- We head to Washington now, where Congress hopes to get
some traction on legislature, including what to
do on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program.
We caught up with Republican
U.S. Representative Mike Gallagher late in the week.
First I want to say thanks very much for joining us.
- Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.
- So either President Trump made an agreement with Democrats
over DACA to protect dreamers from deportation or he didn't.
But what is your position on what should happen with DACA,
which the president rescinded last week?
- Well, to your point, I think there's been conflicting stories
about whether there's an agreement,
whether there isn't an agreement.
Speaker Ryan, as I was talking in here,
was on TV suggesting there isn't yet an agreement.
I think the president was right to give Congress six months
in order to step up and take action.
And Congress needs to do its job.
And I think if we are simultaneously willing
to have a discussion about border security,
then we can begin a debate.
But we have to secure the border first and foremost.
It's not secure.
I even worked at the drug enforcement agency for a year
doing counter narcotics work.
I can tell you that firsthand.
So if we're going to be having the DACA discussion,
we need to have the border security discussion
at the same time.
- Do you favor a fix that might include a pathway to citizenship
for the 7600 recipients of DACA in Wisconsin?
- I'm certainly sympathetic to the dreamers who came here
through no fault of their own.
There's something out there now called the Enlist Act
that would allow for citizenship
for those who stepped up and served in our military.
I think there's proposals like that that should be considered.
But again if we don't secure the border first and foremost
and then do a Band-Aid fix
by creating a pathway to citizenship for the dreamers,
then we'll actually have made the problem worse
'cause you've incentivized the people to break the law.
That's really the problem with the system overall.
We have a fundamentally broken immigration system that punishes
people trying to do it the right way.
And helps people that are trying to break our laws.
So we have to have respect for the rule of law in this country.
I understand we're a nation of immigrants.
But we have to find a way
to restore some semblance of respect for the rule of law
and fix the immigration system more broadly.
Because there may be times when we want to have more people come
into this country.
And right now the immigration system makes us economically
uncompetitive and makes it a farce out of the law.
- Let me just jump in on this
before we move onto another matter.
Would you want to protect dreamers from deportation?
- Well, I think I support
the president's desire to find some fix.
There's about four proposals that are out there right now
that I'm reviewing.
My hope is that if the other side is willing to come to
the table on border security, then we can have a conversation.
And I'm certain that everyone wants to see
this problem resolved in a humane and just way.
- All right. On this other matter.
It's a little confusing
and had to do with the president siding with Democratic leaders
for a short-term debt limit extension,
tying it to Hurricane Harvey relief.
And you voted no on this measure.
Why?
- I voted yes for help for the victims of Hurricane Harvey
when it came up earlier in the week,
when it was a stand-alone bill.
It should be a stand-alone bill.
And then what the Senate did is attach it
to a continuing resolution and a debt ceiling increase.
So a debt ceiling increase absent meaningful reform
when it comes to driving up our debt
strikes me as entirely irresponsible.
We need to fix that broken process.
Continuing resolutions
are the epitome of why Washington is broken.
Since 2010 we spent about 1,000 days
of operating under a continuing resolution.
And as Secretary Mattis--
Secretary of Defense Mattis confirmed in a letter
to Senator McCain and Chairman Mac Thornberry this week,
continuing resolutions
are devastating for the U.S. military.
It's bad process. It's bad policy.
It doesn't help us fund the programs we need to fund.
It actually drives up costs.
And it's a perfect example of how and why
Washington D.C. is broken.
We have to find a way to restore regular order
and govern as we should be governing.
- Let me ask what you think
of the president of your party
reaching across the aisle in these kinds of ways
making deals with the Democrats?
- I think you should always be having a conversation.
I'm part a problem solvers caucus.
I'm a conservative.
I think you can be looking for principled compromise without
compromising your principles.
As a younger member of Congress, as one of three millennials in
Congress, I think it's apparent politics as usual isn't working.
I think there's a lot of appetite
for new ideas and new solutions.
What struck me for far early in my first term is how hard it is
to even carve out a space to have a civil conversation
about some of the more difficult issues,
like health care or tax reform,
let alone the drivers of our debt.
So I think carving out a space where people from different
ideological perspectives can come together
and have an honest debate is always a good thing.
You might just learn something from that process.
- You have expressed yourself against the president
on other occasions.
Naming in the wake of his suggesting quote many sides were
to blame in the Charlottesville white supremacists violence.
You said, "The president needs to be crystal clear
"that hatred has no place in our society
but he is currently failing at it."
He's now poised to sign a Congressional resolution
condemning the Charlottesville violence and white supremacy.
Do you think that will pull him into a passing grade
on this issue in your mind?
- Well I think it's a step in the right direction.
Obviously I wish the White House would have been
clearer in condemning the neo-Nazis that we saw
and the racism, bigotry, and intolerance.
But this is a step in the right direction.
I think everyone in public office has a duty to make it
crystal clear that such hatred is not only unacceptable,
it's anti-American.
It's antithesis to our founding creed as a nation.
I'm happy that he's going to sign this resolution.
I know a lot of people of my party were upset or are upset
if I ever disagree with the president
but I don't work for the president.
I don't work for any party leader
or even a political party.
I represent 730,000 people in northeast Wisconsin.
I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution.
That's where my loyalty lies.
I'm just going to be honest about how I feel
about each issue as it comes up.
- I know the tax plan involving cutting the corporate rates,
simplifying tax brackets and eliminating the estate tax
and the alternative minimum tax is in the work.
President Trump insists these would not be tax cuts
for the rich, but what if the tax cuts add to the deficit?
- Well there's an argument that with tax cuts you could see
an uptick in economic growth.
And certainly it's my belief that if you allow people to keep
more of what they earn, they will be able to make better
decisions about how to spend that money rather
than having bureaucrats in Washington D.C. make decisions
about how to spend that money.
