MSNBC Hardball - Transcript

MSNBC Hardball - Transcript
Tuesday, September 20, 2005

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

MATTHEWS: Our guest is Senator John McCain, senator from Arizona.

Senator McCain, we have not had you on since Katrina hit. What have you learned that we have been doing wrong in getting ready for these major natural disasters?

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: Everything.

(LAUGHTER)

MCCAIN: We have made serious mistakes.

I think it is clear that, to state the obvious, that we had probably placed too much emphasis on a terrorist attack vs. a natural disaster. And there were many mistakes that were made, including lack of communications capability, a lack of coordination between the different levels of governments, all the things that I have been watching you talk about for the last couple of weeks, Chris.

But, primarily, I think the focus perhaps was misplaced to a degree over to countering a terrorist attack, as opposed to handling a natural disaster.

MATTHEWS: If you were president, would you name somebody from the Arabian Horse Association to head FEMA?

(LAUGHTER)

MCCAIN: Well, somebody said no—well, at least no Arabian horses died.

No, I—no, I wouldn't. But I also would seriously consider, if I were president, the appointment of now an overall administrator that everybody could look to. I am told that there are still problems of coordination between state, local, federal officials. And I think you should have a go-to guy. I think Rudy Giuliani would be a great one for it, Colin Powell, General Tommy Franks, maybe Jack Welch or Lou Gerstner, one of those people who is used to administering bureaucracies. We probably need that now.

MATTHEWS: Why do you think the vice president opposes such an action?

MCCAIN: I—I didn't know that he did.

MATTHEWS: Yes, he does.

MCCAIN: Well, I had heard that the administration was considering such a move, but I didn't know...

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: He doesn't want a name brand named, a big fellow like you mentioned. You mentioned four or five people that could be president. And, apparently, the vice president is not interested in having somebody of that stature fill this position.

MCCAIN: Well, I don't know anything about that.

But I know that the vice president has the highest priority of getting this crisis handled, not only for the good of the nation, but for the good of this administration.

MATTHEWS: What about getting FEMA outside of Homeland Security. You mentioned there's a—we put too much emphasis on the homeland security part, the anti-terrorist function. Do we need to have two different departments, two different agencies handling the terrorist challenge and the natural disaster?

MCCAIN: Probably, you need to take it back out.

But, look, Chris, isn't the moral of the story here, you know, you can shuffle boxes around on the organizational chart, but unless you really give enough priority, assets and talents to the task, that is secondary? In other words, suppose that inside—FEMA inside the Department of Homeland Security had focused enough attention on taking care of natural disasters, had had the qualified kind of leadership that it needs. We might not be arguing about moving the boxes around.

So, it makes me a little bit uneasy by saying, OK, let's take it out of DHS and then everything is going to be OK. Do you see my point?

MATTHEWS: Yes.

You know, of the things that's been reported on about Louisiana is, it is guilty of the same kinds of things we are seeing at the federal level, cronyism, where somebody happens to be a friend of Joe Allbaugh, who was head of FEMA at one point and his—he's his roommate in college and so gets the job.

Down here in—down here in Louisiana—rather, in Louisiana, you see all kinds of family relationships. You have got Mitch Landrieu as the lieutenant governor. The senator is Mary Landrieu. And everybody seems to be related. And they're all buddies with each other, and rampant corruption, historically, down in that part of the country. Is that going to be a challenge? I mean, are you happy sending a lot of money to Louisiana?

MCCAIN: I am happy sending a lot of money to Louisiana. But we really need—this is one of the arguments for the administrator. It's another reason, argument, for I.G.s of the most highly qualified type.

Look, I don't think you can focus—funnel all the money direct from the federal government to whoever the recipient is. But you have also got to have accountability. There has not been one disaster that I can remember where there wasn't a lot of money wasted. Maybe we could do it a little better this time.

And, also, there is Mississippi and Alabama as well that have to be handled. So, am I uncomfortable when I read that there is a different governmental entity for every levee? Yes.

(LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: Yes.

MCCAIN: And some of the expenses, like a fountain of lights, instead of—but, also, isn't it also true, Chris, that, even though Louisiana got the largest amount of Corps of Engineers money, a whole lot of that went to pork-barrel projects, rather than what would have been judged by an objective observer as higher priorities?

