カマラ・ハリス上院議員ジョー・バイデンと私には意見の相違がある｜モーニング・ジョー｜MSNBC (Sen. Kamala Harris: Joe Biden And I Just Have A Difference Of Opinion | Morning Joe

字幕表動画を再生する

ON "MORNING JOE." >>> IN THIS CAMPAIGN, WE HAVE
>>> IN THIS CAMPAIGN, WE HAVE ALSO HEARD AND I’M GOING TO NOW
ALSO HEARD AND I’M GOING TO NOW DIRECT THIS AT VICE PRESIDENT
DIRECT THIS AT VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN.
BIDEN. DO I NOT BELIEVE YOU’RE A RACIST
DO I NOT BELIEVE YOU’RE A RACIST AND I AGREE WITH YOU WHEN YOU
AND I AGREE WITH YOU WHEN YOU COMMIT YOURSELF TO FINDING
COMMIT YOURSELF TO FINDING COMMON GROUND.
COMMON GROUND. BUT I ALSO BELIEVE -- IT’S
BUT I ALSO BELIEVE -- IT’S PERSONAL AND I WAS ACTUALLY
PERSONAL AND I WAS ACTUALLY VERY -- IT WAS HURTFUL TO HEAR
VERY -- IT WAS HURTFUL TO HEAR YOU TALK ABOUT THE REPUTATIONS
YOU TALK ABOUT THE REPUTATIONS OF TWO UNITED STATES SENATORS
OF TWO UNITED STATES SENATORS WHO BUILT THEIR REPUTATION AND
WHO BUILT THEIR REPUTATION AND CAREER ON THE SEGREGATION OF
CAREER ON THE SEGREGATION OF RACE IN THIS COUNTRY.
RACE IN THIS COUNTRY. AND IT WAS NOT ONLY THAT, BUT
AND IT WAS NOT ONLY THAT, BUT YOU ALSO WORKED WITH THEM TO
YOU ALSO WORKED WITH THEM TO OPPOSE BUSING.
OPPOSE BUSING. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A
AND, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A LITTLE GIRL IN CALIFORNIA WHO
LITTLE GIRL IN CALIFORNIA WHO WAS PART OF THE SECOND CLASS TO
WAS PART OF THE SECOND CLASS TO INTEGRATE HER PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND
INTEGRATE HER PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND SHE WAS BUSSED TO SCHOOL EVERY
SHE WAS BUSSED TO SCHOOL EVERY DAY.
DAY. AND THAT LITTLE GIRL WAS ME.
AND THAT LITTLE GIRL WAS ME. >> THE MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY
>> THE MISCHARACTERIZATION OF MY POSITION ACROSS THE BOARD.
POSITION ACROSS THE BOARD. DID NOT PRAISE RACISTS.
DID NOT PRAISE RACISTS. THAT’S NOT TRUE.
THAT’S NOT TRUE. NUMBER TWO, IF WE WANT THIS
NUMBER TWO, IF WE WANT THIS CAMPAIGN LITIGATED ON WHO
CAMPAIGN LITIGATED ON WHO SUPPORTS CIVIL RIGHTS AND
SUPPORTS CIVIL RIGHTS AND WHETHER I DID OR NOT, I’M HAPPY
WHETHER I DID OR NOT, I’M HAPPY TO DO THAT.
TO DO THAT. I WAS A PUBLIC DEFENDER.
I WAS A PUBLIC DEFENDER. I DIDN’T BECOME A PROSECUTOR.
I DIDN’T BECOME A PROSECUTOR. I LEFT A GOOD LAW FIRM TO BECOME
I LEFT A GOOD LAW FIRM TO BECOME A PUBLIC DEFENDER WHEN IN
A PUBLIC DEFENDER WHEN IN FACT -- IN FACT WHEN MY CITY WAS
FACT -- IN FACT WHEN MY CITY WAS IN FLAMES BECAUSE OF THE
IN FLAMES BECAUSE OF THE ASSASSINATION OF DR. KING.
ASSASSINATION OF DR. KING. >> DO YOU AGREE TODAY THAT YOU
>> DO YOU AGREE TODAY THAT YOU WERE WRONG TO OPPOSE BUSING IN
WERE WRONG TO OPPOSE BUSING IN AMERICA THEN?