I think everyone understands
the importance of getting tax reform done.
I think done the right way.
If we keep it simple and transparent
and eliminate all these loopholes and deductions
that allow special interests and lobbyists to profit
at the expense of average hard working Wisconsin families.
I think we will see an uptick in economic activity.
I think we'll see a dramatic uptick in growth.
That will increase the revenue that
the government is able to collect.
So I'm hopeful that we will move forward on tax reform.
I talked to -- it's not just big companies.
It's every small business in northeast Wisconsin
that's struggling to survive every single day.
We need to think about them
when we think about simplifying the tax code.
And think about families.
They want to keep more of what they earn
and make those decisions in a prudential way.
- I need to leave it there.
Representative Mike Gallagher, thanks very much for joining us.
- Thanks for having me. Appreciate it.
- We spoke with Congressman Gallagher earlier.
On the other side of the aisle,
U.S. Representative Gwen Moore of Milwaukee
with her take on the issues.
Thanks very much for being here.
- Always great to be with you.
- Earlier this month as you know,
President Trump rescinded the DACA program.
Now it looks like he may be working with Democrats to
protect dreamers from deportation in return for what
he calls tough border security.
What is your reaction, though, to the president
and his words and deeds on DACA?
- Well, Frederica, I can tell you
that DACA really makes sense.
It makes sense
from a humanitarian and moral standpoint.
But it also makes sense from an economic perspective.
We've invested in these kids.
800,000 of them.
Most of them have been educated
through our public school system.
They've gone on to college.
They've served in the military.
So apparently someone has gotten through to him through
this little window to say that he'll at least support
this legislatively.
It remains to be seen whether or not the Republican leadership,
Paul Ryan and McConnell, actually put this legislation
on the floor.
If they put it on the floor of the house,
I can guarantee you it would pass.
- Now the dems apparently thought he agreed on a path
to citizenship.
He know says that's not the case.
I'm a little unclear what his position is at this moment.
But what is your position on that pathway to citizenship?
- I think a pathway to citizenship
is absolutely necessary.
You know, there would be absolutely no point
in breaking up families.
Again, I think the security of the United States and the
economic security of the United States is really at stake.
And so hopefully this quote unquote deal will hold.
When you're dealing with Donald Trump, you just--
it's really like trying to grab hold of a bowl of jello.
- Earlier this summer you called for the impeachment
of Donald Trump over his response
to the white supremacist violence in Charlottesville.
But now he has signed
this Congressional resolution denouncing white supremacy.
Are you still calling for his impeachment?
- You know, by any means necessary he needs to go.
I think that he is mentally unstable.
I do think, I agree with Dr. Alvin Poussaint
the renowned Harvard University scholar and psychiatrist
that says racism is a mental illness.
And the extent to which Donald Trump has doubled down,
tripled down, quadrupled down as recently as yesterday to support
these white supremacists means that it is really part of a--
an indelible part of his character.
And I don't think he's fit.
One reason to represent all people in the United States.
I think that he is, you know,
you know, Charlottesville is just one issue.
And when you look at the situation in North Korea
and his saber-rattling there, his support of Vladimir Putin,
who is trying to destroy all of our democratic institutions,
interfere in our elections, discredit the mainstream media,
I think he is a dangerous person.
And so I support impeachment.
I support censorship and I certainly support removing him
through the 25th Amendment of the Constitution.
I don't think that we can bear four years of Donald Trump.
- Congressional Republicans
are now working on a tax cut package.
The president says it is not a tax cut for the rich.
What do you make of their tax changes and whether simplifying
the code, for example, would help your constituents?
- Well, let me tell you.
We are long due for tax reform.
I think everybody would agree we need to do that.
But it all depends on what your definition of tax reform is.
And tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans
is certainly not tax reform.
We've spent 30 years having every corporate interest
march up to Washington D.C. and get their special interests
sewn into our tax code, so we now have
a very asymmetric tax code with various incentives.
And it really is not helping
the middle class or the poor at all.
Certainly this is Paul Ryan's tax reform plan.
And I've been on the budget committee with Paul Ryan
when he was the budget committee chair.
So I know very, very well that his idea of tax reform,
you know, involves taxes, corporate taxes,
providing tax breaks to the wealthy.
Right now one of the reasons the Republicans were so serious
about so-called health care reform is because they wanted to
take almost a trillion dollars out of health care
so they could use it for tax cuts.
So if that's the kind of tax reform, I call tax deform,
Frederica, that they want to do, I'm not on board with that.
But certainly -- go on, Frederica.
- Here at home the Foxconn incentive package
is on its way to the governor, having passed the legislature.
Have you in favor of that Foxconn deal?
- Well, Frederica, I'm going to have to admit that I didn't take
a deep dive into all of the details.
But from what I can gather, it has some very perverse items.
It seems like we want to socialize the cost
and privatize the profits, if you ask me.
There's no guarantee
that all these jobs are going to be created.
But it's going to cost a lot -- taxpayers are going to have to
pay a great deal for this quote unquote deal.
Foxconn doesn't have a great reputation in terms of other
things that they've done, and so this is very, very frightening.
- What about the-- with just about 30 seconds left,
what about the appeal of certain number of jobs, up to 13,000,
according to state officials?
- Sure wish he had done this with Talgo.
We needed those jobs in Milwaukee.
It was a much better deal than Foxconn is.
I think this is all political to drive Donald Trump's agenda.
Again I think it's a corporatist package.
I hope to be wrong, but I don't think it's going to provide
the yield that we expect.
- All right. We need to leave it there.
U.S. Representative Gwendolynne Moore out of Washington.
Thanks for joining us.
- Thank you. Be well, Frederica.
- Thank you.