John McLaughlin's One on One-Transcript
Federal News Service February 26, 2004 Thursday
Copyright 2004 Federal News Service, Inc.
Federal News Service
February 26, 2004 Thursday
HEADLINE: JOHN MCLAUGHLIN'S "ONE ON ONE"
GUESTS: REPRESENTATIVE ROBERT MATSUI (D-CA), CHAIRMAN, DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE; REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS REYNOLDS (R-NY), CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
TAPED: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2004 BROADCAST: WEEKEND OF FEBRUARY 28-29, 2004
BODY:
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: A House divided. The first congressional election of this year took place in Kentucky last week. It was a special election to fill the seat vacated by Ernie Fletcher, a Republican, who became Kentucky governor. A Democrat won Fletcher's Republican seat, former attorney general Ben Chandler. He defeated Republican state senator Alice Forgy Kerr.
Democrats are declaring Chandler's victory as proof that they can carry the South in November's general election. Republicans counter that not on the ballot in this Kentucky special House election was the name of President George W. Bush, so there was no coattail effect.
Is Democrat Chandler's win an omen, or is Republican control of the U.S. House of Representatives unassailable? We'll ask the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Bob Matsui, and the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, Tom Reynolds.
(Announcements.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Welcome, gentlemen.
Chairman Matsui, are you delighted at the results of the Kentucky 6th District special election?
REP. MATSUI: Oh, we're extremely delighted about the victory that Dan Chandler had a couple weeks ago.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What does it indicate to you?
REP. MATSUI: Well, two things. We had a great candidate, there's no question about it. He was just really superior to his opponent. On the other hand, what we did was got about 30,000 Democrats that came out to vote that were intensely opposed to President Bush, and at the same time, we were able to get them out to vote, probably wouldn't have voted otherwise.
What we're finding throughout the country-and you saw it in the Democratic primaries, the fact that there's a great deal more turnout now going on among Democrats and among many independents, mainly because there's a strong anti-Bush feeling throughout the country. On the other hand, I have to say that I don't want to overstate that. President Bush is still very popular in Kentucky and he's very popular in Ben Chandler's new congressional district.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think this is a harbinger of things to come?
REP. MATSUI: I think the Democrats are going to have a huge turnout, a lot of independents are going to have huge turnouts in the 2004 election. I think that's going to help Democrats in the presidency, the House and Senate as well.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Those 30,000, were they delinquent voters in the sense that they had not voted and you pulled them out with the strength of the anti-Bush sentiment that's there, and that was the engine of their going to the polls?
REP. MATSUI: Well, let me say this.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do they have a history of voting?
REP. MATSUI: These were voters that many times did not vote in elections, and we were able to knock on their doors, make phone calls to them and bring them out to vote. We had a great field operation. I'm sure that Tom will tell you he had one, too.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you see this as a harbinger, Chairman Reynolds?
REP. REYNOLDS: No. I think we had a special election that had a candidate in Bob Chandler, as the chairman said, that I agree with, was a great candidate. He'd been running for governor for a year. He had a 98 percent ID. And something I'm not used to, coming from New York-I don't know how California is-he had a 3-to-1 favorable/unfavorable rating after being beat 55-45 in the seat. George Pataki would tell you that when he first ran for governor, his numbers were inverted in New York based on a slugfest campaign.
But I also watched Chandler-and by the way, Alice Forgy Kerr, I think, was a good candidate. Most of what I saw of the campaign was run on local issues: that she may have raised taxes, that she had raised her pay, and that that she was in a pension question.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let's --
REP. REYNOLDS: And quite frankly, when I looked at the Chandler record as a prosecutor and as an attorney general, there was not the type of issues of the legislative side.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: So you think it was decided on local considerations?
REP. REYNOLDS: I think it was a popularity contest. So while we tried to close, two things I saw happen that I think are significant to this discussion. One, we always did a turn-out model of about 35 percent, which is about where this was. We saw it. And the election night showed up about where our polling was on it. So I didn't see any real surprises other than we closed the gap, but we didn't close it enough to win.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let's take a look at the ad, the advertising of the losing candidate, who is Ms. Kerr.
REP. REYNOLDS: You ought to look at some of the winning candidate, too --
(Begin videotape segment.)
