The panel on Fox News Sunday discussed the Massachusetts Senate race and health care today. Here's the full transcript:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARTHA COAKLEY: We never take elections for granted, and we're not paying attention to the polls.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT BROWN: ... the people around the country want somebody down there who's going to be an independent voter and thinker and bring some common sense back to Washington, then they -- I need their help.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUME: That's just a brief sample of the candidates' moods in what's turned out to be a Senate race of considerable consequence, that one in Massachusetts.
It's time now for the Sunday group of Fox News contributors -- Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard, Nina Easton of Fortune Magazine, syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer, and Juan Williams of National Public Radio.
Well, if you had any doubt about that -- whether that Senate race is close, or tight, or in an unexpected posture, let's take a look at a couple of polls that are recent here that will give you a sense of that. We should have -- be able to put it up on the screen.
Well, there you see -- in two out of the three there, you see Brown is up a few points. The latest Rasmussen poll has Martha Coakley, the Democrat, up by a couple. So as everybody is saying, it's pretty close.
And if you don't think the Democrats are worried about this race, get a load of this ad -- the flyer that was distributed by Democrats against Scott Brown, seven -- "1,736 women were raped in Massachusetts in 2008. Scott Brown wants hospitals to turn them all away."
This the result, apparently, of a measure that Scott Brown backed in that state which would have allowed conscientious objectors, if you will, who work in hospitals not to participate in abortions. It certainly doesn't seem to add up to backing up the charge that was made there.
So, Bill Kristol, where, in your judgment, watching this from a distance but with great attention, does this race stand?
KRISTOL: I mean, it's worth just commenting how extraordinary it is. The Suffolk Poll, which is 50-46 Brown right now, very recent poll -- and that's consistent with internal tracking polls from both campaigns, I believe -- a slight Brown edge.
That poll -- two months ago they did a poll just before the primary. They matched up Brown and Coakley, who were the front runners in each party. Coakley was ahead by 30 points. So this race has moved 30 points in two months. In two months.
Now, that tells you something, I think, about what the country's judgment -- and the voters of -- Brown's run a good campaign. Coakley's run a poor campaign. But the voters of Massachusetts are well aware that this is a national referendum on the health care bill and on Obama's general big government liberal program, and they don't like it. And that's Massachusetts.
And on this flyer -- I mean, that is the face of desperation in a campaign. In Massachusetts, the attorney general running -- 73 percent of the vote in 2006. At the end of -- the Massachusetts Democratic Party sends out a flyer with, really, a pretty despicable lie about Scott Brown, who voted for a conscience clause for day-after -- the morning-after pill for people who came to emergency rooms.
That clause required the emergency room to find someone else to provide the medication or pay for the woman to go elsewhere to get the medication. He then voted for the bill -- the amendment lost. He voted for final passage of the bill, which requires emergency rooms to treat women. And this is denying 1,700 rape victims treatment?
I mean, it's really an ugly case of desperation by the Massachusetts Democratic Party. I can't believe it's going to work. And will President Obama distance himself from it today when he's up there campaigning for Martha Coakley?
HUME: Nina?
EASTON: Well, the race is tight. In fact, Coakley's internal polls show her down -- within the margin of error, but a couple points down.
And I think what happens historically in these kinds of races where it's a lower turnout, when the momentum is breaking in a certain direction -- in this case, the momentum and the energy is all with the Republican -- that that tends to carry the day on election day.
So I think yes, they're nervous. They're very tight. I would say two things. One, I agree with Bill. I do think this is a referendum on the health care bill, because 60 percent of Massachusetts voters think the bill is too expensive. Fifty-one percent think that -- they oppose it. And the other thing is that Massachusetts, this liberal Massachusetts -- the dirty little secret about that state is that they do not have a history of electing women to national office.
We now have Niki Tsongas, the widow of Senator Paul Tsongas, in the congressional delegation for Massachusetts. Before she -- and that was a recent election. Before that, 25 years before they had elected a woman to Congress, 35 years before they had elected a woman Democrat.
And then we have Coakley saying on a radio show -- she said that Red Sox great Curt Schilling was a Yankees fan, which doesn't help her on that score. So I think that's something else that is feeding into this election.
KRAUTHAMMER: Well, if we're going to talk about history, this is a state that hasn't elected a Democratic senator since 1972, and the seat in question has been held by a member of the Kennedy...
HUME: You mean a Republican.
KRAUTHAMMER: I'm sorry, Republican. And the seat in question has been held by a Kennedy or a Kennedy, let's say, associate, or flunky, or some sort, since...
HUME: Ally.
KRAUTHAMMER: ... 1952.
HUME: We'll say ally.