AMERICA THEN? DO YOU AGREE?
DO YOU AGREE? >> I DID NOT OPPOSE BUSING IN
>> I DID NOT OPPOSE BUSING IN AMERICA.
AMERICA. WHAT I OPPOSED IS BUSING ORDER
WHAT I OPPOSED IS BUSING ORDER BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION THAT’S WHAT I OPPOSED.
THAT’S WHAT I OPPOSED. [ APPLAUSE ]
[ APPLAUSE ] >> ALL RIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT. THAT WAS PART OF A HEATED
THAT WAS PART OF A HEATED EXCHANGE BETWEEN JOE BIDEN AND
EXCHANGE BETWEEN JOE BIDEN AND KAMALA HARRIS DURING LAST
KAMALA HARRIS DURING LAST NIGHT’S DEBATE IN WHICH THE
NIGHT’S DEBATE IN WHICH THE SENATOR CRITICIZED THE FORMER
SENATOR CRITICIZED THE FORMER VICE PRESIDENT’S RECORD ON RACE,
VICE PRESIDENT’S RECORD ON RACE, FOLLOWING HIS RECENT COMMENTS ON
FOLLOWING HIS RECENT COMMENTS ON WORKING WITH SEGREGATIONISTS
WORKING WITH SEGREGATIONISTS DURING HIS TIME IN THE SENATE.
DURING HIS TIME IN THE SENATE. JOINING US NOW, 2020 DEMOCRATIC
JOINING US NOW, 2020 DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, SENATOR
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, SENATOR KAMALA HARRIS.
KAMALA HARRIS. AND I THINK -- I BELIEVE THIS
AND I THINK -- I BELIEVE THIS WOMAN OWNS THE ROOM.
WOMAN OWNS THE ROOM. [ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]
[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ] ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. >> I WILL -- I WILL SAY, JOHN
>> I WILL -- I WILL SAY, JOHN HEILEMANN, THAT’S THE LOUDEST
HEILEMANN, THAT’S THE LOUDEST APPLAUSE I EVER HEARD FOR YOU.
APPLAUSE I EVER HEARD FOR YOU. >> SOMETIMES I’M LUCKY WITH YOU
>> SOMETIMES I’M LUCKY WITH YOU AS MY WING WOMAN.
AS MY WING WOMAN. >> SENATOR, I WAS TALKING OFF
>> SENATOR, I WAS TALKING OFF CAMERA WITH YOU AND I ASKED WHAT
CAMERA WITH YOU AND I ASKED WHAT YEAR THAT WAS.
YEAR THAT WAS. YOU SAID ’72.
YOU SAID ’72. I WAS IN MISSISSIPPI IN ’69,
I WAS IN MISSISSIPPI IN ’69, ’70.
’70. THE FIRST YEAR MISSISSIPPI WAS
THE FIRST YEAR MISSISSIPPI WAS INTEGRATED AND I SAID -- THIS
INTEGRATED AND I SAID -- THIS HAS TO DO WITH GENERATIONAL
HAS TO DO WITH GENERATIONAL CHANGE, I SAID WHAT A BLESSING
CHANGE, I SAID WHAT A BLESSING IT WAS --
IT WAS -- >> THERE’S A PICTURE.
>> THERE’S A PICTURE. >> -- TO SEE THAT AS NORMAL.
>> -- TO SEE THAT AS NORMAL. >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. >> INTEGRATION NORMAL.
>> INTEGRATION NORMAL. >> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. >> MY OLDER BROTHER AND SISTER
>> MY OLDER BROTHER AND SISTER WENT THROUGH A LOT MORE TURMOIL.
WENT THROUGH A LOT MORE TURMOIL. I’M JUST WONDERING IS THAT PART
I’M JUST WONDERING IS THAT PART OF JOE BIDEN’S PROBLEM?
OF JOE BIDEN’S PROBLEM? PART OF BERNIE SANDERS’ PROBLEM?
PART OF BERNIE SANDERS’ PROBLEM? IT’S A GENERATIONAL THING WHERE
IT’S A GENERATIONAL THING WHERE THAT WAS NORMAL FOR US IN OUR
THAT WAS NORMAL FOR US IN OUR OWN SETTINGS.
