Here & Now

Here and Now for Oct. 7, 2016

Announcer:

The following program is part of our Here and Now 2016 Wisconsin Vote election coverage. Funding for “Here and Now” is provided in part by Friends of Wisconsin Public Television.

Frederica Freyberg:

I’m Frederica Freyberg. Tonight, a special edition of Here and Now. Extended interviews with the Republican and Democrat running for U.S. Senate, Ron Johnson and Russ Feingold. My conversations with the candidates covered a wide range of issues, from health care to national security. We reached out to these candidates for interviews anytime and anywhere. That’s why the settings look different. We caught up with Senator Feingold in his backyard. Senator Johnson joined us on-camera in our studios. We’ve edited the interviews by topic with the goal to make it easier to compare and contrast the candidate’s positions, which you will hear back-to-back. Starting with, “Why you?” We want to ask you first, why you think voters should return you to the Senate?

Ron Johnson:

I’ve not only listened, I’ve acted. And I’ve actually gotten real results. Very rare in my first term, I’m chairman of a full standing committee of the Senate. Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. And using a business person’s approach. Compare that to Senator Feingold, who– let’s face it– is a career politician. 34 years in politics. Has very little to show for it. I mean he has accomplished very little. He had one high profile failure, campaign finance reform. So much of that’s been ruled unconstitutional. So I think it’s just that contrast. Do Wisconsinites want a career politician that really didn’t deliver in 34 years? Or somebody like me, a citizen legislator with a manufacturing, private sector background, in a very short period of time has figured out a way to get real results even in divided government.

Frederica Freyberg:

Why do you think you can beat the incumbent Senator?

Russ Feingold:

Well, it’s not really about whether you can beat the incumbent Senator. What it’s about is how the people of the state want to be represented. And what I’ve done is taken the time to go out, last year and this year, and visit all 72 counties both years. And I have a pretty clear sense that middle income and working families feel like they’re not really getting a fair deal in terms of the hard work they do and being able to pay their bills. So the question for people will be on November 8th, who do you think is gonna be more likely to do something about that. I’m very confident that people will have confidence in the fact that I will fight to raise the minimum wage, that I will fight for paid family leave, and to do something about the cost of prescription drugs and, especially, the cost of higher and education and student loans. Senator Johnson has a frankly very poor record on those issues. And he votes almost every time with the corporations and the billionaires and the multimillionaires… people like himself so people get to decide and they’ll make the decision about who wins.

Frederica Freyberg:

On jobs and the economy, all of your proposals, and you have many, including closing special interest loopholes, rebuilding infrastructure and raising the minimum wage, of all those which plans in your mind go the furthest to increasing jobs and boosting the economy?

Russ Feingold:

What we call our Badger Innovation Plan says, Look, we gotta do something. And this is what people have told me about infrastructure. We have the fourth worst roads in the country, according to some people. Fourteen percent of the bridges are deficient. A million people in this state don’t have access to adequate high speed internet. And this is very hard on businesses as well as students. So these are some things that have to change. We have to make that internet coverage basically like the utility. So everybody has it.

Frederica Freyberg:

You want to lower taxes and government regulations to boost jobs and the economy and cut federal spending. On the first one, for whom would you lower taxes?

Ron Johnson:

Well first of all what I want is I want is a competitive tax system. What we should do is scrap the entire tax system. Right now 70 some thousand pages costs hundreds of billions of dollars to comply with. So the tax system I would envision would be elegantly simple. Based on two principles. Raise the revenue you need. And do no economic harm. And, Frederica, we have to reduce regulatory burden. Let’s stop stagnating wages because of over-regulation and then it also results in higher prices. The cost of a water heater is increased by $450 per water heater because of federal regulation. So those are self-inflicted wounds on economic growth which is the number one component of the solution is economic growth.

Frederica Freyberg:

On trade, the politics of trade I don’t have to tell you are increasingly complicated. Donald Trump opposes trade deals like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but so does your opponent. Chambers of Commerce support it, as does President Obama. What is your position on this TPP?

Ron Johnson:

We need to keep overseas markets available for agriculture products in Wisconsin, as well as our manufacturing projects. In Wisconsin, our exports equal our imports so it’s extremely important we don’t start engaging in trade wars. And so, we definitely need to engage in trade around the world, but it has to be fair. But again, I do not want to engage in protectionism. We have to keep those overseas markets open for our customers. And I’ll just keep looking at these trade deals until, you know, up until the point it’s actually presented on the floor of the Senate for a vote.

