3: you asked me, are the aspects of it that I
Speaker 3: am disappointed? In law? We proposed six trillion dollars as
Speaker 3: a bill. Many of my more conservative Democratic colleagues did
Speaker 3: not agree with that, and it was taken down to
Speaker 3: three and a half trillion plus six hundred billion going
Speaker 3: into the physical infrastructure, which is part of the so
Speaker 3: called bipartisan bill.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I want to ask you about that in
Speaker 1: a minute. So it seems like you have obviously a
Speaker 1: couple of constraints. You have people like Center or Mansion,
Speaker 1: He's expressed skepticism over some of the provisions regarding climate change.
Speaker 1: You also have the Senate parliamentarian to contend with. They
Speaker 1: previously stripped out the fifteen dollars minimum wage the last
Speaker 1: time around, things like the Proact Immigration Reform, potentially the
Speaker 1: renewable Energy Standard. It seems like those all might be
Speaker 1: contested by the Senate Parliament.
Speaker 3: Those are all hurdles that we've got to overcome.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and what is your expectation there though I don't.
Speaker 3: Want to make any any speculation on that. But I
Speaker 3: just again want people to understand that because of the Fillibus,
Speaker 3: let's get back to the phillbus. So we don't even
Speaker 3: have fifty votes plus the Vice President, we're operating under
Speaker 3: a reconciliation rules and the so called bird rules, which
Speaker 3: means and this is hard for people outside of the
Speaker 3: belt Way to understand it's not just hey, I have
Speaker 3: an idea, let's put it in the bill. It has
Speaker 3: to confirm conform to reconciliation rules, which have to do
Speaker 3: with budgetary processes, not policy decisions. Her argument, which I
Speaker 3: strongly disagree with against the minimum wage is that was policy,
Speaker 3: not a tax proposal. So we have to in a
Speaker 3: sense conform to the bird rules budget rules rather than
Speaker 3: just the good policy that we have to do.
Speaker 1: Why do you have to conform to those rules from
Speaker 1: this particular parliamentarian because look, the Republicans previously they got
Speaker 1: a ruling they didn't like, they got a new parliamentarian,
Speaker 1: and I just look, I know you see the climate
Speaker 1: crisis as existential as I do too. It seems hard
Speaker 1: to understand how you would let the the advice of
Speaker 1: an unelected.
Speaker 3: Staffer work somebody that.
Speaker 1: We have hired staffer who's unelected, who is there to
Speaker 1: provide you with guidance on what these rules should be,
Speaker 1: allow them to stand in the way of doing what
Speaker 1: is really necessary to deal with what is truly an
Speaker 1: existential crisis.
Speaker 3: Uh, you're right, period, you are right. So again, there
Speaker 3: are fifty members of the Democraticalcus. I share you a
Speaker 3: view not everybody agrees with that.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 3: In other words, you know, if you're saying, you know,
Speaker 3: should the lead a fire the parliamentarian, you can make
Speaker 3: that argument, but I have to tell you that there
Speaker 3: are members of them crodicbal becaus who do not agree
Speaker 3: with them.
Speaker 1: And same thing on the filibuster. Is there any movement
Speaker 1: towards filibuster reform because it's another one of these things
Speaker 1: that it's kind of hard to understand. You see what
Speaker 1: needs to be done, it's really clear, I know, you
Speaker 1: see it really clearly, and then you have this kind
Speaker 1: of you know, archaic Senate procedure that's standing in the
Speaker 1: way of actually accomplishing it.
Speaker 3: You know, you talk about climate being an existential threat
Speaker 3: to the planet. I would also put in that area
Speaker 3: the attacks on democracy that we're thinking in Texas and
Speaker 3: Georgia and states all over this country.
Speaker 5: Yep.
Speaker 3: And to me, that is an existential threat against American democracy.
Speaker 3: Do I think we should act boldly to overturn what
Speaker 3: these states are doing, who are very clear about trying
Speaker 3: to exclude African Americans, Latinos, young people, people with disabilities
Speaker 3: from the political process. Of course we should do. We
Speaker 3: have fifty votes to do that. Now we're working on that.
Speaker 1: So let's talk a little bit about the infrastructure plan,
Speaker 1: the bipartisan plan. There is a lot of focus and obsession,
Speaker 1: I would say, with getting a couple of Republicans on
Speaker 1: board with this plan so they can pass in and
Speaker 1: bipartisan way. The reports are it includes some privatization schemes,
Speaker 1: things like asset recycling, which is basically just a fancy
Speaker 1: name for selling off some public works. Do you expect
Speaker 1: to vote in favor of that bill based on what
Speaker 1: you need?
Speaker 3: Question? All right, Look between you and me, don't tell
Speaker 3: anybody I think this whole process doesn't make a whole
Speaker 3: lot of sense. Look, you got needs out there. Should
Speaker 3: we invest heavily in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, roads, bridges, water,
Speaker 3: huge problem, wastewater, plants, broadband, all of those are huge issues.
Speaker 3: Of course we should do it. My own preference would
Speaker 3: have been to do it in one bill, that's all,
Speaker 3: and get the fifty votes plus the Vice president that
Speaker 3: we need. Again, there are fifty members of the Democratic Caucus.
Speaker 3: Some felt it very important too, for whatever reason, to
Speaker 3: show the world that they can work with Republicans. And
Speaker 3: that's what this process is about. So I think by
Speaker 3: in law, and we haven't seen the fine print of
Speaker 3: this legislation yet. As you and I chat, I think
Speaker 3: the investments are sensible, roads, bridges and all that stuff,
Speaker 3: greats jobs. It's important what we call the pay for
Speaker 3: is how these things are going to be funded. In
Speaker 3: many ways do not make a lot of sense to me,
Speaker 3: based on what I have seen up to now. They
Speaker 3: are pretty conservative approaches, and the reason of that is Republicans,
Speaker 3: of course don't want to raise any taxes on the
Speaker 3: wealthy large corporations, so the Democratic negotiators are caught in
Speaker 3: a bund.
Speaker 1: What's your understanding right now of those pay for us?
Speaker 1: I think the asset recycling.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that is the idea that we privatize infrastructure, that
Speaker 3: we give over roads and bridges and parking meets or
Speaker 3: whatever it may be to private sector. I think is
Speaker 3: a very foolish idea. I'm not a great fan of privatization.
Speaker 3: And what they are also doing is taking money from
Speaker 3: other pots of money that were passed in previous COD
Speaker 3: bills which should be used later on. Concerned about small businesses, restaurants,
Speaker 3: et cetera. So in general, the pay fors are not
Speaker 3: good but here is the bottom line, and this is
Speaker 3: the world that we live in. We have fifty volks.
Speaker 3: One person says no, nothing happens. So I am willing
Speaker 3: to go along. I think I want to see the
Speaker 3: final details of the bipotterisan bill. If there is one
Speaker 3: hundred percent agreement on the part of the Democrats who
Speaker 3: are negotiating this that they are going to go along
Speaker 3: with the reconciliation package.
Speaker 5: And do you have those assurances today?
Speaker 3: That is a very good question. And the fate of
Speaker 3: the All I can tell you is, if I have
Speaker 3: anything to say about it, there will not be a
Speaker 3: bipotisan bill unless there is a reconciliation bill.
Speaker 1: I guess that gets into one of the other questions
Speaker 1: that I've had and a lot of other people have had,
Speaker 1: which is that it seems like the Mansions and the
Speaker 1: Gottheimer's of the world, the more conservative Democrats are always
Speaker 1: willing to threaten to withhold their vote over things that
Speaker 1: frankly make the bills worse. Mansion willing to walk away
Speaker 1: if we're raising taxes on corporations too much. Gotttheimer and
Speaker 1: the Salt Tax Caucus over in the House saying we
Speaker 1: really are dying to, you know, give the wealthy in
Speaker 1: our district a tax break, and there's not an equivocal
Speaker 1: willingness to walk away from the progressive siluce Well, I wouldn't.
Speaker 3: Say that, Crystal, I really would not. In fact, we
Speaker 3: have gone as far as we have gone. Let's again,
Speaker 3: you know, sometimes we kind of take things for granted.