NARRATOR: American values. If you share the values of President Bush, you'll like Alice Forgy Kerr. They're cut from the same cloth.
While others attack the president's economic program and his fight to protect our national security, Alice Forgy Kerr stands with President Bush. Unlike her opponent, Alice supported the Bush tax cuts that are now triggering jobs and economic growth.
Alice Forgy Kerr is the only candidate who will work with President Bush.
ALICE FORGY KERR (Republican candidate for U.S. House): I'm Alice Forgy Kerr and I approved this message.
(End videotape segment.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You don't believe that this was a referendum on Bush?
REP. REYNOLDS: No, sir.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Aside from that, does this ad suggest to you that there's political peril in identifying oneself with the programs and policies of President Bush?
REP. REYNOLDS: Well, one of the things I understood-what I thought I understood the campaign wanting to do, was in the race for governor, then-Attorney General Chandler ran against the president and Fletcher ran in support of the president. And that's what that campaign was about. What I sensed in the candidate on the Republican side was trying to convey is that she would support the president's policies, such as tax cuts. What I noticed-the transition, as Chandler reinvented himself, he no longer ran against the president in Kentucky. He said I will support the president when I think he's right and I will oppose him when he's not. And he began to have a more temperate position on it. But the issues where I saw both independent expenditures and the campaign was directed at Alice Forgy Kerr as a state senator.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Let's look at this district. It's in the middle of Kentucky; it's rural, I believe. It hasn't been won by a Democrat since 1991.
REP. REYNOLDS: No, that's not true.
REP. MATSUI: That's-no.
REP. REYNOLDS: Scotty Baesler had the seat from '92 to '98 --
REP. MATSUI: Right.
REP. REYNOLDS: Ernie Fletcher came to Congress with me in 1998 --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Oh, is that right?
REP. MATSUI: Yeah. Fletcher won.
REP. REYNOLDS: It's 26 percent Republican.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: In a special congressional election?
REP. MATSUI: No. Well, we haven't won a special congressional election since --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Since 1991.
REP. MATSUI: -- where a Republican had a seat and it turned Democratic since 1991, yes.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: All right. And you got a-you put together a great get-out-the-vote for those 30,000. Correct?
REP. MATSUI: Right.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And to summarize this, the Democrats have pulled off their first special election win in more than a decade by mobilizing anti-Bush voters and they did it in a district which was solidly pro-Bush in 2000. Based on these factors, the Democrats have earned bragging rights in the race. Is that what you're saying?
REP. MATSUI: No, let me say this, John. I don't want to overstate that. We had a great candidate and what the real message here, in my opinion, is is that when you have a great candidate and we are able to get the vote out, we can win in a Southern state. And that's what we're really trying to establish here. We can win in the South as Democrats.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Okay. The question is whether we are overinterpreting this race.
REP. MATSUI: Yeah.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And the argument-and the argument is all politics, as Tip O'Neill says, is local. However, the parties made this a showdown, did you not? This was a showdown --
REP. REYNOLDS: Well, we both have-every seat I have is precious that comes up on a special. I'm sure that the chairman also --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, it was the most expensive election that's ever been run in central Kentucky.
REP. REYNOLDS: I'm not sure of that.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Both for you and, I think, for you.
REP. REYNOLDS: Ernie Fletcher's a tremendous fundraiser. I think both sides at the end of the day, when you add it all up, had about 2 million on each side of the race.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: But wasn't it for-wasn't it-wasn't it Terry McAuliffe and you who decided we're going to make this a showcase, we're going to have a showdown, we're going to show that we can take this seat?
REP. MATSUI: It was a Kentucky seat, it's in the South. We felt that we wanted to demonstrate to the country that we can win in the South with a good candidate. We did win in the South with a good candidate. At the same time, I think another lesson is that the Democrats are going to be out to vote in the 2004 election. I-there's a lot of feelings that things are not right, they want change.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You're saying that on the basis of the anti-Bush sentiments in the South there among the Democrats, and you see it as fierce. Do you think you're-do you think that your formula can be used in the form-the-what, how many districts do you have? -- in the districts that you have --
REP. MATSUI: Right.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- throughout the country. Same formula. What did you do? Did you use telephone banks? Did you use the Internet? How did you get them out?