Russ Feingold:

We don’t want to send our jobs overseas with trade deals that are bad, such as the TPP. I opposed the TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, just like I opposed NAFTA. I’ve done this against democratic presidents like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, as well as republicans. So I'm not a partisan on this issue. I’m independent. And to me, Wisconsin jobs come first. We’ve lost 75,000 Wisconsin manufacturing jobs from these trade deals and Senator Johnson is hiding on this. You know, he’s voted for all these trade deals and voted for Fast Track. And all of a sudden, he’s saying, “Well, it’s complicated so I’m not going to tell you how I’m going to vote until after the election.” I think the people of this state deserve to know who is with the working families of this state. So it’s another, it’s another clear example of how we’re different.

Frederica Freyberg:

On social security, you’ve said that you want to expand it. How and why?

Russ Feingold:

Since everybody gets Social Security, even if you’re very wealthy, you’re still eligible for Social Security and I’m okay with that. Otherwise I worry that somehow people will see it as kind of a welfare program or attack it that way. On the other hand, people who are very well-to-do and make a lot of money could pay more on the FICA tax and the FICA fee. Right now it cuts off at $118,000. Why shouldn’t LeBron James, who is having a very good year, both athletically and financially, why shouldn’t he pay more into this system? Maybe make it what members of Congress make. That would do a great deal to make the program solvent for the future and what I think it would do is help us avoid things like the cost of living increase not being given last year. So that’s one way we can enhance the program.

Frederica Freyberg:

On Social Security, you’ve described it as a Ponzi scheme and said that we need to address our deficits in Social Security and Medicare. How?

Ron Johnson:

The best way to solve that deficit in Social Security is economic growth. If, right now, we’re growing about 2%. Over the last 100 years, the American economy has grown about 3.5%. So we’re way underperforming what the potential of our economy is. If we go from 2% to 3% growth, that’s another $14 trillion of economic activity over the 10-year period. 2% to 4% is $29 trillion. Even with the meager economic growth we’ve had since 2009, revenue to the federal government has increase by $1.1 trillion. There’s the solution to solve the deficit problem of Social Security. Economic growth, and again, you have to reduce the regulatory burden. You have to reduce, the– you have to have a competitive tax system. You’ve got to start celebrating and incentivizing success rather than demonizing and demagoguing against it.

Russ Feingold:

I want to make sure Social Security is kept as a public program. You know, that idea was basically invented up on Bascom Hill. My alma mater here. That’s where Franklin Roosevelt got the idea. So the first thing is to assure the American people that we’re not going to try to privatize Social Security. Senator Johnson calls it a Ponzi scheme, but guess what? It’s been paying out for many decades. And he said, “It’s a shame that it wasn't privatized,” you know, a few years ago when George Bush was trying to do that.

Frederica Freyberg:

Would you privatize Social Security?

Ron Johnson:

No. I’ve never said that. The claims that the, you know Senator Feingold says I’ve had, are false. They’re just simply not true. What I did make a comment, it– it was a shame that when President Bush was trying to save Social Security, back in– during his administration, that he didn’t have some bipartisan support for actually trying to save Social Security back then. He never, he never proposed privatizing Social Security. I know he was talking about some, you know, certain private accounts for young people for a certain amount of Social Security, but he never proposed privatization.

Frederica Freyberg:

On health care, we know you really don’t like the Affordable–

Ron Johnson:

I really don’t.

Frederica Freyberg:

…Care Act.

Ron Johnson:

And I’ll tell you what. Wisconsinites don’t like it either. The ones that have been really harmed by the, let’s face it, the massive consumer fraud that Obamacare was.

Frederica Freyberg:

However, it is the law of the land. What now?

Ron Johnson:

First of all, let’s honestly talk about what the promises made under Obamacare were, and how miserably they’ve failed to be kept. President Obama– and let’s face it, Senator Feingold– in an Op-Ed, said that if you like your health care plan, you’d be able to keep it. If you like your doctor, you’d be able to keep it.

President Obama says, as a candidate, if you pass this health care plan, families will pay up to $2,500 less for health care. Well, none of those things came true. Far from it. Let’s eliminate the individual mandate. Let’s give people the freedom to choose whether or not they’re going to buy insurance, first and foremost. Secondly, let’s eliminate and do away with the national definition of health insurance. Let's turn that back to state regulation. Let states determine what kind of insurance policies can be purchased in their state, and then, let consumers purchase across state lines. Then secondly, let’s eliminate the Cadillac tax.

Frederica Freyberg:

How would you describe the ACA as it’s developed since its passage?