Speaker 3: What we are looking at as legislation right now that
Speaker 3: is more consequential than any time in the last seventy
Speaker 3: eighty years. So it's a big deal. It would not
Speaker 3: have happened without the Progressive Caucus in the House standing
Speaker 3: up and fighting. So in the House, for example, it
Speaker 3: is not the there are some conservative to say, hey,
Speaker 3: unless you do these conservative things, we're not going to
Speaker 3: put it is dozens and numbers, dozens of members of
Speaker 3: the progressive caucuses and say, you know what, we are
Speaker 3: going to expand medicare, We're all going to deal with childcare,
Speaker 3: we all going to deal with pre K, we all
Speaker 3: got to deal with paid family and medical leaf. That
Speaker 3: is a huge, huge, huge step forward. Look, this bill.
Speaker 3: You got a fairly conservative of the United States Congress.
Speaker 3: What can I tell you, But this bill is a major,
Speaker 3: major step forward but your point is well taken. Historically.
Speaker 3: I remember I was in the House for sixteen years.
Speaker 3: Over and over again I heard, oh, Bernie, your ideas
Speaker 3: are great there, but you know, we have all these
Speaker 3: conservatives who can't vote for it. We have kind of
Speaker 3: turned that around a little bit. That's what this bill
Speaker 3: is about. That's a big deal. But we are right
Speaker 3: now in a pivotal moment, and I have made clear,
Speaker 3: and I think Schumer has made clear, Pelosi has made clear,
Speaker 3: the President has made clear. This is a two track process.
Speaker 3: You want this bipotizan bill, fine, you're going to vote
Speaker 3: for reconciliation. You don't want it, that's it.
Speaker 1: And so to reiterate, if you don't feel confident that
Speaker 1: all of the Democrats are going to stick together to
Speaker 1: pass something close to what you've proposed with this budget bill,
Speaker 1: you're going to be out in terms of the Infanta
Speaker 1: won't happen.
Speaker 3: That's all. Just it's not me. I mean, Pelosi has said,
Speaker 3: I think very strongly and effectively that this is you
Speaker 3: guys want your bipotisan bill, that's fine, We're going to
Speaker 3: bring the reconciliation bill up at the same time. And
Speaker 3: that's exactly the right strategy. The President has made that clear.
Speaker 3: So it's not just me, but we're going to go
Speaker 3: forward together. We're not going forward at all.
Speaker 1: What is your assessment of the Biden administration to date.
Speaker 1: I know you have a lot of hopes for this
Speaker 1: particular bill.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 1: My own thought is the relief bill was important. It
Speaker 1: was significant, but also especially with the fifteen dollar minium
Speaker 1: and wage stripped down, all of those provisions were ultimately temporary.
Speaker 3: It was, but you're not going to I mean, look,
Speaker 3: do I have disagreements with Joe Biden. Obviously I do.
Speaker 3: I ran for president against them. Right, one clear difference.
Speaker 3: I strongly believe in a Medicare for all single payer system.
Speaker 3: Current healthcare system is totally dysfunctional. His views are different.
Speaker 3: But having said that, and I have to make this point,
Speaker 3: sometimes progresses, Oh it's not perfect. Oh we didn't do this,
Speaker 3: we didn't do that. And by the way, we have
Speaker 3: not given up on the minimum wage. All right, we
Speaker 3: are going to continue to fight for that, and I
Speaker 3: think we have a shot.
Speaker 5: Can you elaborate on that, No.
Speaker 3: But I think we have There are ways that you know,
Speaker 3: it can be implemented, and it must be implemented. Okay,
Speaker 3: we have too many people working for starvation wages. But
Speaker 3: this is what I would say about Joe Biden. You know,
Speaker 3: somebody who, throughout his career in the Senate was considered
Speaker 3: to be a moderate. All right, well, whatever reason. You know,
Speaker 3: Biden came into office and he looked around him and
Speaker 3: he said, you know what, climate is an existential threat.
Speaker 3: We have got to deal with it. Yes, the working
Speaker 3: class has been decimated for decades now. We have got
Speaker 3: to address that. So what he did that, No, President,
Speaker 3: you correct me if you think I'm misstating this. What
Speaker 3: he did said, well, we're going to spend three percent
Speaker 3: more here and five percent more there. What he said,
Speaker 3: these are the issues. We are going to deal with
Speaker 3: the needs of the children. We are going to deal
Speaker 3: with the needs of the eli. We are going to
Speaker 3: deal with climb, we are going to deal with paid
Speaker 3: family and medically, we're all going to deal with housing.
Speaker 3: Virtually every major crisis that we are facing, he is
Speaker 3: prepared to deal with. I have not seen a president
Speaker 3: in my lifetime who has done that. Am I wrong?
Speaker 1: I see that perspective, But I also see a president
Speaker 1: who's willing to let a lot of those agenda items
Speaker 1: be killed by the filibuster and the parliamentarium.
Speaker 3: Well, but again, I don't want to get defend them.
Speaker 3: I think the point you made a few minutes ago
Speaker 3: is exactly right in this critical moment when we're dealing
Speaker 3: with the future of the planet, when we're dealing with
Speaker 3: the future of democracy. You know what, I think majority
Speaker 3: should rule and not that I believe that strongly. But
Speaker 3: don't think that he can snap his fingers no matter
Speaker 3: what he may or may not believe, and make things happen.
Speaker 1: All right, the centered there are certain things he could
Speaker 1: do though through executive at for example, canceling student debt.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right, that's right.
Speaker 1: There are things he can legalizing marijuana. She could potentially
Speaker 1: do a story executive order. And so there hasn't been
Speaker 1: a willingness even though he says, yes, I support the
Speaker 1: fifteen dollars minimum wage, Yes, I support the Proact, to
Speaker 1: use all the tools that are at his disposal to
Speaker 1: actually make those things happen.
Speaker 5: You're absolutely sure that is that fair?
Speaker 3: No? I mean, in other words, you do not know
Speaker 3: about the discussions that he has with people who walk
Speaker 3: into his office. So it's wrong to assume that when
Speaker 3: you're dealing with the United States senator who does not
Speaker 3: want to end the fillibuster, that he can go in
Speaker 3: there and say, hey, I want you to do that. No,
Speaker 3: so don't give the president.
Speaker 5: Although he could do what you proposed.
Speaker 1: When you were asked on the trail, how would you
Speaker 1: deal with Senator Mansion, you said, I go to West Virginia,
Speaker 1: I do the rally. I'd call him out right.
Speaker 3: I mean, there are things you could do. All that
Speaker 3: I'm saying, do not minimize. I mean, and I don't
Speaker 3: want to get into personalities, but sure, any member of
Speaker 3: the United States Senate has the power to kill this thing.
Speaker 3: And to think that the president alone can change that,
Speaker 3: there's not one hundred percent correct.
Speaker 1: Sure, but there are executive actions that he could look student.
Speaker 1: Another thing that we can agree on.
Speaker 3: I am not yes, you know, yeah, Joe Biden and
Speaker 3: I marijuana. I think the war on drugs has been
Speaker 3: just the disaster for this country, for the African American community.
Speaker 3: I think it should end. I think marijuana should be legalizing. Right,
Speaker 3: we do that Philly simply. But so we have differences.
Speaker 3: But on this piece of legislation, at the end of
Speaker 3: the day if we are successful, if you know this
Speaker 3: will be a major, major achievement.
Speaker 5: Yeah, universal pre K two three years too.
Speaker 4: You don't want to be community, you're.
Speaker 3: Working mom and dad out there. What we are talking
Speaker 3: about it again, it's not going to happen overnight. And
Speaker 3: there's not enough money in this bill that I would
Speaker 3: like as much as I would like to see. But
Speaker 3: what we're doing is expanding public education from K through
Speaker 3: twelve to three years old. So you got a three
Speaker 3: year old, you've got a four year old kid will
Speaker 3: go to school, not gonna cost you a nickel. How's
Speaker 3: that maximum of seven percent for childcare when people are
Speaker 3: paying twenty or thirty percent? Do you think that's significant?