REP. MATSUI: Well, we got them out just by --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Door-to-door?
REP. MATSUI: -- door-to-door, by making telephone calls, the Web at times --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, if you're on --
REP. MATSUI: -- there's all kinds of ways to communicate with votes.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: If you're onto something here, will you-will you check the voting records of Republicans around the country and see to what extent they voted for Bush? Say, if they voted over 90 percent, will you then feel that there is a vulnerability there despite the fact of a long incumbency, perhaps?
REP. MATSUI: Well, I don't think there is any question that there's a vulnerability because the Democratic base didn't get out as it should have gotten out in 2002. The base will be out, along with a lot of independents this time.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think that Kerr, Ms. Kerr was misadvised, and by that ad she presented herself as forfeiting her independence, and that all the research shows that what-what voters want, particularly in the House districts, is someone who's going to take care of THEIR interest, and they're not dedicated to any party interest primarily, and they're not dedicated to any president, they're dedicated to THEM.
REP. REYNOLDS: Well, first of all, this seat is a two-to-one Democratic seat. It's 26 percent Republican enrollment. And then, in order to --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: In a special election?
REP. REYNOLDS: -- in order to win-well, wait a minute.
That's what the enrollment registration is. In order to win the seat, a Republican like Fletcher, when he replaced the Democrat Scotty Baesler, has to have about 70 percent of what we call "slop Democrats", which are Southern Democrats who vote Republican. She was only getting half. She didn't get the three-quarters. And the message that Chandler sent is, I'm the guy that can do the job. We saw the senator, Forgy Kerr, having to raise her ID, and at the same time she was raising her ID, Chandler I thought ran a great race with a 98 percent ID and a three-to-one favorable as Mr. Kentucky.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, what do you think about his statement? He thinks this is pay dirt for him-that is, the anti-Bush sentiment-and he has a formula by which he was able to-he was --
REP. REYNOLDS: I will tell 49 other states he said that and get our base out.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: He was able to rouse it in Kentucky, and with that formula-that's the-that's a --
REP. REYNOLDS: We had a 35 percent turn-out; the gentleman won 55-43. And it's a Democratic seat by enrollment. And we worked hard, and we didn't win.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: If Matsui-if Chairman --
REP. REYNOLDS: And we had 700 people on the ground getting the vote out, just as he did.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I want to point this up a little bit more, and then we'll let it go.
REP. REYNOLDS: Okay.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: If Chairman Matsui can replicate this formula in the district-in the congressional districts throughout the country-that is, appealing to and procuring the anti-Bush voters, particularly those who have been delinquent in the past --
REP. REYNOLDS: He's got a problem. He's got a problem, and I'll tell you what it is. In the red states, currently there are 55 seats that don't have opponents, Republicans that do not have opponents.
Second, you got to have the money to be able to generate both a message into the campaign, through people, to follow the race, and then have enough ammunition to get people out.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What's the current composition of the House of Representatives?
REP. MATSUI: Well, we're 12 seats down right now. And I think we're going to take the House back. We're going to raise the money. We have great candidates. We have 45 Republican targets --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You've got to 13 seats?
REP. MATSUI: Thirteen. Yeah. We'll do better than that. We'll do, you know, 18, 20 --
REP. REYNOLDS: The fact is, in red states, like Alabama 3, Mike Rogers doesn't have a serious opponent. When you look at other seats that-we can go around the country-we have the second-largest freshman class since the Republicans took control of the Congress. Many of those do not have serious opponents or opponents at all. And as I said, there are 45 (sic) districts that are in red states where the Democrats don't have opponents there.
We have gone and have opponents across the country, as Bob well knows, even in California. We have more money than any of the conferences, as we have raised it. And I think we have a record we can take to the voters in those red states. We're going to do very well. And that doesn't include Texas.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: We'll be right back.
(Announcements.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Will gay marriage become a political football in every one of the 435 congressional districts in the United States? We'll put that question to our guests, but first, here are their distinguished profiles:
Born: Sacramento. Sixty-three years of age. Wife: Doris. One son. One new granddaughter
Japanese-American, interned at the Tule Lake Camp during World War II, at six months of age.
Methodist. Democrat.
University of California at Berkeley, B.A.
Hastings College of Law, San Francisco, doctor of laws.