OWN SETTINGS. BUT FOR SOMEBODY OLDER, THEY’RE
BUT FOR SOMEBODY OLDER, THEY’RE STILL LIVING, THEY GREW UP IN A
STILL LIVING, THEY GREW UP IN A DIFFERENT AMERICA.
DIFFERENT AMERICA. >> YOU KNOW, THE WAY THINK ABOUT
>> YOU KNOW, THE WAY THINK ABOUT IT ON ANY ISSUE AND SO ON SO
IT ON ANY ISSUE AND SO ON SO MANY ISSUES THAT WILL IS COME UP
MANY ISSUES THAT WILL IS COME UP ON THAT DEBATE STAGE, WE HAVE TO
ON THAT DEBATE STAGE, WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE REAL IMPACT ON
UNDERSTAND THE REAL IMPACT ON REAL HUMAN BEINGS IF WE’RE GOING
REAL HUMAN BEINGS IF WE’RE GOING TO HAVE A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION
TO HAVE A MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION AND IF THAT IS BASED ON FACT AND
AND IF THAT IS BASED ON FACT AND IF IT’S GOING TO BE BASED ON
IF IT’S GOING TO BE BASED ON TRUTH.
TRUTH. SO THE POINT THAT I WAS RAISING
SO THE POINT THAT I WAS RAISING LAST NIGHT IS THAT THE
LAST NIGHT IS THAT THE CONVERSATION ABOUT
CONVERSATION ABOUT SEGREGATIONISTS AND WHO THEY
SEGREGATIONISTS AND WHO THEY WERE AND WHAT THEY DID IN
WERE AND WHAT THEY DID IN AMERICA CANNOT JUST BE AN
AMERICA CANNOT JUST BE AN INTELLECTUAL CONVERSATION.
INTELLECTUAL CONVERSATION. IT HAS TO BE GROUNDED IN THE
IT HAS TO BE GROUNDED IN THE EXPERIENCE OF REAL PEOPLE.
EXPERIENCE OF REAL PEOPLE. I CANNOT TELL YOU THE NUMBER OF
I CANNOT TELL YOU THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE -- NOW STRANGERS WHO HAVE
PEOPLE -- NOW STRANGERS WHO HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME SINCE LAST
REACHED OUT TO ME SINCE LAST NIGHT TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY
NIGHT TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY WERE BUSSED IN THE ’70s.
WERE BUSSED IN THE ’70s. AND THAT THE COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT
AND THAT THE COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT THE SEGREGATIONS WERE WERE
THE SEGREGATIONS WERE WERE HURTFUL TO THEM AND THEY WERE
HURTFUL TO THEM AND THEY WERE APPRECIATING THAT THERE WAS SOME
APPRECIATING THAT THERE WAS SOME AIRING OUT OF WHAT THAT
AIRING OUT OF WHAT THAT EXPERIENCE WAS.
EXPERIENCE WAS. THAT’S HOW I THINK ABOUT IT.
THAT’S HOW I THINK ABOUT IT. FRANKLY THAT’S HOW I THINK ABOUT
FRANKLY THAT’S HOW I THINK ABOUT EVERY ISSUE.
EVERY ISSUE. WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE
WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE ISSUE OF IMMIGRATION.
ISSUE OF IMMIGRATION. ALL OF US TRIES TO COMPEL US
ALL OF US TRIES TO COMPEL US WHAT A MOTHER IN THAT SITUATION
WHAT A MOTHER IN THAT SITUATION IS THINKING AND DOING THAT
IS THINKING AND DOING THAT CAUSES HER TO PUT HER CHILD INTO
CAUSES HER TO PUT HER CHILD INTO POTENTIAL PERIL.
POTENTIAL PERIL. YOU BECAUSE OF COURSE WHAT THAT
YOU BECAUSE OF COURSE WHAT THAT CHILD IS FLEEING IS EVEN WORSE.
CHILD IS FLEEING IS EVEN WORSE. WHAT IS OUR IMMIGRATION POLICY
WHAT IS OUR IMMIGRATION POLICY ABOUT IF WE TELL THEM TO GO BACK
ABOUT IF WE TELL THEM TO GO BACK WHERE THEY CAME FROM?