Speaker 3: And by the way, what we haven't discussed when we
Speaker 3: talk about rebuilding the physical infrastructure and addressing climate, transforming
Speaker 3: our energy system, galking about millions and millions of good
Speaker 3: pay in many cases union jobs. Is that transformative? So
Speaker 3: I don't want to argue with you about whether he
Speaker 3: could do more. He could, all right, but I don't
Speaker 3: want you or anyone else to think that what we
Speaker 3: are talking about here is not extraordinarily significant and transformative
Speaker 3: for the lives of working families.
Speaker 1: Your political role has changed a lot over the past decade.
Speaker 3: It has I'm getting bold and my hair is getting whiter.
Speaker 1: You're right, you are very much in the room now.
Speaker 1: You know, in terms of implementing the Biden agenda, there's
Speaker 1: almost no one who's more central to all of that
Speaker 1: than you. Do you still see yourself as an outsider.
Speaker 3: Look, you're absolutely right. My role has been transformed. I
Speaker 3: am frankly much more comfortable being in front of twenty
Speaker 3: five or thirty thousand people at a rally doing five
Speaker 3: town today. I love doing that. I love That's where
Speaker 3: I get my energy from. Yes, I do. I love it.
Speaker 3: It's I get you know, people say, oh, Bernie, you
Speaker 3: inspired me. Trust me. Those folks, young people especially inspire me.
Speaker 3: I love it. But that's not my role right now
Speaker 3: Chairman of the Budget Committee. So I'm trapped in a
Speaker 3: room with a lot of middle aged or aging members
Speaker 3: of the United States Senate trying to work out a
Speaker 3: transformative agreement. And it is in a sense, I don't
Speaker 3: know that I was born to do that, but that's
Speaker 3: the role that I have, and I am proud that
Speaker 3: many of the ideas you know, these ideas that we're
Speaker 3: talking about are They're not all that I had talked about,
Speaker 3: They're not funded in the way I would have liked.
Speaker 3: But many of them are there on the table right now.
Speaker 3: And I think it's fair to say that unless there
Speaker 3: was a progressive movement in this country, not just me,
Speaker 3: but so many other great progresses, these things would not
Speaker 3: be discussed right now. Does that mean to say that
Speaker 3: we still don't have a very long way to go? Absolutely,
Speaker 3: we do. I get back the crooks and the pharmaceutical
Speaker 3: industry or ripping off the American people, the absurdity of
Speaker 3: our current privatized health insurance system, the fact that no
Speaker 3: matter what we do on climate in this bill, which
Speaker 3: will be unprecedented, that it is not enough. How do
Speaker 3: you deal with the issue that we can't do it alone.
Speaker 3: You got to work with China, India, other countries. Huge issues,
Speaker 3: But if we can pass this bill, it'll be an
Speaker 3: important step forward.
Speaker 1: Were there considerations around or is it still on the
Speaker 1: table even to put the public option into this bill?
Speaker 1: You and I both support Medicare for all. I'd rather
Speaker 1: see that Joe Biden ran on the public option. It
Speaker 1: seems like that's kind of fallen off the table.
Speaker 3: I won't want my preferences to expand public healthcare.
Speaker 1: So you would rather see the Medicare age lowered for example, Yes, gotcha,
Speaker 1: that makes sense. I wanted to ask you mentioned the
Speaker 1: pharmaceutical industry. I got a couple more, just very specific
Speaker 1: questions for you. There's a plant that's closing in West Virginia.
Speaker 1: It's eleven hundred jobs and generic pharmaceutical maker. One of
Speaker 1: the things that we found, of course, during the pandemic
Speaker 1: is that a lot of critical ppe and other medicines
Speaker 1: not made in this country that made us incredibly vulnerable.
Speaker 1: Seems like a candidate and the workers in the union,
Speaker 1: they're asking for the Biden administration to invoke the Defense
Speaker 1: Production Act.
Speaker 5: Does that make sense to you? Is that something that
Speaker 5: you would encourage?
Speaker 3: Let me get I can't give you the finner of answer,
Speaker 3: but in general, yeah, I mean, I think, as you've indicated,
Speaker 3: it is unbelievable how poorly prepared we were. That we
Speaker 3: have doctors and nurses who couldn't have masks decent and
Speaker 3: ninety five masks or gowns or gloves is beyond comprehension.
Speaker 3: So it goes without saying and by the way, We're
Speaker 3: putting a lot of money into research and development in
Speaker 3: terms of future pandemic so that we are a lot
Speaker 3: better prepared, and that would mean that we produce these
Speaker 3: products here in the United States.
Speaker 1: You mentioned your disenchantment with Beltway media something and I
Speaker 1: share and I know you have long standing criticisms there.
Speaker 1: There's a minor strike going on right now, something like
Speaker 1: eleven hundred miners down in Alabama, been going on for
Speaker 1: four months. They are picketing in front of Black Rock
Speaker 1: in Manhattan right now as we're talking, and at least
Speaker 1: as of last week, there hadn't been a single cable
Speaker 1: news segment on this four month long strike, first of
Speaker 1: its kind in forty years. What sort of I mean,
Speaker 1: what's going on with that? Why do they ignore these
Speaker 1: incredibly significantly?
Speaker 3: I don't want to overly generalize it. Yeah, there are
Speaker 3: great reporters who work really, really hard, and every now
Speaker 3: and then you really see outstanding investigative reporting. Sure, but
Speaker 3: in general, I would say that for corporate media in general,
Speaker 3: there is not a lot of respect or connection with
Speaker 3: working class people. Those issues that impact people get their
Speaker 3: hands dirty are not terribly high priorities for a lot
Speaker 3: of the corporate media. I mean again, I would point
Speaker 3: back to here, we are working on a piece of
Speaker 3: legislation which is transformative for working families, very very little interest.
Speaker 3: But the process is what is interesting. Gossip is very interesting.
Speaker 3: But you have a strike is we're taking on Wall
Speaker 3: Street and getting very little coverage. It does not surprise me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it also doesn't fit into a political horse race
Speaker 1: kind of narrative, which I think is kind of their
Speaker 1: comfort zone in terms of covering.
Speaker 3: The corporate media is not particularly interested in class issues.
Speaker 3: So here you have mine is thinking on a major
Speaker 3: Wall Street entity.
Speaker 1: So yeah, last question I have for you. One thing
Speaker 1: that I've always really appreciated about you and the way
Speaker 1: that you've thought about the Trump era, as you've recognized
Speaker 1: him as a symptom of these broader underlying problems. And
Speaker 1: as I was looking at some of the statistics this week,
Speaker 1: every metric that was bad when we got Trump has
Speaker 1: gotten worse. So inequality now we're not just in the
Speaker 1: yielded age, We've surpassed the yielded age.
Speaker 5: We had the worst year ever.
Speaker 1: For addiction overdoses, mental health has collapsed. All of these
Speaker 1: indicators that tell you, you know, you've got a society
Speaker 1: where you have a lot of people who are hopeless,
Speaker 1: a lot of people in despair.
Speaker 3: We did a hearing, by the way, on life expectancy, yeah,
Speaker 3: and which got no by the way, I got virtually
Speaker 3: no coverage none. So. But the point to be made
Speaker 3: is that if you're wealthy, you're going to live ten
Speaker 3: fifteen years longer in America than if you're poor. Can
Speaker 3: you do that?
Speaker 5: Wow?
Speaker 3: No? One was particularly very little medior interest in that.
Speaker 5: Wow.
Speaker 1: So given that those metrics have gotten worse, and given
Speaker 1: that our former president seems very interesting running again, do
Speaker 1: you think you could get reelected?
Speaker 3: Sure? Look I think you have And this would be
Speaker 3: a whole other, longer discussion. Yeah, You've got million, many
Speaker 3: millions of people who are working longer hours for low
Speaker 3: for lower wages. They are hopeless about the future. Their
Speaker 3: kids are not doing well. They are turning to drugs,
Speaker 3: to alcohol, even to suicide. They're going nowhere in a hurry.