Sacramento City Council, six years. Sacramento, vice mayor, two years.
U.S. House of Representatives, California's 5th District, Including all of Sacramento, member, 25 years and currently.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, DCCC, chairman, one year and currently.
Hobby: baseball.
Robert Matsui.
Born: Belfonte, Pennsylvania. Fifty-four years of age. Wife: Donna. Four children. Protestant. Republican.
Kent State University, three years.
New York Air National Guard, six years.
New York Legislature, Erie County, six years. New York State Assembly, 10 years.
U.S. House of Representatives, New York's 26th District, Including Buffalo and Rochester suburbs, member, five years and currently.
National Republican Congressional Committee, NRCC, chairman, one year and currently.
Hobby: downhill skiing.
Thomas Reynolds.
How would you vote on this amendment to the Constitution banning same-sex marriage?
REP. MATSUI: Well, I'm going to vote no if it ever comes to the floor of the House. I think, frankly, that each state should be able to make its decision. And ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court should be able to rule on this. Obviously, if, at the end of the day, there's a ruling that goes one way or the other, I think those that then want to advance a constitutional amendment should do it at that time.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: How would you vote on it, Chairman Reynolds?
REP. REYNOLDS: I think we're going to see a debate and I don't think we're going to have a vote just yet. I think that we'll see --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You'd vote for it?
REP. REYNOLDS: Would I vote for the constitutional amendment? I think the question I want to see answered, even by the judiciary, is what's the constitutional provision of states' rights versus the federal law? And from that, we'll go. I think the debate is under way, and I've got people in our own Republican conference that either support state rights, look at a constitutional amendment, look at civil unions, or look at allowing gay marriage.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Okay. Now, there's no possibility this is going to pass the Congress.
You need two-thirds-you need a two-thirds --
REP. REYNOLDS: I don't see it happening before this election.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: No. Do you see it ever?
REP. REYNOLDS: I do not see it happening this year.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you see it ever pass?
REP. MATSUI: Well, I don't know, but I wish it would not have come up because we don't need a division right now, seriously.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Mm-hmm. Does he-in calling for this gay-amendment, has he now-the president-made this an issue in every congressional district?
REP. MATSUI: I don't think so. I frankly think my colleagues on both sides of the aisle are trying to be very tempered and trying to look at this thing in a very objective way, and I think ultimately it won't be a concern.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, I'm talking about in the election. You don't think the voters are going to ask a candidate, particularly a challenger?
REP. MATSUI: It's my belief-and Tom may disagree here-that people are going to be concerned about bread-and-butter issues. They're going to be concerned about the economy, about jobs, obviously international issues because of personal security. Those are the issues people are going to be concerned about.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you going to issue any guidance to candidates on this issue, as is customary from your shop?
REP. MATSUI: I think candidates will have to decide these things kind of based upon their own feelings, but I frankly think, as I said before, this should be a state issue until such time that the U.S. Supreme Court decides.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You feel pretty much what he says is --
REP. REYNOLDS: I think Bob has outlined a couple good points there, and I think an individual, district-by-district, candidate-by- candidate answer.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think that President Bush was baited by what's going on in San Francisco, and should he have responded to the bait?
REP. REYNOLDS: I don't want to speak for the president. I think the president has said he supports the sanctity of marriage and yet wants tolerance of civil unions and other decisions of companionship.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Karl Rove is involved in a great gamble here, the president's political strategist. Looked at through a political lens, many people see this: There are about 4 million relatively non- voting fundamentalists who feel very strongly in favor of an amendment; there are about 1 million gays and lesbians who will-he will lose their vote-the president will lose their vote, Republicans mostly; and then there are the moderates, both Republican and independents. So it's 4 million versus whatever he can generate from those categories. Do you think this was a good gamble for Karl Rove if the structure of the gamble is as presented?
REP. MATSUI: Well, let me say this. I think when you play with human lives and when you play with relationships that we should not bring a political dimension into it, and I think that the president erred in that respect. I don't think he should have raised this issue. And --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, it was a very-you must admit it was a very dignified statement that he made, and it was pretty comprehensive.