WHERE THEY CAME FROM? THAT’S WHAT I HAVE IN MIND WHEN
THAT’S WHAT I HAVE IN MIND WHEN I SAY THAT MINE IS A 3:00 IN THE
I SAY THAT MINE IS A 3:00 IN THE MORNING AGENDA.
MORNING AGENDA. LET’S THINK ABOUT THE ISSUES.
LET’S THINK ABOUT THE ISSUES. AND THE WAY THEY REALLY IMPACT
AND THE WAY THEY REALLY IMPACT REAL PEOPLE WHEN THEY WAKE UP IN
REAL PEOPLE WHEN THEY WAKE UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, TRYING
THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT ALL
TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT ALL WORK.
WORK. >> SO A LOT TO GET TO, A LOT TO
>> SO A LOT TO GET TO, A LOT TO UNWIND IN THAT ANSWER.
UNWIND IN THAT ANSWER. BUT I GUESS LET’S JUST GO FROM
BUT I GUESS LET’S JUST GO FROM 30,000 FEET AND ASK A QUESTION
30,000 FEET AND ASK A QUESTION AND THIS OF JOE BIDEN WHICH IS
AND THIS OF JOE BIDEN WHICH IS YOU SAY YOU KNOW HE’S NOT
YOU SAY YOU KNOW HE’S NOT RACIST.
RACIST. >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. >> DO YOU THINK HE’S RACIALLY
>> DO YOU THINK HE’S RACIALLY INSENSITIVE IN A WAY THAT MAKES
INSENSITIVE IN A WAY THAT MAKES HIM A POOR FIT TO BE PRESIDENT
HIM A POOR FIT TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?
OF THE UNITED STATES? >> I WOULDN’T SAY THAT.
>> I WOULDN’T SAY THAT. I JUST THINK HE AND I HAVE A
I JUST THINK HE AND I HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.
DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. AND ALSO A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION
AND ALSO A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON STATES RIGHTS.
ON STATES RIGHTS. I WAS ACTUALLY A BIT SURPRISED
I WAS ACTUALLY A BIT SURPRISED TO HEAR HOW HE DESCRIBED IN
TO HEAR HOW HE DESCRIBED IN DEFENSE OF HIS POSITION HIS
DEFENSE OF HIS POSITION HIS PERSPECTIVE ON THE ROLE OF THE
PERSPECTIVE ON THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND IN
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND IN PARTICULAR HE MENTIONED THE
PARTICULAR HE MENTIONED THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHY I SAID,
YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHY I SAID, LOOK, WE HAVE SO MANY EXAMPLES
LOOK, WE HAVE SO MANY EXAMPLES IN HISTORY OF WHERE STATES HAVE
IN HISTORY OF WHERE STATES HAVE LIMITED OR RESTRICTED PEOPLE’S
LIMITED OR RESTRICTED PEOPLE’S CIVIL RIGHTS SO THAT IS WHY WE
CIVIL RIGHTS SO THAT IS WHY WE AGREED AND FOUGHT FOR THE VOTING
AGREED AND FOUGHT FOR THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT.
RIGHTS ACT. WHICH OF COURSE IS ABOUT THE
WHICH OF COURSE IS ABOUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAYING, LOOK,
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SAYING, LOOK, IF YOU ALL ARE GOING TO TRAMPLE
IF YOU ALL ARE GOING TO TRAMPLE ON PEOPLE’S VOTING RIGHTS THEN
ON PEOPLE’S VOTING RIGHTS THEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS GOING
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO STEP IN BECAUSE WE HAVE
TO STEP IN BECAUSE WE HAVE CERTAIN VALUES THAT ARE NATIONAL
CERTAIN VALUES THAT ARE NATIONAL STANDARDS AND WE WON’T LET
STANDARDS AND WE WON’T LET STATES COMPROMISE THAT.
STATES COMPROMISE THAT. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT. I KNOW BUSING WAS UNPOPULAR IN
I KNOW BUSING WAS UNPOPULAR IN THE ’70s.
THE ’70s. >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. >> I KNOW BUSING WAS UNPOPULAR
>> I KNOW BUSING WAS UNPOPULAR THE LAST TIME THAT THERE WAS A
THE LAST TIME THAT THERE WAS A POLL WAS TAKEN AND IF YOU WENT
POLL WAS TAKEN AND IF YOU WENT TO LIBERTY CITY YOU’LL FIND THE
TO LIBERTY CITY YOU’LL FIND THE SEGREGATED SCHOOLS.