Speaker 3: Somebody's got to talk to those people. Somebody's got to
Speaker 3: talk to those people. And I think the Democratic Party
Speaker 3: has not done a particularly good job in that. I
Speaker 3: hope if I ever have the damn time and we
Speaker 3: can pass this bill, actually get out into Trump Land
Speaker 3: and to start talking to working class people, because when
Speaker 3: people are frustrated and angry, they turn to bad things,
Speaker 3: and that's where racism and sexism, and homophobia and xenophobia
Speaker 3: rear their ugly heads. And what we have got to
Speaker 3: do is say to those people, Look, there is a
Speaker 3: reason why you can't afford to send your kid to college.
Speaker 3: There is a reason why the richer getting richer and
Speaker 3: you're getting poor. Let's talk about what those reasons are.
Speaker 3: How we can create a nation that works for all
Speaker 3: of us. And you've got to be involved in that.
Speaker 3: And in Trump you know where people don't talk about.
Speaker 3: You may have known Trump has held some rallies recently,
Speaker 3: huge turnouts, huge turnouts for a non campaign moment. So
Speaker 3: is the a potent threat, yes, and we have got
Speaker 3: to think long and hard about how we reach out
Speaker 3: to those people. Many of them, not all. Some of
Speaker 3: them are going to be racist, and you're frankly, you're
Speaker 3: never going to read nothing you can do about it,
Speaker 3: and that is really sad. It upsets me very much.
Speaker 3: That is a reality. But not all of them are.
Speaker 3: You've got to give them some hope. You've got to
Speaker 3: give them an alternative, and I don't think we're doing
Speaker 3: anywhere near enough. Now, what this bill is about, this
Speaker 3: crumpled piece of paper, this is the legislative language, you
Speaker 3: got it. What is about is saying to those people,
Speaker 3: you've given up on government, but you know what, we
Speaker 3: have not given up on you. We know you can't
Speaker 3: afford to send your kids to college, You're going to
Speaker 3: be able to do that at least for two years.
Speaker 3: You can't afford childcare, you can't afford teeth in your mouth.
Speaker 3: We're going to address that. Is that all that we
Speaker 3: have to do? No, is this an important step forward
Speaker 3: in order to restore the faith of millions of people
Speaker 3: that the government can work for them, not just you know,
Speaker 3: billionaire campaign contributors. That's what this is about.
Speaker 5: Senator, thank you, great to see you, Thank you for
Speaker 5: your time.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 1: So that was Senator Sanders covered quite a lot of
Speaker 1: ground there. I thought it was interesting there at the
Speaker 1: end him talking about the conditions that exist in the
Speaker 1: country that led to Trump. I mean, this is actually
Speaker 1: a controversial view bizarrely that like economic conditions might fuel
Speaker 1: political conditions, but he's clearly concerned about not enough getting done,
Speaker 1: and yet there's also a tension there where now rather
Speaker 1: than just being the outsider throwing bombs and occupying that role,
Speaker 1: which is a space he feels very comfortable, and he's
Speaker 1: trying to navigate this new space of like being in
Speaker 1: the room and being the insider. So it was interesting
Speaker 1: to hear him articulate that kind of tension.
Speaker 6: Yeah, you know, that's one of the things I was
Speaker 6: thinking of to ask him, and that's something that you
Speaker 6: touched on. Is I really do think he he has
Speaker 6: contradictory views right now. On the one hand, he still
Speaker 6: thinks to himself as like the crusading outsider, Yeah, trying
Speaker 6: to take down the system.
Speaker 1: But on the other hand, and not your whole life.
Speaker 1: I'm sure that gets that's what's in your.
Speaker 6: Head, right, But on the other hand, he's got to
Speaker 6: be honest with himself about the fact that's not the
Speaker 6: role he's playing now. The role he's playing now is
Speaker 6: I'm the cheerleader for the administration, and yeah, I try
Speaker 6: to hold them to the left flank.
Speaker 4: Of what is possible.
Speaker 6: But what is possible is a lot different from Bernie
Speaker 6: Sanders of twenty sixteen and Bernie.
Speaker 4: Sanders of his entire fucking career.
Speaker 6: Yeah, where he was the one dragging the spectrum saying, no, bitch,
Speaker 6: I'm gonna make some shit possible.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Now he's like, okay, Realt, it's up the pragmatic terms,
Speaker 6: and in the pragmatic terms, I'll be the left flank
Speaker 6: of that.
Speaker 1: I thought it was funny. There's a moment, I guess
Speaker 1: not funny revealing. There's a moment when he's like sometimes progressive,
Speaker 1: like they want everything, you'd be perfect, they want everything.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that was you, bitch, that was you, motherfucker.
Speaker 5: That's what's the fire.
Speaker 1: I was like, this is very different from you know,
Speaker 1: the role that you've occupied previously, and it's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: of course we want things to be better. Of course
Speaker 1: we want you know you to do everything you can,
Speaker 1: for Biden to do everything he can.
Speaker 5: That's that's our job.
Speaker 1: That's our role is because if we don't push and
Speaker 1: demand the very bare minimum of what working class people deserve,
Speaker 1: no one else is going to do it.
Speaker 6: So the best part of the interview is, I think
Speaker 6: very clearly when you ask about Biden and you know
Speaker 6: he contradict for yours is again, on the one hand,
Speaker 6: you want that old side of him wants to come
Speaker 6: out and be like, here are the things that we
Speaker 6: need to do.
Speaker 4: But then on the other hand, he's sort.
Speaker 6: Of like, hey, uh, you know, there has there been
Speaker 6: a president who's ready to deal with climate and wages
Speaker 6: and paid leave and all these things like him. And
Speaker 6: you know, you go back and forth. Three times, you
Speaker 6: check made him there, three times, you hold him accountable,
Speaker 6: and you basically say like he's like, oh, I kept
Speaker 6: it all on his own, and you're like, yes, he can.
Speaker 6: He has executive orders, he could, he could get rid
Speaker 6: of student dead if he wanted to today. He could
Speaker 6: legalize marijuana if he wanted to today. The other thing is,
Speaker 6: like you said, he could go to West Virginia and
Speaker 6: you rally in West Virginia and rile up West Virginians
Speaker 6: against Joe Manchin. If Joe Manchin stands in the way,
Speaker 6: you know he can do the old LBJ or FDR move.
Speaker 6: Call Kirston Cinemon Mansion into the office. Hey, I'm gonna
Speaker 6: make you an offer you can't refuse. I'll be your
Speaker 6: best friend or I'll be your worst enemy. You pick,
Speaker 6: and he can do all of that. He's chosen to
Speaker 6: do none of that. So when Bernie sits there and
Speaker 6: he's like, oh, he's trying and he's doing a lot,
Speaker 6: and you're like, no, he's not.
Speaker 4: Oh, okay, you're right, you're right.
Speaker 6: See that's the thing that was so sad, honestly is
Speaker 6: and I don't he's not doing he's not lying when
Speaker 6: he says this stuff.
Speaker 4: I think he's just confused and contradictory.
Speaker 6: And on the one hand, like I said, he's got
Speaker 6: that thing where old Bernie is still in him, but
Speaker 6: new Bernie's like, well, give the president credit because I
Speaker 6: think he's obviously he thinks Biden is better than Obama,
Speaker 6: Obviously he thinks Biden's better than Bill Clinton. But the
Speaker 6: idea is a FDR. That's one of the bars exactly.
Speaker 6: That's one of the questions I wanted to ask him.
Speaker 6: I wanted to ask him, is Joe Biden closer to
Speaker 6: the new Bill Clinton or the new FDR? And if
Speaker 6: he says the new FDR, I would have been like, bullshit,
Speaker 6: here's the list of He's not like that.
Speaker 4: So but I think that was definitely the best part of.
Speaker 6: The interview because you basically you pressed him and you
Speaker 6: checkmated him three times, and I don't even think he
Speaker 6: realized he was checkmated because he would literally flip like that, Oh,
Speaker 6: he's doing a lot, He's doing all he can, and
Speaker 6: you're the things that he's.
Speaker 4: Doing and you're like, well, he could do more. Oh yeah, no,
Speaker 4: you could definitely do that.
Speaker 6: It would just immediately with flip flop, flip flop, flip flop,
Speaker 6: and you caught him three times.
Speaker 1: The thing that is interesting in interviewing him is he
Speaker 1: is different than most fault He does not like to spin,
Speaker 1: and he doesn't typically spin. So when he's saying he
Speaker 1: really thinks Biden is better than Obama and than Clinton.
