National Public Radio "Morning Edition" - Transcript

National Public Radio "Morning Edition" Interview With Rep. Walter Minnick - Why Minnick Voted Against The Stimulus Package

Interviewer: Steve Inskeeper

Copyright ©2009 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Carina Nyberg at cnyberg@fednews.com or call 1-202-216-2706.

MR. INSKEEP: Now, while some Republicans welcomed the president's economic plan, a few Democrats in Congress voted against it. One of them was Walter Minnick. He's newly elected from a very rural and very conservative part of Idaho.

REP. MINNICK: We all recognize that in a recession this severe, the federal government has to do something. The issue is how much should we spend to create jobs and how do we ensure that this is a one-time event and not a continuation of piling debt that our kids and grandkids are going to have to repay.

MR. INSKEEP: Well, now, when you looked at the details of this, what made you think that it was going to fail in those criteria so badly that you voted "no"?

REP. MINNICK: Well, the cost per job is the thing that jumped out at me. I've only been a congressman six weeks, but I've been a businessman all my life. And it's costing us -- depending on number of jobs created -- north of a quarter-of-a-million dollars of taxpayer money for every job we create.

I was also concerned that -- depending upon the estimate -- 30 to 50 percent of these jobs aren't even going to be created for three to five years. And by that time, we need to be out of this recession. So it's inefficient from both of those perspectives.

MR. INSKEEP: Did you get a groundswell of opposition from constituents about this?

REP. MINNICK: My constituents are very tight with the dollar. We're a poor district. We're not used to borrowing and spending money.

My constituents, by and large -- while they want to support the president -- had great reluctance about spending this much money to create that few jobs. And the spending on other worthwhile aspects of this bill -- my constituents think that should have been considered separately against the budget target.

I also favor that approach. I think the energy, education and health care provisions should have been considered as a secondary process after we created jobs in a tax efficient way.

MR. INSKEEP: Although, while given the deficit and debt situation, if you did consider those within the framework of trying to balance the budget or even move in that direction, you wouldn't do any of this stuff.

REP. MINNICK: Well, look at electronic medical records, for example: Six years ago, I was lying beside a highway in rural Idaho with a broken neck and there's no question that my medical care would have been easier and better if those EMT technicians had access over their computer to my health records. They would have known whether I was a diabetic or whether I had allergies as they were treating me.

So no one disagrees that that would improve health care in America, but that kind of provision should have been considered separately by a committee dealing with health care issues. And the value of doing that now weighed against things that should wait until later.

MR. INSKEEP: So your larger point is you see worthy spending here, but maybe it should have been considered in a different way.

And I want to ask you this: There weren't a lot of Democrats who voted "no", but I wonder if there is some tension ahead for the Democratic Party over this question of how much to spend on what seemed like worthy goals in the coming years.

REP. MINNICK: Clearly, I'm a conservative Blue-Dog Democrat and we are very, very concerned about getting to balanced budgets and paying for what we spend, because we are concerned about this mountain of debt. And we're also concerned about whether these foreign lenders, who don't exactly have our nation's best interest as their first priority, are going to continue to lend.

And fiscally conservative Democrats like me are very, very concerned that we not get into that situation. That's why we want to spend the minimum number of dollars to create the maximum number of jobs in the short term in any jobs creation bill. And frankly, we thought this provision failed that test.

MR. INSKEEP: Congressman Walt Minnick of Idaho, thanks for taking the time.

REP. MINNICK: Thank you very much, Steve.

Source