SEGREGATED SCHOOLS. IN HARLEM, THE BRONX, THE
IN HARLEM, THE BRONX, THE SEGREGATED SCHOOLS.
SEGREGATED SCHOOLS. WE DON’T SUPPORT BUSING RIGHT
WE DON’T SUPPORT BUSING RIGHT NOW --
NOW -- >> JOE, YOU’RE RIGHT TO TALK
>> JOE, YOU’RE RIGHT TO TALK ABOUT THE TRAJECTORY OF THIS
ABOUT THE TRAJECTORY OF THIS ISSUE.
ISSUE. AND SO IF -- SO TO HAVE A
AND SO IF -- SO TO HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE CONVERSATION ABOUT
COMPREHENSIVE CONVERSATION ABOUT IT I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT
IT I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT 1954 AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF
1954 AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BROWN V BOARD OF EDUCATIONWHICH
BROWN V BOARD OF EDUCATIONWHICH IF THE SUPREME COURT HAD NOT
IF THE SUPREME COURT HAD NOT DECIDED IT I WOULD NOT BE
DECIDED IT I WOULD NOT BE SITTING HERE AS A MEMBER OF THE
SITTING HERE AS A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE AND AS A
UNITED STATES SENATE AND AS A SERIOUS CONTENDER FOR THE UNITED
SERIOUS CONTENDER FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
STATES OF AMERICA. WHEN BROWN V BOARD OF EDUCATION
WHEN BROWN V BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS DECIDED AND THEN BUSING
WAS DECIDED AND THEN BUSING FOLLOWED, THAT WAS THE WAY WE’LL
FOLLOWED, THAT WAS THE WAY WE’LL INTEGRATE SCHOOLS THAT WAS THE
INTEGRATE SCHOOLS THAT WAS THE BEGINNING OF CERTAIN FAMILIES
BEGINNING OF CERTAIN FAMILIES FROM -- BEGINNING OF THE FLIGHT
FROM -- BEGINNING OF THE FLIGHT OF CERTAIN FAMILIES FROM PUBLIC
OF CERTAIN FAMILIES FROM PUBLIC SCHOOLS THAT’S WHY ONE OF MY
SCHOOLS THAT’S WHY ONE OF MY ISSUES IS ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO
ISSUES IS ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO PAY TEACHERS THEIR VALUE.
DO TO PAY TEACHERS THEIR VALUE. BECAUSE OVER THE COURSE OF THAT
BECAUSE OVER THE COURSE OF THAT PERIOD OF TIME WE HAVE ALSO
PERIOD OF TIME WE HAVE ALSO DEVALUED AND PULLED RESOURCES
DEVALUED AND PULLED RESOURCES FROM THE PUBLIC EDUCATION IN
FROM THE PUBLIC EDUCATION IN AMERICA.
AMERICA. YES, YOU SEE THE SEGREGATED
YES, YOU SEE THE SEGREGATED SCHOOLS BUT IT’S ABOUT
SCHOOLS BUT IT’S ABOUT SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS OF
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS OF FAMILIES.
FAMILIES. THE FAMILIES THAT CAN AFFORD TO
THE FAMILIES THAT CAN AFFORD TO PUT THEIR KIDS IN PRIVATE
PUT THEIR KIDS IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS DO BECAUSE THE RESOURCES
SCHOOLS DO BECAUSE THE RESOURCES ARE THERE FOR A BETTER EDUCATION
ARE THERE FOR A BETTER EDUCATION OFTEN.
OFTEN. TEACHERS ARE PAID BETTER.
TEACHERS ARE PAID BETTER. SO THAT’S WHY ONE OF MY
SO THAT’S WHY ONE OF MY PROPOSALS THAT I’M VERY PROUD OF
PROPOSALS THAT I’M VERY PROUD OF IS TO SAY LET’S PAY TEACHERS
IS TO SAY LET’S PAY TEACHERS THEIR VALUE AND I’M PREPARED AS
THEIR VALUE AND I’M PREPARED AS PRESIDENT TO HAVE THE FIRST
PRESIDENT TO HAVE THE FIRST FEDERAL INVESTMENT TO THE
FEDERAL INVESTMENT TO THE TEACHER PAY GAP BEING CLOSED IN
TEACHER PAY GAP BEING CLOSED IN AMERICA.