Speaker 4: I don't I use those words. He didn't use it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but I don't he said of any president in
Speaker 1: our lifetime. That's what he means by that, right, we
Speaker 1: certainly Reagan and Bush.
Speaker 6: Just just to interject, he said, oh, he's ready to
Speaker 6: deal with climate wages and pay leave, and it's like,
Speaker 6: we haven't gotten anything on any of those things yet, right.
Speaker 6: So that's the other problem is that he's taking these
Speaker 6: like proposals which are still up in the air and
Speaker 6: likely going to get slapped down, and giving him credit
Speaker 6: for those things why are you doing that?
Speaker 1: So that was why I tried to frame it as,
Speaker 1: how do you assess the Biden administration.
Speaker 4: So far so far right?
Speaker 1: I get you have a lot of hopes for this bill,
Speaker 1: and I think we would both agree there's some really
Speaker 1: you know, significant items that are that Bernie wants in
Speaker 1: the reconciliation package.
Speaker 5: That's a long way from happening.
Speaker 1: And we've seen already the way fifteen dollars minimum wage
Speaker 1: got stripped down of the relief bill, and that mattered
Speaker 1: a lot because that was effectively the only permanent change
Speaker 1: that was even being proposed as part of that bill.
Speaker 1: So were there good things in the relief bill that
Speaker 1: were really critical in that moment?
Speaker 5: Yes, of course.
Speaker 1: I mean we saw the way that the checks were
Speaker 1: helpful for poverty. The short term child tax credit also
Speaker 1: significant and dramatically decreased poverty. Those are all short term things.
Speaker 4: Yeah, you made that point, he ignored.
Speaker 1: It, So to paint that as FDR is you know,
Speaker 1: that's just not true. So I think he's perspectively looking
Speaker 1: at and here are the things that I believe we've
Speaker 1: got in this bill that I've been pushing for that
Speaker 1: I think we have a pathway to getting done we're
Speaker 1: looking at like, yeah, but here's the reality of where
Speaker 1: things have been. And also, by the way, and this
Speaker 1: is part of what he admits to is he says, oh,
Speaker 1: we've got to keep in mind in early in the interviews,
Speaker 1: oh we got to keep in mind or the bird
Speaker 1: rule and the parliamentarian. I know it's difficult for people
Speaker 1: outside the Beltway to understand. And I said, well, yeah,
Speaker 1: but why do Why are we letting a parliamentarian hem
Speaker 1: in what the agenda should be And he's like, I,
Speaker 1: you know, I agree, I think that's ridiculous. But that
Speaker 1: then gets ignored when when he says I think Biden's
Speaker 1: doing everything he can, It's like, well, no, we already
Speaker 1: acknowledged that he could not. You could get rid of
Speaker 1: the parliamentarian. You could push for Pilovester reform. Who knows
Speaker 1: if it will work or not, but you could go
Speaker 1: to you could go to West Virginia the way that
Speaker 1: Bernie proposed on the campaign trail. So there and then
Speaker 1: putting all of that aside, there are executive actions he
Speaker 1: could do today that he just is it.
Speaker 5: That's the reality.
Speaker 6: So it's even worse than we're letting on here because
Speaker 6: you keep bringing Oh, they could fire the parliamentarian.
Speaker 4: They don't even have to fire the parliamentarian. They could
Speaker 4: ignore the parliamentarian.
Speaker 6: They could do specific carve outs on the filibuster and
Speaker 6: say voting rights says nothing to do with the filibuster
Speaker 6: doesn't apply to this anymore. There's one hundred and sixty
Speaker 6: exceptions to the filibuster right now. Yeah, you could also
Speaker 6: just increase the number of reconciliation attempts you have from
Speaker 6: two or three to fucking ten, and then all of
Speaker 6: a sudden, you got all these other things that you
Speaker 6: can do, and you got a lot more chances to
Speaker 6: get good policy through. So there are so many ways
Speaker 6: around it, and he's not acknowledging it. And I noticed
Speaker 6: something now. His fall back line is like you say, hey,
Speaker 6: the parliamentarian is a staffer and they have no power. Effectively,
Speaker 6: their job is just to explain to you what precedent
Speaker 6: is and what did he say? You're right with their
Speaker 6: fifty other senators who disagree mm hm. And I think
Speaker 6: that's my biggest objection is that, yeah, when he's having
Speaker 6: conversations with people who agree with him ideologically, you'll be like, yeah,
Speaker 6: I agree with you. But then when you know you're
Speaker 6: in the room boom with these other people, instead of
Speaker 6: acknowledging that these are ideological enemies who need to be
Speaker 6: pressured and need to be you need to find a way,
Speaker 6: like Biden should to make them fall in line. And
Speaker 6: he has the power to, you know, exert some pressure
Speaker 6: on them. That's where I start getting pissed off, is
Speaker 6: because I feel like he's gaslighting us because don't tell
Speaker 6: me you ideologically agree with me on this shit, and
Speaker 6: then also make the excuse which is exactly what you
Speaker 6: just explained that he did, and to and use that
Speaker 6: line multiple times. By the way, in the interview, Oh
Speaker 6: you're right, you said do you have any red lines?
Speaker 6: This was one of the early questions, JA, do you
Speaker 6: have any red lines on this thing? Basically asking hey,
Speaker 6: will you tank the bill of certain things if they
Speaker 6: put certain things in there, take certain things out of there?
Speaker 6: And he basically said I do, but so do fifty
Speaker 6: other senators. So it's always like, oh, woe is me?
Speaker 6: I'm just this one senator and you know what am
Speaker 6: I supposed to do? And if Biden is who Bernie
Speaker 6: Sanders seems to think he is, he would have already
Speaker 6: dismissed the parliamentarian or said we're going to do more
Speaker 6: cracks of reconciliation, or put more exceptions in there for
Speaker 6: the filibuster, or reform the philibuster back to the talking filibuster,
Speaker 6: or did the thing with Mansion or ready where he
Speaker 6: did the right life Mansion, he could any of that shit,
Speaker 6: he could have done, and he's done none of it,
Speaker 6: which tells me he's not the guy that you know
Speaker 6: is Bernie, and not even have to think that Biden's
Speaker 6: really this guy, because Biden's probably just telling Bernie what
Speaker 6: he wants to hear when he's in the meeting with him.
Speaker 1: Well that I think that's a really good point of
Speaker 1: It is true that Bernie on his own right as
Speaker 1: one actor in this process trying to corral fifty Democrats,
Speaker 1: including Mansion and Cinema.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's that's an impossible task.
Speaker 1: But what he's presenting is that he has a lockstep
Speaker 1: ally in Joe Biden also doing everything that it takes.
Speaker 1: And that's the part that just I mean, it just
Speaker 1: doesn't hold up to scrutiny. If that was the dynamic,
Speaker 1: then it wouldn't be Bernie Sanders and the left, who's
Speaker 1: under it to be Joe Manchon, who's under pressure, it'd
Speaker 1: be Kirsten Cinema, who's under pressure, who's in a tough spot,
Speaker 1: who's getting called out publicly.
Speaker 5: It would be you know, you wouldn't have.
Speaker 1: These concerns about the parliamentarian and about the philibuster. I mean,
Speaker 1: and I asked him specifically. You know, he seemed to
Speaker 1: agree and acknowledge that the pro a lot of provisions
Speaker 1: of the Proact, the renewable Energy standard, immigration reform, that
Speaker 1: it was questionable whether these items would make it through
Speaker 1: the Parliamentarian and the Bird rule. And you know, we
Speaker 1: see the way that that limitation has been intentionally imposed
Speaker 1: so that the Biden administration can go to their allies,
Speaker 1: you know, whether it's people who are advocating on immigration
Speaker 1: reform or people who are advocating on fifteen dollars minimum wage,
Speaker 1: people who are advocating in climate and go, look, I
Speaker 1: really tried, but we just can't.
Speaker 5: Get it done.
Speaker 6: So some of the questions that I wanted to ask him, now,
Speaker 6: a bunch of them you touched on and you made
Speaker 6: them your own, and you asked them.