KRAUTHAMMER: 1952. So this is really astonishing. And if you look at the internals, what's so interesting is about a tenth of the electorate only has cast a vote as an absentee -- absentees. And of those, according to the ARC poll, Brown has a 16-point advantage, 58- 42.
And if you look at independents, which were the swing electorate in Virginia and in New Jersey in November, Coakley is behind by over 20 points.
WILLIAMS: Well, look. It's no question that independents have swung towards Brown in this race. And independents, it's interesting to note, or unenrolled voters, are a majority of the voters in Massachusetts.
But remember, it's a three-to-one registration edge for Democrats in the state, three-to-one. So Coakley's challenge is really to rally her base. And that base has to do with something that Nina was touching on -- women, especially, who seem that this -- they're just sort of uninterested in this race, assumed that it was going to go to the Democrat.
Well, now women are being charged up by the Democrats, by Coakley, with these efforts, such as that flyer that had to do with giving help to... HUME: Do you think that flyer will work or backfire?
WILLIAMS: I think the flyer will work in the short-term with women, who -- you know, the appeal...
(CROSSTALK)
HUME: Well, that's all there is. There ain't no long term here.
WILLIAMS: Right. Well, it...
HUME: ... The race is on Tuesday.
WILLIAMS: Well, what I'm saying is is there time for Brown to come out and refute it successfully? And I don't think so. But it's a...
HUME: So you think that...
WILLIAMS: I think it's going to have some energy.
HUME: ... you think that damages him.
WILLIAMS: I think it will damage him.
And then the second thing is to say that you've got to remember minorities play a role here. Blacks, Hispanics, have not shown any enthusiasm for Coakley. President Obama goes up there today, and he needs to stir up the people who voted for him, Obama supporters.
HUME: Based on what you've seen in his performance and his efforts as a -- as a -- as a political leader and as a -- as a speaker in recent months, do you think he can make a big difference?
WILLIAMS: Oh, yeah. Well, all he has to -- just his presence...
HUME: I understand.
WILLIAMS: ... because I think the White House feeling, from what I heard from White House officials this week, is he wouldn't go unless he thought there was a chance here to make a fast difference.
And he thinks he can make that fast difference, and the issue -- the whole health care issue and the like he feels has played against him. But remember, he remains personally popular, especially in Massachusetts.
KRISTOL: I just have a higher view of the women of Massachusetts than Juan does, having gone to school there and taught there, and they are not going to fall for this.
This is really an unbelievable low blow. And there is a gender gap, as there always is. The Democrats are doing better among women if you look at the polls. But this -- the idea that the women don't know what's going on, or people aren't interested in the race -- this has been the sort of mainstream media... HUME: Well, that's true, Bill, though, of -- this is not even -- now, this is not just an off-year election. This is a -- this is a -- this is a special election...
(CROSSTALK)
KRISTOL: And there's going to be a large turnout. And there are more people involved in this race -- there are more grassroots donations, certainly -- on the Republican side and probably, by now, to some degree, on the Democratic side -- than in a typical Senate race.
People are more involved in this race than in a typical Senate race, not less. What was Martha Coakley's strategy? It was to put everyone to sleep. "Hey, this is a boring Massachusetts Senate race. We always elect a Democrat. Let's elect a Democrat."
And now she's upset, and the mainstream media are upset that, guess what, the voters of Massachusetts decided, "Well, OK, let's have a campaign. Let's make up our mind."
WILLIAMS: No, no.
KRISTOL: But let's not -- that's what the...
WILLIAMS: It became a nationalized election. And in fact, Scott Brown is running away from some of this because he doesn't want to be identified as the Tea Party candidate. He doesn't want that. He wants to say he's getting support across the board because such an affiliation with the far right here could hurt him with those independents.
KRAUTHAMMER: He's running as the guy who will stop health care. That's his case.
WILLIAMS: That's what he wanted to do.
KRAUTHAMMER: "I'm the vote that will stop it."
WILLIAMS: And low taxes, and all the rest.
KRAUTHAMMER: But essentially, it's a referendum on health care. It's a referendum on the Obama agenda. And Obama's up there because everything hinges on this election...
HUME: All right.
KRAUTHAMMER: ... his agenda and also his popularity.
HUME: All right. Suppose, then, he goes in, he stirs people up, Democrats have a majority, enough of them turn out, Coakley gets elected. Does that mean that this is a big win for him and a sign that health care isn't as...
KRAUTHAMMER: No.
HUME: ... unpopular as we thought?
KRAUTHAMMER: It's an escape. That's all it is. It's a -- it's a -- the negatives here -- his risks are huge. It could be a Copenhagen III. He goes -- he ends up in Copenhagen, he loses the Chicago Olympics, he returns, and he doesn't get anything on climate change.
And now he ends up in Massachusetts, which is even friendlier. He's got to come back with a victory.
