Sen. Elizabeth Warren on the economy, immigration and how to shore up Social Security

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

So, look, I am always concerned when we are not opening ourselves and staying in line both with federal law and with our moral responsibilities.

But I also want to underscore the other part of this, that the president and his administration are clearly looking for alternative ways to deal with people who want to come to the United States and who are looking for sanctuary here.

This program is one way to try to do that to make sure that people don't have to take a long, expensive, dangerous trip in order to ask for help. Let's face it. The bottom line is, Congress needs to put in place comprehensive immigration reform.

In the meantime, the president is trying to meet our responsibilities, and to do it through administrative action. And I'm glad that they're out there trying different parts. I just want to make sure that we continue to live up to our moral responsibilities and international law.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, this is why I said I am concerned.

If the point here is to bar people from being able to apply for help that international law says they can apply for, then that would be a terrible mistake for our country. I want to see us do -- meet our moral responsibilities and our responsibilities under international law, but to try to do it in ways that do not force people to take long, dangerous, expensive trips, where they put themselves and their children at risk.

And that's what the president, I think, is trying to find that line. It would be better if Congress were willing to take that on. But, so far, the Republicans have blocked us on that.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, so I'm going to push back on this just a little bit. I'm not sure we need a bill for much of this.

I want to applaud the agencies that are starting to step up in this area. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has stepped up and said, what do you mean you're charging $30 for a late credit card fee -- credit card payment? There's not much additional risk associated with that. I think that should be down around $8.

How it is that the banking regulators are stepping up and pressure from Congress, so that they are reducing the charges on check overdrafts. Department of Transportation, come on, step up on this idea of charging fees for families to be able to sit together.

So I want to start with the notion that a lot of these junk fees basically fit under the idea that there's one advertised price for the service or for the good. Same thing with hotels, right?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

But, because of the junk fees, it actually costs $5 more or $10 war or $25 more.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, every time I hear somebody say, just raise the retirement age, I think to myself, boy, there's somebody who didn't work construction for all of their life. There's somebody who didn't have to pick up little kids as a kindergarten teacher or preschool teacher. There's somebody who didn't work as a nurse all their life helping patients in and out of bed and helping roll people over.

In other words, just because people are living longer does not mean that you can still do those hard jobs at 65, 70, 75. But, also, think of it this way. If we simply said that you're going to pay Social Security on all of your income, even if you are a billionaire, we can extend the life of Social Security to 2095.

Plus, we can increase Social Security payments by $200 a month. I mean, look, bottom line is, this is math and values. And the math is that if, we simply bring in a little more revenue, we can actually make the Social Security system work on through the rest of this century.

But it's also about values, how we're going to do that. Is it more important that we protect the wealthy and the well-connected, so that they don't have to pay taxes on their million-dollar incomes, multimillion-dollar incomes?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Why eliminate the benefit? Why not just have people pay taxes? That's the notion of a tax system in the United States.

And that is, as your income goes up, you pay more in taxes. Believe me, they will still be earning a whole lot more, but pay Social Security taxes on that as well. That way, we don't have to increase taxes on America's middle class, on America's working families, and we don't have to cut benefits. In fact, we can raise them.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Well, I have no doubt that the president has the legal authority to cancel this debt.

My concern is whether the Supreme Court is going to apply the law or they're going to play politics. When Donald Trump was president, he canceled billions and billions and billions of dollars of interest rate payments that were -- canceled them, didn't defer them, canceled them. And not one Republican, not one court lifted a hand to say there's any problem. They said, of course, he's legally entitled to do this.

The president of the United States now is also legally entitled under the law to cancel this debt. And keep in mind who's going to be helped by this. We now know that 90 percent of the people who are going to get help from this debt cancellation make $75,000 or less. It means that, if this goes through, half of all Latinos are going to see all of their debt wiped out and about a third of African Americans, people who worked hard, who 40 percent of them did not end up with a college diploma, but who got out there and tried.

And the consequences of their having tried, when they came from families that couldn't just afford to write a check in order to pay for college, is that they are getting crushed by this debt. The president has designed a plan to help get people out from underneath that debt. The law lets him do that. I just hope the Supreme Court and the Republicans stay out of the way.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source