Speaker 4: I'll just leave those out here.
Speaker 6: Yeah, one of the things I wanted to ask him
Speaker 6: is just very simply, give me a current criticism you
Speaker 6: have of Joe Biden. Yeah, because he does seem to
Speaker 6: be taking this role of now I'm going to be
Speaker 6: an advocate for Biden and basically imply or outright make
Speaker 6: the argument that yes, Biden is more ideologically in agreement
Speaker 6: with me than he is with Manchin than Cinema. When
Speaker 6: he talks to Manchin, he makes Manchin think on with you,
Speaker 6: And when he talks to Bernie, he makes Bernie think
Speaker 6: I'm with you.
Speaker 4: That's well.
Speaker 1: You remember you remember in some meeting with Republicans, I
Speaker 1: guess around the infrastructure bill. Remember, they came away thinking
Speaker 1: that he had agreed even with them, right on what
Speaker 1: he does, whatever their papers or whatever it was that
Speaker 1: they were negotiating, and then the White House staff had
Speaker 1: to come clean up after and be like, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: that's not his position. So I do think I think
Speaker 1: it's Biden's disposition to try to make whoever is in
Speaker 1: the room with him.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 6: And you know, one of the ways I would press
Speaker 6: Bernie on that question, give me a current criticism you
Speaker 6: have of Biden. Is you know you support a Medicare
Speaker 6: for all. Joe Biden said he supported a public option.
Speaker 6: Now neither one of them is on the agenda. We're
Speaker 6: not talking about any of them, right, So are you
Speaker 6: going to criticize him for that?
Speaker 4: Right? That's something that I wanted to.
Speaker 1: Ask his explanation on the public option. He made it
Speaker 1: seem like it was my choice to instead of pursuing.
Speaker 4: The public option, he expanded Medicare.
Speaker 1: To expand Medicare and not, actually, to my knowledge, it's
Speaker 1: news making that Medicare expansion is still on the table
Speaker 1: because the reporting had been that the lowering the age
Speaker 1: had basically been stripped out, so that apparently is still
Speaker 1: potentially insane.
Speaker 6: But that's where I did think Bernie's just wishful thinking there,
Speaker 6: you think so absolutely? I mean, this is the same
Speaker 6: thing everybody. It was all this this Kabooki theater about
Speaker 6: the three point five trillion dollar Partisan Reconciliation Human Infrastructure Bill.
Speaker 6: Everybody was pretending like, yes, we're on the brink of agreeing,
Speaker 6: and then two seconds later, heresin Cinema comes out and
Speaker 6: she's like, I don't support that right, and everybody's like,
Speaker 6: oh yeah, how the fuck, did you guys not know that?
Speaker 4: Of course that's the case. So there's this weird kobuki theater.
Speaker 6: Well, yeah, Bernie might be saying, I want it to
Speaker 6: still be on the table, and maybe the people I've
Speaker 6: talked to recently think it's all on the tabe That
Speaker 6: shit is not still on the table.
Speaker 4: No way.
Speaker 6: If it is and it gets through, then I'll be
Speaker 6: the happiest man on the planet. But that I definitely
Speaker 6: don't think that's the case. Another question I wanted to
Speaker 6: ask him is about they just had a march in
Speaker 6: over forty cities for Medicare for All last week. I'm
Speaker 6: curious why he didn't say anything about it, Why he
Speaker 6: didn't voice support for it. Why none of the people,
Speaker 6: the lefties in Congress did it. You know, regardless of
Speaker 6: what you think of the organization or the people involved,
Speaker 6: it's march for Medicare for All. Yeah, it's like that's
Speaker 6: your thing, and now mum's the words.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that was actually that was one that I was
Speaker 1: regretful that I wasn't able to get to. I mean,
Speaker 1: I would love to have gotten to all of them,
Speaker 1: but that was what I was really sorry to not get.
Speaker 5: His response on because it.
Speaker 1: Is strange to live in a moment where it seems
Speaker 1: like we were so close to having that thing and
Speaker 1: now it's like it seems like it's completely evaporated. And
Speaker 1: you don't have Bernie, who was the leader who really
Speaker 1: put that on the table, talking about it. You don't
Speaker 1: have him laying out Okay, here's how the the path
Speaker 1: for how we get here. So I would have been
Speaker 1: interested here as response, for sure.
Speaker 6: I wanted to ask why or if maybe is a
Speaker 6: better question the Progressive House Democrats, why is it they
Speaker 6: don't organize better, band together, vote as a block, and
Speaker 6: why can't he play a leadership role in that as
Speaker 6: a senator? Yeah, to sort of get even if you
Speaker 6: just slap together a coalition of six, there's a three
Speaker 6: vote margin in the House, right, So if you guys
Speaker 6: did act like the Tea Party and you did vote together, then.
Speaker 4: You can effectively get whatever you want.
Speaker 6: Like I say that, you know, my pipe dream to
Speaker 6: get as much change as quickly as possible would have
Speaker 6: been if you had a group of six or ten
Speaker 6: or twelve Progressive House Democrats and Bernie could be you know,
Speaker 6: a leader of theirs in the Senate where they say
Speaker 6: Not a single thing is going to get through Congress
Speaker 6: in lesson until Joe Biden takes out that Executive order
Speaker 6: pencil and pencil pen and eliminates student loan debt and
Speaker 6: legalizes marijuana. And I don't want to hear it. I
Speaker 6: don't want to hear a single peep against this. It's
Speaker 6: on him. It's not on us. It's on him. If
Speaker 6: he does it, fine, we're in business. If not, blame him,
Speaker 6: because guess what, these things pull very very popular. So
Speaker 6: we are standing up for democracy. We are standing up
Speaker 6: for the American people. And even if the media shits
Speaker 6: on them, and they will, Republicans will shit on them.
Speaker 6: Democratic leadership will shit on them. If they had spine,
Speaker 6: they could do that. And guess what, eventually, after week
Speaker 6: two or three, Biden would talk to them and maybe
Speaker 6: you don't get everything, but maybe you do get fifty
Speaker 6: thousand dollars worth of student loan debt canceled, and maybe
Speaker 6: again we decriminalized instead illlegalized around the country, which is
Speaker 6: a fucking win.
Speaker 4: I would take.
Speaker 6: Yeah, But they don't do this, and I want to
Speaker 6: know why the fuck aren't you doing this?
Speaker 4: I don't I genuinely think they don't realize how much
Speaker 4: power they have.
Speaker 5: Do you think that's it?
Speaker 6: I do, Yeah, I do. I don't listen. I don't
Speaker 6: think Bernie's corrupt. I don't think he's serving corporate interests.
Speaker 6: I think he means what he says. Yeah, And I
Speaker 6: just think fundamentally he's got a little bit of Washington
Speaker 6: brain going on, and you suddenly you stop thinking big,
Speaker 6: and you stop thinking of what you try to color
Speaker 6: within the lines. You don't want to be the sore
Speaker 6: thumb that sticks out and do something that that looks
Speaker 6: like that it fails, you feel stupid.
Speaker 1: In some ways, that portion of the conversation where I
Speaker 1: asked him, do you still see yourself as an outsider?
Speaker 1: I sort of felt like was the most revealing part,
Speaker 1: because he articulated that tension and discomfort with the role
Speaker 1: that he's occupying now, Like he misses the rally, he
Speaker 1: misses being that guy. Right, that was a role that
Speaker 1: felt very comfortable to him, and now he's in the room.
Speaker 1: And so I think you're right that there's a different
Speaker 1: mentality that she's operating with than we've ever seen from
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders' entire time in Washington. And you've seen that
Speaker 1: we've seen that transition happen with AOC and the way
Speaker 1: she positioned herself when she first came into the house
Speaker 1: versus how she positions herself now.
Speaker 5: And it's it.
Speaker 1: I thought that was very revealing, just to see how
Speaker 1: he himself is kind of viewing his role and viewing
Speaker 1: that transition and ending up you know, sounding a lot
Speaker 1: like saying things all you progressives always want this guy
Speaker 1: in the moon and you know, of course Biden's doing
Speaker 1: everything he can do. Oh well, you're right, he's not
Speaker 1: actually doing everything he could do.