WILLIAMS: Very quickly, let me say Democrats...
HUME: Quickly.
WILLIAMS: ... are losing on this one even if Coakley wins, because all the momentum is coming from the anti-health care plan side.
KRAUTHAMMER: Right. It shouldn't have been close.
HUME: OK. We've got to take a break here.
When we come back, we'll discuss that health care reform bill and the home stretch for it. And the new taxes for the nation's major banks -- we'll talk about that, time permitting. Back in a moment.
HUME: On this day in 1994, a 6.7-magnitude earthquake struck southern California, leaving behind billions of dollars in damage. The Northridge quake, as it was called, left the Santa Monica freeway partially collapsed, snarling Los Angeles traffic for months.
Stay tuned for more from our panel.
HUME: And we're back now with Bill, Nina, Charles and Juan.
Subject: health care reform before the -- before the House and Senate, a bill being worked on. And the latest wrinkle is to overcome labor union objections to the proposed tax on so-called Cadillac health plans.
The latest deal is that labor union members will be exempted from that tax for a period of some five years, while non-union people with similar plans will have to pay the so-called Cadillac tax. The New York Times, in its wisdom, referred to this as a reasonable solution to a problem that threatened to derail the plan.
Well, what about this? Where does the bill stand? And what about the deal cut for organized labor? How will that play in this country?
Juan Williams?
WILLIAMS: Well, it plays well with the unions. I don't think there's any question about that. They'd been putting pressure on the White House, didn't have much success. They went up to Capitol Hill. They've had some success there, and now...
HUME: It seems like they had a lot of success in both places.
WILLIAMS: Well, no. They weren't having much success with the White House. And what's really interesting about this week is President Obama has really put his name on this negotiation.
He's been staying up late. He's involved -- I think it was from 10:00 to 6:00 on Wednesday. He was up late on Thursday night involved in these negotiations.
Now, it's possible, the White House says, that the House could still just vote for the Senate bill, but everybody's focused on the idea that these Cadillac plans now would be held exempt through 2018, essentially a five...
HUME: For labor members.
WILLIAMS: For labor unions, so that they would not have to pay the extra tax. The problem is, of course, it drives up the cost. There's no -- you know, you're trying to reduce the cost of increase Medicare and Medicaid spending. And it wouldn't do it. So how are we going to pay for health care?
It's a huge, huge problem for people who are...
HUME: Do you think this gives...
WILLIAMS: ... defending the health care plan.
HUME: You would not disagree that this deal is just a -- is basically just a special benefit for a special interest?
WILLIAMS: Of course. That's what it is.
HUME: All right. So the question is how well do you think it will play in the country?
WILLIAMS: In the country?
HUME: In the country.
WILLIAMS: Remember, Brit, the country is not the audience here. The country may have a judgment to make on -- day-to-day right now, the health care plan is not very popular. People may say they want health care reform, but things like this look very unsavory. It's...
HUME: That's what I'm asking.
WILLIAMS: People say, "Oh, it looks like a bribe, a special interest reward." And people say -- they see that kind of compromise, they say, "This is tawdry."
KRAUTHAMMER: It is a bribe, and that's why it is so unpopular. Look, it's not just a question of it depriving the Treasury of revenue. It's question of equity.
You've got two workers, same type of job, same plan, one of whom -- same income, one of whom is a member of a union. And the guy who isn't is going to end up having a tax of 40 percent on his plan, and the other guy is not. And that's simply incredibly unfair. And obviously, it's a corrupt bargain.
What's really hurting the bill here isn't only the opposition on the substance, the half a trillion in cuts in Medicaid, in Medicare, and half a trillion in taxes. It's the process.
The idea that it's been -- that deals are made corruptly and so openly is astonishing -- the "Louisiana Purchase," a cool $300 million for the Landrieu vote, the -- what happened in Nebraska, this eternal exemption that Nebraska would have on paying for the extra Medicaid cost, and now the unions.
The reason it's hurting Obama is he ran on the idea that he would change our politics. It would not be driven by special interest. There would not be the secret deals.
And he's done it with the unions, with the pharmaceutical companies, with the doctors, with the hospitals, all in a way that everybody can see. And that's why he's hurting so much in the polls and on the health care issue itself.
HUME: Is the deal-making on this bill, Nina -- is it fair to say that this is any worse than the kind of horse trading that's done all the time in Congress, and log rolling and so on, to round up votes? Is this just more conspicuous, or is this...
EASTON: Two points. Is it...
HUME: ... is this -- is this worse?
EASTON: I would say -- I would say two points to that. One is that this is major social legislation -- historic, landmark, whatever you want to call it. And at every other point in history -- the Medicare in the '60s -- we had Republicans as well as Democrats supporting it. There was - - there was bipartisan support.