Russ Feingold:

Unlike Senator Johnson, I didn’t take a blind view that there’s no possibility something good would come out of this. The fact is a great deal of good has come out of it. And it would be incredibly foolish to repeal Obamacare as he’s suggesting. Twenty million people are now covered who were not covered before. Now that’s great for them, but it’s also great for the rest of us because those individuals are not coming in as charity care to the hospitals in a much sicker way. In a much more expensive way. People can now make sure they can on insurance without being cut off for pre-existing condition. You have a child who is in college and even a little bit beyond. They can stay on their parents insurance til they’re beyond 26 years old. If you have a mental health issue in your family, there’s now mental health coverage. So these are all very positive things. Some of the cost increases in the last few years were much less than were expected. That happened in the early years. Some of the increases now may be somewhat higher so we need to all work together to make it even more affordable. But the reality is it’s moving in the right direction and Senator Johnson’s just living in the past.

Frederica Freyberg:

On women’s health, how would you compare your position on abortion, birth control, and funding of Planned Parenthood?

Russ Feingold:

The difference is night and day. I am a strong supporter of Planned Parenthood, of women’s health and women’s reproductive rights and always have been. He is the opposite. He actually voted repeatedly to defund Planned Parenthood. He actually said, “It was fun.” That’s an actual quote from him that it was fun to try to defund Planned Parenthood. And it’s because he doesn’t know the state. He doesn’t get around. He doesn’t realize that 66,000 women a year benefit in their health coverage from Planned Parenthood. Cancer checks, birth control, as well as other aspects of Planned Parenthood are crucial. And yes, I do believe that this is a decision that should be up to a woman. He has done everything he can to try to take a hard line against the rights of the people of this state, the women of this state and the women of this country. And, yes, it’s a clear difference between us. There can be no doubt.

Frederica Freyberg:

On women’s health, you have a 100% rating from National Right to Life. Your opponent has a 0% rating. Compare your position on abortion, birth control and funding of Planned Parenthood with his?

Ron Johnson:

I support birth control. That’s a good way of family planning. No doubt about it. I happen to believe life begins at conception. But I also believe in the exceptions. I’m not going to impose that. So from my standpoint, it’s just a very personal, personal choice. I certainly didn’t run for office on the social issues. I’m really trying to concentrate on the economic issues. Trying to create greater opportunity but you run for an office like this, you have to tell people what you believe.

Frederica Freyberg:

What about funding for Planned Parenthood?

Ron Johnson:

I certainly agree with the Hyde Amendment that no American taxpayer’s money should go toward things like abortion that they find themselves morally wrong. So there’s– certainly want to fund women’s health issues, women’s health clinics, but we just should not be funding abortions. There’s no reason for doing that.

Frederica Freyberg:

On national security, how does the U.S. stay safe in the face of ISIS?

Ron Johnson:

First we have to strengthen our economy. You know I agree with Admiral Mike Mullen where he said the greatest threat to our national security is our debt and deficit. We gotta bring the deficit down so we can strengthen our economy. So we can have the resources to strengthen our military. And then we actually have to show leadership. Because we have allowed ISIS to continue to exist, they’ve become– they’ve evolved. They’ve metastasized. They’re a growing threat. And you don’t have to just believe me. Listen to CIA Director Brennan who said all of our efforts over the last two years. And Nick Rasmussen basically confirmed this in our hearing. He said all of our efforts have not reduced their terrorist capability and their global reach. They remain a formidable, resilient, and largely cohesive enemy. That’s pretty sad after two years of effort.

Russ Feingold:

I have offered a very specific plan to do something about these monsters who have to be stopped. I have advocated that we knock off the leaders of these organizations which there are some aspects of it in place but it has to be intensified. We’re able to apparently get the number two guy over there recently. And one of the ways it can be intensified is by using more human intelligence. That means more spies. We need more people thru our intelligence agencies able to infiltrate those areas to find these people and destroy them. We also have to make it so they can’t function. They’re really trying to have a caliphate there. They’re trying to have a state. They’re trying to have a country. And they’ve lost a lot of ground. But some of the ways that they are able to proceed we can stop. Oil production and oil transport. We are able with more aggressive activity to destroy their ability to transport and produce oil. We can do something to make sure they don’t get financial transactions. You know, our Department of Treasury has a fairly sophisticated ability to go after some of this. When I was on the Intelligence Committee for five years, I worked with them closely on this kind of thing.

Frederica Freyberg:

On immigration, what should U.S. policy be on undocumented immigrants?

Russ Feingold:

Well, we should have a national comprehensive plan to deal with the issue the approximately 11 million people who are undocumented. And this is again a clear area of contrast. I have always supported bipartisan reform that involves giving people a path to citizenship, but they might have to pay a penalty and they get some kind of legal status.