Speaker 6: And just one more I'll give you year. I was, uh,
Speaker 6: I wanted to ask him to your point, do you
Speaker 6: fear at all that Biden is using your outsider status
Speaker 6: to sort of lull the left to sleep and say, see,
Speaker 6: even Bernie's with me, even Bernie agrees with me.
Speaker 1: Did you read that piece from Alex Sammonson American Prospect
Speaker 1: about how Joe Biden defanged the left? No, very good piece,
Speaker 1: not specifically about Bernie, more about progressive activist groups in
Speaker 1: DC who he points out. You know, voting rights gets
Speaker 1: totally quashed, and you don't hear a peep from civil
Speaker 1: rights groups like Women's protections and daycare and these sorts
Speaker 1: of issues get get stripped out and pushed aside, and
Speaker 1: you don't hear anything from the feminist groups and just
Speaker 1: goes through point by point of like you know, fifteen
Speaker 1: dollars minimum wage gets stripped down, You don't hear anything.
Speaker 5: So what's going on?
Speaker 1: And he essentially posits that these groups have all sort
Speaker 1: of been co opted by Washington brain where they've been.
Speaker 5: Allowed in the room.
Speaker 1: Right, they're not They're given the illusion of influence, right,
Speaker 1: they don't want to lose that positioning and that access,
Speaker 1: which they feel like is valuable even though it's not
Speaker 1: really garnering them anything at this point, and so they
Speaker 1: keep their.
Speaker 5: Mouth shut, you know.
Speaker 1: I mean the Infrastructure bill is perfect example. Now, I
Speaker 1: do want to say you, you did have Sunrise out
Speaker 1: protesting about the infrastructure Bill and taking a little bit
Speaker 1: of a harder line there, so I want to give
Speaker 1: them credit for that. But almost all the climate provisions
Speaker 1: stripped down of the infrastructure bill right and pushed to
Speaker 1: the Reckoncilly Bill, which is much more of a question
Speaker 1: mark than the Infrastructure Bill is, and as subject to
Speaker 1: the whims of Joe Manchin, who has already expressed concern
Speaker 1: about the climate change portions of that bill. And oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, the probably most transformational part of the
Speaker 1: climate agenda in the Reconciliation Bill is the renewable Energy Standard,
Speaker 1: which is at risk of being stripped out by the Parliamentarian.
Speaker 1: So in spite of all this, I mean, you hear
Speaker 1: and what is truly an existential crisis that we are
Speaker 1: all living through, And we hear lots of words and
Speaker 1: rhetoric about a World War II style mobilization because the
Speaker 1: thread is that real. But then you're gonna let the
Speaker 1: parliamentarian decide whether you're going to do what it takes
Speaker 1: to save the world. Like what in what world does
Speaker 1: that make any kind of sense? And yet most of
Speaker 1: these groups have been really quiet because they all it
Speaker 1: took was just like, give them some pats on the head,
Speaker 1: invite them to some meetings, occasionally have ron Klay like
Speaker 1: tweet something nice down about them, and they've effectively been defanked.
Speaker 4: What was the term you use? The illusion of power?
Speaker 6: What was it they're given the illusion of You say,
Speaker 6: you had a good phrase there, but I forget the words.
Speaker 5: You have no idea.
Speaker 6: Well, whatever it was, it struck a chord and listen.
Speaker 6: I think this is honestly a bigger problem with institutions too,
Speaker 6: that once things become an institution, once you set up
Speaker 6: a bureaucracy, things sort of take on a life of
Speaker 6: their own.
Speaker 4: And yeah, I mean.
Speaker 6: It's almost a contradiction in terms, right, Like, Yeah, a
Speaker 6: group in Washington that's institutional, that's an outsider group. No,
Speaker 6: by definition you're insiders because look at where you are.
Speaker 1: Well and what were we just looking at before we
Speaker 1: started doing this. Our revolution, which came out of the
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders movement, is now rebranding themselves as pragmatic progressives,
Speaker 1: which is so cringe because that's what Hillary called herself
Speaker 1: back in twenty sixteen that we all rolled our eyes on.
Speaker 1: Are like, what is this. They're curbing their advocacy for
Speaker 1: the Sanders platform of medicare for all green New Deal
Speaker 1: in those Boulder proposals in favor of trying to push
Speaker 1: public option and the Biden more incrementalist positions.
Speaker 5: So it's sad to see.
Speaker 6: Yeah, there's a great MLK quote about how now's not
Speaker 6: the time to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism m H.
Speaker 6: And it just it fits this moment so perfectly because
Speaker 6: the guy who was the quintessential outsider crusader, unapologetic, policy focused,
Speaker 6: rigid and I mean that with a positive, positive connotation,
Speaker 6: not a negative connotation. I mean you see it there
Speaker 6: in that interview perfectly. It's almost like this Jekyl and
Speaker 6: Hide thing where you know he'll the the positive parts
Speaker 6: are when he admits to you like, oh.
Speaker 4: Yeah, okay, he could do more.
Speaker 6: Oh yeah, okay, eliment Tellary and his bolster, Oh yeah, okay,
Speaker 6: we should get rid of philibuster. Oh yeah, he could
Speaker 6: legalize marijuana and each student loan debt. Like that's the
Speaker 6: positive part. But everything he says before that is always
Speaker 6: like what do you expect this guy could do all
Speaker 6: this shit?
Speaker 4: Right? So it's like he can't do it, don't be ridiculous.
Speaker 6: Okayeah, he could do it, And it's like that's the
Speaker 6: tug of war going on inside him. Yeah, And it's
Speaker 6: sad to see because he used to have definitive answers
Speaker 6: to that, to those questions.
Speaker 4: On one side of it, well, and I.
Speaker 5: Do have.
Speaker 1: I do kind of understand where he's coming from because
Speaker 1: he looks at the things that he thinks can get
Speaker 1: into the reconciliation bill and actually pass and sees you know,
Speaker 1: universal pre K, and sees paid leave, and sees the
Speaker 1: child tax credit, and sees two years of free community college,
Speaker 1: and sees significant investments.
Speaker 5: But he's wrong, that's not passing and the CCC.
Speaker 1: So he's you know, really desperately trying to hold that
Speaker 1: thing together, believing that those provisions, believing correctly that those
Speaker 1: provisions would be really significant.
Speaker 4: They would, but that's not passing if they get through.
Speaker 1: And so that's I think where part of the disconnect
Speaker 1: comes in, as he's sort of like preemptively getting credit,
Speaker 1: giving credit to Biden for things that haven't actually happened yet,
Speaker 1: and that you don't see a demonstrated willingness from Joe
Speaker 1: Biden to fight to actually make happen in.
Speaker 6: Order to even get the things that he said there,
Speaker 6: which he was acting like we already got but we didn't.
Speaker 6: In order to even get those Joe Biden needs to
Speaker 6: do the things that we said he should do. Right,
Speaker 6: she is either fire the parliamentarian, or ignore the parliamentarian,
Speaker 6: or come up with you know, you can do reconciliation
Speaker 6: ten times a year instead of two or three times
Speaker 6: a year. Here's another exception to the filibuster. We're gonna
Speaker 6: go back to the talking filibuster. I'm gonna go to
Speaker 6: West Virginia and I'm gonna call out Joe Manchin. I'm
Speaker 6: gonna do a rally there, or I'm gonna call him
Speaker 6: into the office and make them an offer they can
Speaker 6: refuse and do.
Speaker 4: The characterstick approach.
Speaker 6: Yeah, in order to even just get the things that
Speaker 6: Bernie is acting like we already have that needs to
Speaker 6: be done, and the fact that he doesn't see that
Speaker 6: or get that or acknowledge that is astonishing to me.
Speaker 6: How long have you been in Washington, DC? Like you're
Speaker 6: you're giving credit for a bill that hasn't passed and
Speaker 6: that is falling apart right in front of our eyes
Speaker 6: because Houston Cinema just was like, no, I'm not going
Speaker 6: to vote for it. You're already given credit for that,
Speaker 6: and you don't even realize even get just the things
Speaker 6: you said. We need hardball, that's beyond any hardball that
Speaker 6: we've seen since LBJ.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and Bernie Sanders alone can't get it there because
Speaker 1: you need the backing of the Pride Biden, Yes, you do,
Speaker 1: because ultimately you're you're gonna get. You are going to
Speaker 1: get as much of the reconciliation bill as Joe Biden
Speaker 1: is willing to fight for.