REP. MATSUI: Well, I have to say that --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And he doesn't have to go back to it. It's out there now, but it's not going to go away before the election. Does anyone think it's going to disappear? The gays and lesbians who are affected by this, they have equivalently declared war on this particular subject. They feel outraged by it. So it's going to be around. What's it's going to do --
REP. REYNOLDS: I think it's --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You have to look at it through a political lens, Bob. Don't you feel that way?
REP. REYNOLDS: No. As I said before, I think it's district by district. I think John Kerry is the lead candidate for the Democratic nomination, has staked out his position. Apparently the president has. Our colleague, Marilyn Musgrave, felt strong enough about it she introduced the legislation some time ago; this isn't new. And it's going to be a long debate, if a debate, depending on the sense of Congress wanting to debate it.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, it's a very high-minded discussion we're having here. But there are the political analysts who say that Rove is banking more on the voters who do not-that the voters who do not vote-let me see if I can get this straight here. If he gets more votes from people who don't normally vote than he'll lose from people who do routinely vote, then he'll succeed in the political gamble.
REP. REYNOLDS: Right now it's political pundit projection. After November, somebody can begin to measure out whether it was or wasn't.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: We'll be right back.
(Announcements.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Gentlemen, please take a look at the screen. I'm going to quote from Tim Story-he's an expert at the National Conference of State Legislators-regarding the potential impact of the upcoming Supreme Court decision on redistricting. He says it could have the same force of a Class 5 -- and you can go no higher-hurricane altering the political landscape in a way not seen since Baker versus Carr. Baker versus Carr was a landmark decision of 1962 providing one man, one vote.
Do you believe that's going to happen with this Supreme Court decision? One is coming up on Pennsylvania this summer. And there's another one on Georgia which I think is in the pipeline.
REP. MATSUI: Basically, the Georgia and the Pennsylvania case, particularly the Pennsylvania case, is that the proponents of the lawsuit want the court to basically say that any overtly political gerrymandering would be declared unconstitutional and would have to be done over.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Depriving people of their rights.
REP. MATSUI: Of their right to vote. And yes, over a period of time, if in fact the court ruled that way, it would have a major impact on our political system because --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What's in the best interests of incumbents like yourselves, Chairman Reynolds? To retain the present system?
REP. REYNOLDS: Well, for Congress it's a different story. Remember, when I was a state legislator for 10 years, then you're the victim or the opportunity of holding the pen. So what we see with lawsuits, when the Democrats are out of power, then bring lawsuits. When the Republicans are out of power, they bring the lawsuits.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What's the length of your incumbency in the Congress?
REP. REYNOLDS: How long have I been here? Five-and-a-half years.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Well, you're an incumbent, so you're enjoying the rewards of incumbency, so you don't want to see the system change.
How long have you been in Congress --
REP. REYNOLDS: But incumbency isn't the question on this, John. The question is what do the lines look like? Do I end up in a seat like Bob Matsui's or do I end up in a seat more like a Texas Republican?
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Independent of you, what's in the best interests of incumbents? And that is to keep the vagueness that now exists about the configuration and the permissibility in between the decennial-the decennial-what are --
REP. MATSUI: Census. Decennial census, yeah.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Census, right. As is happening in Texas with this absurdity and the way that's going on there.
But let me ask you, what's in the best interest of voters?
REP. MATSUI: Well, let me say this. I mean, yes, it is better to have a safe district if you're an incumbent. On the other hand, if you have members that go back a number of years --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Seniority helps --
REP. MATSUI: No, no. If I can just say this, because this is important. Then you members with experience, then they'll know how to work with their constituents to get, obviously, transportation projects, things that states need. So there's a balance here.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Seniority has with it the opportunity to gain more advantages for your individual district, too, what is commonly referred to, in a rather degrading way, as pork.
REP. MATSUI: (Inaudible) -- that.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: However, the opposite of that is that if you're facing an election and you don't have a safe seat that has been steeped in incumbency, you're going to be more responsive to the people because you're running again. You follow me? Now, how should --
REP. REYNOLDS: I think that people have to run it every two years as it is now.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Yeah, but you're running again in a serious race. You're not facing a serious challenger this go-round.
REP. REYNOLDS: I always run like I'm behind. But let's take --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What's better for the voter?
REP. REYNOLDS: John, John, the state legislatures --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: We're almost out of time. Can you give me a quick answer?