MATTHEWS: Yes.

And the other question I raised with the local head of the Corps of Engineers was, do we know there wasn't graft in building of those flood walls down there, because they gave way right across the board. And nobody can figure out what happened to the materials, the construction. And he said it was an open question, whether we were seeing some graft here, the old trick of six inches of concrete for eight inches of payment.

MCCAIN: Well, also, isn't it true that some of these projects actually contributed dramatically to the erosion of the wetlands, which, as you know, requires certain conditions...

MATTHEWS: Yes.

MCCAIN: ... as opposed to preserving them?

Now we are looking at a $14 billion tab for the reconstruction of the wetlands, without which, in the view of many experts, you're never going to be able to protect New Orleans and—or...

MATTHEWS: Right.

MCCAIN: ... provide it with increased protection. I have seen the pictures of the erosion of the wetlands over the last 10 years. It is dramatic.

MATTHEWS: We will be back with Senator John McCain, talking about how to pay for Hurricane Katrina and whether we are ready for Hurricane Rita.

This is HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.

We are talking with Senator John McCain.

Senator, you mentioned a number of economy measures that might be well to think about right now to pay all—for the cost of Katrina, which could be $200 billion. Do you think we should reconsider the tax cuts of the president?

MCCAIN: No, I don't. I don't think we have to do that at this time.

Let's look at spending savings first and then get to that. But, first, I'd like to see where we can—before we would have to do—to do that, I would like to look at the spending cuts that would be necessary and I think applicable.

MATTHEWS: Do you think that the cost of Katrina is going to put the squeeze on the war? And you're a military guy, of course. Everybody knows that. Are you worried that some of the materiel, some of the support for our troops may be shortchanged because of the big pressure for Katrina?

MCCAIN: I got—I got to be straight again with you. I'm very worried about some of the polling numbers that I have seen concerning support for the war, because it has been affected by Katrina.

I hope that the president and some of us who believe we must win this conflict have got to speak up, remind people of the importance of this conflict and the consequences of failure and the benefits of success, and try to shore that back up. But a lot of it is understandable.

Katrina has dominated what they have seen and heard for the last three weeks or so, and so that it has caused Iraq to recede somewhat in the background. But we have got to—we have got to speak up on this issue. We can't—we can't cut and run.

MATTHEWS: Do you think—and this is a real political question. I have gotten to know you pretty well over the years and it's a real political question.

A lot of people have been very skeptical about this war and why we are fighting it. And maybe that is most of the Democratic Party now. Would it be smart for the president to come out to the American people and say:

"This is not an argument about whether we should have gone or not. You know, we can argue about that. Maybe you are right. Maybe I'm right. We can argue about that in 20 years. But we have got to get out of there the right way over the next couple years. And there is a right way to get out and a wrong way to get out"?

Do you think he would ever say it that way?

MCCAIN: I hope so, because I have been.

I have made the case that I think we did the right thing. But I have also said, and almost in the words you just used, that whether we should have gone in or not is a bit of an academic argument. And I am sure there will be plenty of time for it. But we have got to stay the course. We have got to win. We cannot afford to fail.

And if we do win, it will have profound benefits for the region and for the world and America.

MATTHEWS: Do you ever worry that we bet on the wrong horse? We are betting on the Shia majority to have a democratic government. Could it be that the Sunnis, the minority, 20 percent of the country, are the real fighters, they're the ferocious group, and they are going to be damn tough to keep down, even if we have a democratic system over there?

MCCAIN: Well, first of all, the Shia were the underdogs and the oppressed, as you know, by the minority Sunnis for a long period of time.

MATTHEWS: Yes.

MCCAIN: Second of all, it is not that.

It is whether the Sunnis will feel that they can legitimately participate in the government of their country. And that is the problem we are facing right now, is that many Sunnis feel that the constitution did not contain sufficient provisions for them to feel that their rights are protected.

MATTHEWS: Right.

MCCAIN: We have got to continue to work on that. We have got to continue to try to convince the Sunnis and make changes, if necessary, in the constitution to make them feel included.

MATTHEWS: That's a powerful statement.

Thank you very much, Senator John McCain of Arizona. Thank you for joining us tonight.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9425219/