Ron Johnson:

First we have to secure the border. We’ve got to show the American public that, once and for all, we’re committed to securing our border for a host of reasons. Public safety. The drug wars, for example. Once we secure our border, I think we need to take a look at those individuals. Have them come forward. Admit they did something wrong. I think my guess is employers would probably pay some kind of fine. Can’t have amnesty. You can’t condone that type of action. But I think once we secure that border, I think we can treat those individuals with real humanity. But we also need to deport criminals. People just feeding off our welfare system.

Frederica Freyberg:

On education, PolitiFact rated as “mostly true” that you’re opposed to all government-assisted student loans. What if a student wants to go to college, but can’t afford?

Ron Johnson:

First of all PolitiFact is completely wrong. It’s just simply false. I’m the guy that really pushed Lamar Alexander to lift the hold so we could extend Perkins loans for two years. So listen, I want every American who wants a four-year degree to have the opportunity to get one. But I’m also concerned and here’s the problem we have to address, is the explosion in costs of higher education. Costs of college have increased at two and a half times the rate of inflation. Why? The federal reserve bank in New York in a study points to the reason. The federal government pouring money into it in the form of student loans. And so we have to understand when the federal government does that, it has very negative, unintended consequences. So we have to really address the unaffordability of college so that college is more accessible. But again, it’s completely false that I oppose student loans. I also supported the [unintelligible] stabilization bill that Senator Alexander and Colburn and Burke worked on a bipartisan basis. So again those, those claims are completely false.

Frederica Freyberg:

On education, student college debt is obviously a big issue. How to address it in your mind, and prevent it?

Russ Feingold:

When I was younger and when Senator Johnson was younger and we went to college, you didn’t have to be afraid of starting off life with that kind of debt. This is a denial of the American dream. And in my view, the first thing to do which I would try to do if I was elected, is support Senator Elizabeth Warren’s bill that would allow people to negotiate a lower interest rate on their student loan like you can on your mortgage. Senator Johnson voted against that bill. I would support it. We also have to make sure that if the government’s making any money off of these loans which they do sometimes, that money should be put back into reducing the cost of student loans.

Frederica Freyberg:

On the national debt, how important is it to stop its growth and how do you do that?

Russ Feingold:

I had experience in the senate of working on a bipartisan basis of identifying exactly what it is that we think on a bipartisan basis we can cut or get rid of in terms of loop holes and that’s why I created what I call my Federal Fiscal Fitness Plan. You won’t see a plan like that from Senator Johnson ’cause that means taking a tough stand. It means you are actually going to introduce a bill that says the federal government should negotiate lower drug prices. That could save the federal government $123 billion. That means standing up to the oil and gas companies who right now have a $40 billion over 10 years oil and depletion allowance. It basically had to do with the dangers of oil drilling back in 1912 and 1920. So there are all kinds of things like this and I’ve offered a specific plan with some 30 provisions that I'm ready to act on immediately. You know, it's about rolling up your sleeves.

Frederica Freyberg:

What’s the best way to get at the national debt?

Ron Johnson:

Economic growth. Again I just laid it out there. Even with the meager economic growth we’ve had, somewhere around 2%, we’ve increased revenue to the federal government by $1.1 trillion dollars since the trough of 2009. We go up to 3%, we go up to 4%, that’s a tremendous amount of added economic activity that will be taxed. Revenue would flow into the federal government. So there’s the most painless, the best way of actually addressing the debt and deficit.

Frederica Freyberg:

On gun control, cities like Milwaukee as you know struggle with gun crime and violence. What’s your position on stricter laws on guns?

Ron Johnson:

We have all kinds of gun control laws. Take a look at the city of Chicago. Some of the strongest gun control laws and look at the level of murders in the city. That’s not the solution. We should enforce the laws we have. I mean the statistics on actually enforcing for example violations of background check are… it’s silly. A couple hundred when you got 70,000 violations. Something like that. So why don’t we enforce the laws that are on our books. Then why don’t we work in a bipartisan fashion. I supported Senator Grassley’s bill that would have put greater penalties and enforce straw purchases. Would have put more resources toward actual enforcement of laws. So, but we couldn’t pass those because, I hate to say it, Democrats play politics with this. They want it as an issue rather than actually looking for a solution. I’m all about solutions. I’m all about reaching to the other side. Actually compromising, as opposed to being very doctrinaire and demanding, you know, basically letting perfect be the enemy of the good.

Frederica Freyberg:

What is your position on stricter laws on guns?

