MSNBC Buchanan & Press Transcript

MSNBC  
SHOW: BUCHANAN & PRESS

HEADLINE: BUCHANAN & PRESS For June 23, 2003

BYLINE: Pat Buchanan; Katrina Vanden Heuvel

GUESTS: Jon Corzine; Jerry Falwell; David Smith; Kenneth Connor; Byron York; Julian Epstein

VANDEN HEUVEL: Well you know all the Democratic candidates together are going to raise less than Bush, Inc.

BUCHANAN: OK. Well let's move on right now to someone who knows a good deal about that subject and that's Senator Jon Corzine. Thanks very much for coming over Senator...

SEN. JON CORZINE (D), NEW JERSEY: Good to be here Pat.

BUCHANAN: We appreciate it.

CORZINE: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)

BUCHANAN: Katrina Vanden Heuvel—let me talk—I know that—I think you're head of the Senate Campaign Committee for the Democrats...

CORZINE: Yes.

BUCHANAN: ... so you know all about these things. But...

CORZINE: I did notice that the president doesn't have a presidential competitor in the primary...

(CROSSTALK)

CORZINE: ... was raising $200 million, which at least raises some question of why we are being...

BUCHANAN: Right.

CORZINE: ... so aggressive about that.

BUCHANAN: All right. Well let me ask you a question about the affirmative action decision today. Senator, I know you were undecided. First, do you believe that the correct side won this decision because what it says to me basically is discrimination is forbidden unless you can do it right, unless it's against white kids.

CORZINE: Well I'm not sure that I agree with that interpretation. I think this is a victory for the American people. I think the Bakke decision originally was based on the view that there was a compelling interest of the nation to make sure that all people had access to the American promise, that we were one nation. I think that's one of the reasons that there was great support in the corporate community, the military community and among those that believe in civil rights in this country, and I think that was confirmed today. I'm happy about that.

BUCHANAN: But Senator, let me ask this, look, what the—you're right, diversity—they said diversity is a compelling state interest. Everybody would like to have a diverse population on campus. But, does that trump the Constitution, which says no preferential treatment based on race and no discrimination based on race? I mean, these—certainly the one you supported in the college was thrown out because it gave people 20 points—or 20 percent in the way simply for being black.

CORZINE: Well, first of all, the quota system one could question from a lot of different perspectives—alumni's, children, legacy, athletics, a whole series of things that I think really are open to question. But you know, using race, just like using ethnic background or gender, as one of the many considerations seems to me to be perfectly reasonable so that you get a diverse community that allows for people to experience education in the world that they live in and I think it's a positive.

VANDEN HEUVEL: Senator Corzine, this slim margin of victory in this decision suggests that the—part of the balance of our nation's future and our—the protection of our rights hangs in the balance. Are we going to face a roll back of rights? We have a possible Supreme Court opening coming up. What are the Democrats going to do in this area to ensure that the broad rights...

(CROSSTALK)

CORZINE: In fact, you use the word that I don't know that we will be able to bring to life, ensure. We need to have a real debate about the commitment to precedent and the interpretations of the Constitution that have been in place for a very long period of time, that I think are at stake with this very close 5-4 majority. You can see an overturning of some of the fundamental principles that have been established in jurist prudence of this country in the days ahead if we are not careful about it. Democrats need to very strongly challenge whether people are going to adhere to precedent in this...

BUCHANAN: Senator...

CORZINE: ... election process...

BUCHANAN: ... there was a president in 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson 57 years later, Brown v. Board of Education overthrew it.

(CROSSTALK)

BUCHANAN: It said segregation, which was Plessy v. Ferguson was wrong and they overturned it. What is the matter—I mean you say precedent, but suppose a new justice comes in and says, precedent's fine but I'm looking at the Constitution, just like the Warren Court did in Brown, and I don't believe that abortion is in the Constitution or a right to an abortion. Would you oppose a candidate to the Supreme Court who said that he felt if Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided?

CORZINE: Pat, I ran on a platform that said that I would use that as a test with regard to my own vote...

(CROSSTALK)

CORZINE: ... a test with regard to whether that candidate would adhere to the precedent as established in Roe v. Wade. So, you know...

(CROSSTALK)

CORZINE: ... I'm there and stand there, and consistent with how I was elected by the people of New Jersey.

BUCHANAN: Do you think—do you agree with Senator Kerry that President Bush misled us in taking us into the war in Vietnam? Or do you agree that...

(CROSSTALK)

CORZINE: ... Iraq...

BUCHANAN: Excuse me, in Iraq. We're not there yet...

(CROSSTALK)

BUCHANAN: We're not there yet, I hope.

(LAUGHTER)

BUCHANAN: But do you agree with Senator Kerry?

CORZINE: I'm troubled by some of the discrepancies that were actually challengeable even as we approached the vote of use of force resolution in the fall. The uranium enrichment project that came from Niger, the aluminum tubes, the connections with al Qaeda. All of those were issues that there were real debates about, but with no facts, at least to this senator. I think that using information in State of the Union messages and discussions with the American people without the kind of verification (UNINTELLIGIBLE) tells you, you've either got a problem with intelligence or there was using information—selective information for the purposes that politically are advantageous. I think it's trouble.

VANDEN HEUVEL: George Will had a column in "The Washington Post" the other day, arguing that if no weapons of mass destruction are found, that Bush's preemptive war doctrine is undermined by this. Do you agree with that and do you agree that that is a failed policy in terms of engaging...

CORZINE: I tell you where it will absolutely (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that way is with the people that we try to have work with us in the international community. Our credibility will be significantly undermined and our building up of coalitions of the willing and the future. I think it's very troubling if the reality doesn't match the facts that the American people were told ahead of time. I am glad that Saddam Hussein is not in his position and what we found out on human rights afterwards I think justifies what took place, but that doesn't get at this basic issue of preemptive...

VANDEN HEUVEL: Yes...

CORZINE: ... doctrine and whether we are—there was an imminent risk, imminent risk and it doesn't get at the need to be truthful with the American people.

BUCHANAN: Senator Jon Corzine, thank you very much for coming over. We appreciate it.