Speaker 4: That's right, That's exactly right.
Speaker 6: And by the way, the other crazy thing is that
Speaker 6: he's not really willing on his own to just totally
Speaker 6: call bullshit and talk about the farcical things that Democrats
Speaker 6: have done, like when they pulled the fifteen dollars minimum
Speaker 6: wage out of the last reconciliation bill and they said, God,
Speaker 6: this language drives me crazy. The parliamentarian has ruled where
Speaker 6: the parliamentarian has decreed. I mean, the low level staffer
Speaker 6: whose job it is just to give you advisory opinion
Speaker 6: on precedent.
Speaker 1: I even like giving her because it's easy to sort
Speaker 1: of like demonize her, like she's wrong, but it's really
Speaker 1: it's not her. She's sure she made a decision that
Speaker 1: you know, we disagree with, and Bernie disagrees with, et cetera.
Speaker 1: But the real villains here are the Democrats that are like, yeah,
Speaker 1: we're gonna accept whatever you say as if it's you know,
Speaker 1: the word of God, and we can't possibly because so
Speaker 1: beyond it.
Speaker 6: Because they didn't want the fifteen dollar minimum wage we
Speaker 6: know that at least seven or eight of them didn't
Speaker 6: want it because Bernie forced the vote.
Speaker 1: My understanding is that the big pushback on the fifteen
Speaker 1: dollars minimum.
Speaker 4: Wage is secondary budgetary.
Speaker 1: No is from the senators is the tipped minimum wage.
Speaker 1: That they're okay with the top line, but they are
Speaker 1: uncomfortable with increasing the tipped wage.
Speaker 5: By that much.
Speaker 1: Why are they uncomfortable because of the restaurant bobby, which
Speaker 1: is very influential in Washington and all of these states.
Speaker 4: I buy that that's their excuse.
Speaker 5: Well, no, that's not an excuse.
Speaker 4: I don't know that excuse.
Speaker 1: I don't consider that a good reason that some lobbyists
Speaker 1: convince you.
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 6: But I'm saying even that is they're trying to portray
Speaker 6: themselves looking even better than they are, because I think
Speaker 6: in reality they're also just against a fifteen dollar minimum wage.
Speaker 6: I think that, you know, it's not just the restaurant
Speaker 6: lobby that pays them money. How many giant multinational corporations
Speaker 6: pay them money who pay the minimum wage? A lot
Speaker 6: of them, So they might say, oh, I'm totally for it,
Speaker 6: but just this one little thing, it's my ass cheek.
Speaker 1: They pulled out the like, oh, the small business owner
Speaker 1: in the restaurant and whatever.
Speaker 6: Which, by the way, I've made this point a thousand
Speaker 6: times on my show. Let's let's accept that criticism for
Speaker 6: a second. And by the way, it's a fair criticism.
Speaker 6: There are small businesses out there that might struggle to
Speaker 6: pay that. The answer to that is not to say,
Speaker 6: scrap the whole idea of the fifteen dollar minum wage.
Speaker 6: The answer to that is to come up with a
Speaker 6: subsidy program for small businesses, or come up with a
Speaker 6: tax credit program. But no businesses, but they don't want
Speaker 6: to do fucking exactly. They don't give me that.
Speaker 4: Oh, the small businesses which we care so much about.
Speaker 6: If you cared so much about them, you do fifteen
Speaker 6: dollar minimum wage, and then you'd also set up some
Speaker 6: other program to help offset the burden on those small businesses,
Speaker 6: which they never fucking do.
Speaker 5: Yep, yep.
Speaker 1: Anyway, very interesting speaking to the senator. I really did
Speaker 1: appreciate that he took so much time, and I was
Speaker 1: a very busy day.
Speaker 5: The infrastructure thing.
Speaker 1: Was going on, and I think I was pretty revealing
Speaker 1: to see how he's thinking and how he's sort of
Speaker 1: uncomfortably occupying this new role and just what a departure
Speaker 1: it is from who he's been and where he's been
Speaker 1: for the rest of his career.
Speaker 6: Yeah, you did a great job in the interview. There
Speaker 6: were some moments there where you really were able to
Speaker 6: checkmate him well without breaking a sweat. He didn't even
Speaker 6: realize he was getting checkmated in those moments. And yeah,
Speaker 6: I think the biggest takeaway from this interview, at least
Speaker 6: to me, is that he is living a contradiction right now.
Speaker 6: And on the one hand, he've used his job as
Speaker 6: a cheerleader for his most positive image of Biden. He've
Speaker 6: used Biden as more the campaigning Biden who's a little
Speaker 6: more to the left. He've used his job both as
Speaker 6: a cheerleader for that and a cheerleader for the policies
Speaker 6: it still remain the bill in the negotiation. But he
Speaker 6: also views himself as an outsider who's still crusading for
Speaker 6: the principled original position.
Speaker 1: He wants to be the outsider that's not going to
Speaker 1: rock the boat, and those two things don't make much
Speaker 1: sense together, that's right. Yeah, all right, guys, thank you
Speaker 1: so much for watching. We have so many great interviews
Speaker 1: for you coming up and tell the people how they
Speaker 1: can subscribe.
Speaker 4: Kyle, Yeah, so I do.
Speaker 6: Just go to substack and if you want to see
Speaker 6: the video of all the interviews a day early on Friday,
Speaker 6: pay five dollars a month for that. If you want
Speaker 6: to just sign up on substack for free, you could
Speaker 6: also do that and you get the audio version of
Speaker 6: the show a day later on Saturday.
Speaker 4: Pretty simple.
Speaker 6: And obviously we take zero AD dollars for this show,
Speaker 6: and you have our word we will never take a
Speaker 6: single penny of ad money from anybody ever. So we
Speaker 6: do really appreciate anybody who pays the five dollars a month.
Speaker 6: We know that, you know, people out there, it's tough
Speaker 6: out there, and a lot of people are struggling and
Speaker 6: a lot of people just can't swing it.
Speaker 4: And I understand that. We still love that.
Speaker 5: We make the whole thing also completely free.
Speaker 6: It's why it's in audio form exactly. But if you
Speaker 6: do support us, we greatly appreciate it. And you know,
Speaker 6: we're still trying to get in front of Barry Weiss.
Speaker 6: We can give you guys a tour of behind the
Speaker 6: scenes stuff for all the paying members, but you know
Speaker 6: we haven't.
Speaker 4: I don't think you know. Glenn made an interesting point
Speaker 4: about this.
Speaker 6: He was like, oh, because there's some like yearly update
Speaker 6: thing that happens where you know it, or or since
Speaker 6: we started so much later than her, right, didn't we
Speaker 6: start our show.
Speaker 4: Way later than her?
Speaker 6: I don't know that you He made some point where
Speaker 6: I was like, oh, okay, that makes sense. His point
Speaker 6: was at some point you won't even realize it, and
Speaker 6: it'll show that you leap progerr.
Speaker 4: That was his point.
Speaker 5: Okay. It was nice of him to say.
Speaker 6: I don't know if I buy that, because you said
Speaker 6: we were we were way behind her, even though we
Speaker 6: were just one behind her on the list.
Speaker 4: Yeah, we were.
Speaker 5: Gonna look but okay, all right, we had ground.
Speaker 4: You don't have to check. It's it's point so we
Speaker 4: know when to do the video form.
Speaker 5: Yeah, okay, I'll check, but and we'll get back to you.
Speaker 4: We'll have an update.
Speaker 1: Tune in next week for an update on where we
Speaker 1: are in the Barry Weiss fight.
Speaker 6: Yes, but still shameful that we're not in front of
Speaker 6: her yet. We don't advocate for killing Palestinian babies, so
Speaker 6: support us on that.
Speaker 1: All Yeah, there you go, there you go, all right, guys,
Speaker 1: thanks for watching and enjoy the week.
Speaker 5: We'll see you next week.