And you take this bill, which is -- already has no Republican support, has divided the country, and you start throwing in this deal- making, all it does is further divide the country, and it hurts his reputation, as Charles said.
The second point is he came in here to change the way that Washington does business. You could have -- on this, for example, you could have in the health care bill said, "Look, we're going to do away with tax preferences for employer-based plans," which is a lot of economists say, "Look, that's the way to reduce health care costs, because it makes people more connected with their healthcare choices."
They would have actually brought in $250 billion through that, as opposed to $90 billion. They would have been in economic, better fiscal footing if they had done that.
But now it is -- it is this horse trading thing. And I think Senator Ben Nelson, as you pointed out earlier in the show, has seen the dangers of this, because now he says that deal that he cut with the White House over Medicaid -- he doesn't want any part of that anymore. He's seen the political dangers of this.
So I think this White House is -- they're dedicated to ramming this thing through while dividing the country and, I think, hurting the president's reputation.
KRISTOL: Juan said, correctly, I think, that from the point of view of the White House and the Democratic congressional leadership, the country's not the audience. And I think that's very revealing. That is their point of view.
But I don't think that works in America. You know, if we had -- if we had a European system -- you know, you get elected, you ram through your legislation, people get a chance five years later, maybe, to vote yes or no.
America has a different system. It is more democratic. There are more checks and balances. People are responsive to public opinion. I don't believe this is sustainable. They cannot -- they cannot ignore public will for a piece of legislation of this magnitude. They cannot pass this bill, I don't think.
HUME: You don't think -- do you still think the bill will fail?
KRISTOL: Yes.
HUME: All right.
WILLIAMS: Oh, you're really wrong.
HUME: Well, hold...
WILLIAMS: They have 60 votes right now, holding, right? They will get the 60 votes. This is -- let me just say this. It's a matter of...
HUME: In the Senate.
WILLIAMS: In the Senate. It's a matter of leadership.
KRISTOL: But Brown might win, so...
WILLIAMS: Sometimes you have to understand that you push ahead, there's going to be a lot of flak, there's going to be a lot of dogs barking, but the wagon train moves ahead.
KRISTOL: The public -- the American people don't think...
(CROSSTALK)
KRISTOL: The American people don't think they're barking dogs.
WILLIAMS: Once it passes...
KRISTOL: They think they have a right to say something.
WILLIAMS: Once it passes...
KRISTOL: And they are saying something in Massachusetts. And they are saying something and communicating with...
WILLIAMS: OK.
KRISTOL: ... their senators and congressmen. And therefore, I do think the bill will fail. HUME: Let me ask everybody -- hear everybody on this question that I asked senator McConnell and I didn't get very far with, which is this: In raw political terms, is it better for the Democrats if this bill goes down or if it passes?
Bill?
KRISTOL: I actually think it's better if it goes down now. They have time to recoup.
EASTON: They clearly feel that it's just as dangerous to have it pass -- to have it not pass. So I think -- I think it -- they're hurt either way.
KRAUTHAMMER: I think Democrats think that the public perception of how bad it is is wrong. And thus, if it passes, they will see the benefits in the future and they'll be OK.
HUME: So they're better off -- they're better off...
KRAUTHAMMER: They think...
HUME: Well, what do you think?
KRAUTHAMMER: They are wrong.
HUME: You think they're wrong.
KRAUTHAMMER: The bill is as bad as everyone thinks, and it's going to hurt them for decades.
HUME: So you think it hurts more...
KRAUTHAMMER: If it passes..
HUME: ... if it passes.
KRAUTHAMMER: If it passes, it will be a millstone for years.
HUME: What do you think, Juan?
WILLIAMS: If it passes, it'll become extremely popular. You watch. Americans like Social Security. In fact, one of the big points of opposition of this is people fear that their Medicare benefits, and Medicare Advantage and the like, may be cut as a result. No. I think if the...
HUME: Will be cut, won't they?
WILLIAMS: Will be cut. That's what their fear is. So if this...
HUME: Well, that'll happen, won't it?
WILLIAMS: No, not necessarily. We don't know exactly. A -- we don't know -- for example, taxes may come up. Deficit may be lower. All sorts of things may happen. We can't predict that. But I think Americans like entitlements, I've got to tell you.
HUME: All right, panel. Thanks very much.
Don't forget to check out the latest edition of "Panel Plus" where our group right here continues this discussion. It's on our Web site, foxnewssunday.com. It comes up shortly after the show ends. And we'll go at it again.
In the meantime, we'll be right back.
HUME: Well, that's it for today, folks. Have a great week. You'll be relieved to learn that Chris Wallace will return for the next "Fox News Sunday," and we'll see you then.