REP. REYNOLDS: The state legislatures draw the lines, not us. A true value for us would be --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I understand that.
REP. REYNOLDS: -- that Congress draws its own lines. That doesn't happen.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: We're in political theory now.
REP. REYNOLDS: Well, we're at the mercy of state legislatures and governors. And what happened this last time, Republicans had more governorships and state legislatures than they had in 40 years.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Which is better for the voter, the responsiveness that's a product of facing a fresh election for a seat that's not guaranteed to be safe almost, or seniority? Which is better?
REP. MATSUI: It depends, John. You can't make that decision black or white. It's not yes or no. (Laughs.) That didn't help you.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Gentlemen, thank you very much for being my guests.
REP. MATSUI: Thank you.
PBS SEGMENT
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Arnold Schwarzenegger. As governor, after his first 100 days, how would you rate him, Bob Matsui?
REP. MATSUI: I think he's a B-plus right now. I mean, he's got a lot of folks with him and he's come up with a proposition that will probably pass.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What's the proposition?
REP. MATSUI: It's Proposition 58. And basically it's floating a $15 billion bond issue that would be paid off in six years. And if it fails, obviously, the legislature and the governor will have to find spending cuts or tax increases to make it up.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: And what do you think of whether it's going to pass or not?
REP. MATSUI: Well, my guess is it passes. The latest statewide polls have indicated that a majority of the voters now favor it. But two weeks ago, before the governor actually had some TV commercials out, it would have failed.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Chairman Reynolds, are you surprised at the popularity of Arnold Schwarzenegger?
REP. REYNOLDS: Well, I guess I'm not, because of what he has as an actor now running as governor. But what I've been pleased to see is how well he has stepped in and begun to run the state of California as governor. And what I'm hearing from my own governor, George Pataki of New York, is the interaction he's having with governors, both sides of the aisle, as they work on state solutions, asking the federal government for involvement or running his own state, he's become very popular in the state in energizing Republicans, as I hear it, as well as people like him as they meet him.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think that the proposed Hatch Amendment to the Constitution, which would permit foreign-born citizens of the United States to become president of the United States after staying here for 20 years-do you think that will ever reach any kind of maturity, and would you favor it?
REP. REYNOLDS: Well, constitutional amendments are slow to happen as our founders intended, so I don't know whether it will happen or not.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: One of the issues in this campaign-is jobs outsourcing and jobs in general going to be a major issue, especially if what Alan Greenspan says, is it's going to be kind of a long crawl getting jobs back?
REP. MATSUI: Well, I don't think there's any question that the issue of jobs will be a major issue.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is that the number one issue, do you think?
REP. MATSUI: Well, it's hard to know what the number one issue will be.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is the same-sex marriage ban, is that going to be-the amendment, could that overtake it?
REP. MATSUI: It could, but right now I don't think it's going to be a major issue. But --
REP. REYNOLDS: Not in my district. It's going to be jobs and it's going to be taxes and it's going to be education and health care.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: So we're talking about Michigan, California, Ohio-Where else? -- South Carolina and North Carolina, those major states, right?
REP. REYNOLDS: And did you say Ohio?
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I did say Ohio. How about the Iraq-the Iraq resolution authorizing war, you know, voting for the Iraq resolution way back? Is that going to intrude in the campaigns, your campaigns?
REP. MATSUI: Well, I think it could. I mean, it depends upon where you happen to be. Right now we have a situation where there's some primaries in which Democrats who voted for the war are going to have problems, and so in the general probably the same thing will happen.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: How about Nader, his entry? Have you calculated that in your very careful and diligent reviews of the districts? (Chuckles.)
REP. REYNOLDS: We pull out the computers and factor what that meant. No, I --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Could it marginally hurt the Democrats?
REP. REYNOLDS: I think so.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: How?
REP. REYNOLDS: I just think that there's --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: For the Democrats.
REP. REYNOLDS: -- there's a certain voter that, if Nader was not on the ballot, likely would go to a left-of-center candidate like John Kerry.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What do you think of that? Could he marginally help the Democrats?
REP. MATSUI: Yeah, well, they --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Or hurt the Democrats, rather?
REP. MATSUI: Nader-we wish that Nader had not decided to run for president, there's no question about that, and we'll have to figure that one out as time goes on.
END