Russ Feingold:

I follow the common sense of the people of Wisconsin. I believe in the right to bear arms. I always have.

That people have a right to have weapons for purposes of hunting and self-defense and legitimate purposes. I grow up in Janesville. There was never any question in my mind about that. But all you have to do is talk to people in Wisconsin and they’ll tell you that doesn’t mean they don’t think there shouldn’t be background checks on guns shows and the Internet. Overwhelmingly, they do. But Senator Johnson only votes with the NRA on this. People believe there should be waiting periods to get a gun. People believe you don’t really need these super, juiced up ammunition clips. That’s what Wisconsin people feel. So I think my positions reflect what most people in Wisconsin– in fact the vast majority of what Wisconsin people– think, which is, it’s common sense. It’s not anti-gun. It’s not pro-gun. It’s let’s make sure we don’t have crazy policies where people that have serious problems can get weapons. Sadly, Senator Johnson doesn’t vote with Wisconsin. He will only do what the NRA tells him to do. National Rifle Association calls the shots. For me, the people of Wisconsin calls the shots.

Frederica Freyberg:

On campaign finance, PolitiFact rated as “true” that you broke your 1992 promise to always get the majority of funding from Wisconsin residents. How do you respond to that?

Russ Feingold:

Well it shows no recognition of the fact that the rule’s completely changed with the Citizens United decision. In 1992 it was reasonable for me to assume that the law would continue to be that corporations and millionaires and other kinds of people that have supported Senator Johnson wouldn’t be able to have secret contributions supporting them. So I certainly took the view that my promise, whenever I made it, was for 6 years. And at that time I would look at what the situation was. And for many years it was possible to do that. But now I don’t see the reason to allow unlimited corporate contributions and super PACs. Senator Johnson, most of his ads have been from out of state super PACs and special interests. My campaign is a far more Wisconsin-based campaign. I have over 40,000 contributions from Wisconsinites. Many, many more times than he does. Ninety-five percent of the contributions for my campaign are $100 or less. The average contribution overall is $50. Now I know it’s not Bernie, but it’s pretty good. And so, I have a far more Wisconsin-based campaign than he does. So for him to complain about this shows that he doesn’t really know how to defend the fact that his campaign is really a product of the billionaire corporate benefits of Citizens United, and he’s not very Wisconsin about it.

Ron Johnson:

The hypocrisy and phoniness of Senator Feingold on this issue is just jaw-dropping. A recent report came out that you know his Progressives United, which, let’s face it, that was shadow campaign. He actually tried to outlaw political action committees, which was what Progressives United was back in 1995. You know outlaw them in terms of being involved in elections. And yet it’s almost the first thing he did when he left office. Set up two PACs. Raised about $10 million. Does that figure ring a bell? $10 million. Spent about 5% to 10%– 5% to 7% on other candidates. The rest he spent on himself and on his shadow campaign. And now, the reports are he actually made a solicitation during you know the Act 10, in the election following Act 10. And said, “Donate to Progressives United and we will back every Democrat, member, or somebodycandidate running for state assembly, state senate.” Didn’t back any of them. Didn’t donate to any of them. So he’s basically fraudulent claim to his own supporters. So I think there’s the scandal. And I think again him leveling false charges against me is just a way to distract from his own hypocrisy and phoniness on campaign finance.

Frederica Freyberg:

We have a final question, and that is asking you to choose two words. Two words to describe each of the Presidential candidates starting with Donald Trump.

Ron Johnson:

Business person. There’s two words.

Frederica Freyberg:

Okay. Hillary Clinton.

Ron Johnson:

Johnson: Disqualified for office.

Frederica Freyberg:

Okay. Ron Johnson, thanks very much.

Ron Johnson:

Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:

One last thing, could you choose two words to describe each of the presidential candidates?

Russ Feingold:

[laughs] Well with Hillary Clinton I would say extremely competent. And… talking about Mr. Trump here, deeply troubling.

Frederica Freyberg:

Russ Feingold. Thanks very much.

Russ Feingold:

Thank you.

Frederica Freyberg:

Republican incumbent candidate for U.S. Senate Ron Johnson and Democrat Russ Feingold. On the issues. Watch the entire, uncut interviews with the main party candidates, as well as with Libertarian Phil Anderson, at WisconsinVote.org. Next week, Feingold and Johnson hit the debate stage in Green Bay in an event produced by the Wisconsin Broadcasters Association. Tune in for that here on WPT at 7:00, followed by live debate analysis on “Here and Now” at 8:00 p.m. That’s next Friday night, October 14. I’m Frederica Freyberg. Have a great weekend.