AMERICA. >> LET ME END.
>> LET ME END. SO MANY QUESTIONS WE COULD DO
SO MANY QUESTIONS WE COULD DO THIS ALL DAY.
THIS ALL DAY. AT LEAST I COULD.
AT LEAST I COULD. BUT LET ME END WITH ONE QUESTION
BUT LET ME END WITH ONE QUESTION THAT YOU’LL CERTAINLY HEAR FROM
THAT YOU’LL CERTAINLY HEAR FROM CONSERVATIVES.
CONSERVATIVES. YOU’LL CERTAINLY HEAR FROM
YOU’LL CERTAINLY HEAR FROM DONALD TRUMP IF YOU WIN THE
DONALD TRUMP IF YOU WIN THE NOMINATION.
NOMINATION. AND THAT IS THAT HE COULD QUOTE,
AND THAT IS THAT HE COULD QUOTE, FOR INSTANCE, THE PRESIDENT OF
FOR INSTANCE, THE PRESIDENT OF THE URBAN LEAGUE IN MIAMI, WHO
THE URBAN LEAGUE IN MIAMI, WHO SAID IT IS LIBERALS THAT ARE
SAID IT IS LIBERALS THAT ARE ACTUALLY STOPPING POOR BLACK
ACTUALLY STOPPING POOR BLACK CHILDREN AND THEIR PARENTS IN
CHILDREN AND THEIR PARENTS IN MIAMI OR IN HARLEM FROM BEING
MIAMI OR IN HARLEM FROM BEING ABLE TO GO TO THE SCHOOLS OF
ABLE TO GO TO THE SCHOOLS OF THEIR CHOICE NOW BECAUSE LIKE
THEIR CHOICE NOW BECAUSE LIKE FOR INSTANCE, HARLEM VILLAGE
FOR INSTANCE, HARLEM VILLAGE ACADEMIES, THERE’S A QUOTA.
ACADEMIES, THERE’S A QUOTA. TEACHERS UNIONS DO NOT WANT TO
TEACHERS UNIONS DO NOT WANT TO ALLOW CHILDREN TO MAKE THOSE
ALLOW CHILDREN TO MAKE THOSE SORT OF CHOICES, PARENTS TO MAKE
SORT OF CHOICES, PARENTS TO MAKE THOSE SORT OF CHOICES TO BE ABLE
THOSE SORT OF CHOICES TO BE ABLE TO GO TO THE SCHOOLS THEY WANT
TO GO TO THE SCHOOLS THEY WANT TO GO TO.
TO GO TO. >> BUT YOU KNOW, THERE’S SO MUCH
>> BUT YOU KNOW, THERE’S SO MUCH ABOUT THAT ARGUMENT THAT REALLY
ABOUT THAT ARGUMENT THAT REALLY IS MOTIVATED BY FOLKS WHO DO NOT
IS MOTIVATED BY FOLKS WHO DO NOT VALUE PUBLIC EDUCATION.
VALUE PUBLIC EDUCATION. AND ARE ATTEMPTING TO PRIVATIZE
AND ARE ATTEMPTING TO PRIVATIZE EDUCATION.
EDUCATION. >> WHAT ABOUT PARENTS WHO WANT
>> WHAT ABOUT PARENTS WHO WANT TO MAKE THE CHOICES --
TO MAKE THE CHOICES -- >> WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO PARENTS,
>> WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO PARENTS, WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO PARENTS AND
WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO PARENTS AND WE HAVE LISTEN AND RESPECT TO
WE HAVE LISTEN AND RESPECT TO THE DECISIONS THEY WANT AND NEED
THE DECISIONS THEY WANT AND NEED TO MAKE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF
TO MAKE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THEIR CHILDREN.
THEIR CHILDREN. BUT IF WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HOW
BUT IF WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HOW DO WE DO WITH A SYSTEM AND
DO WE DO WITH A SYSTEM AND WHAT’S THE BEST PUBLIC POLICY TO
WHAT’S THE BEST PUBLIC POLICY TO IMPROVE EDUCATION FOR OUR
IMPROVE EDUCATION FOR OUR CHILDREN AND THE VAST MAJORITY
CHILDREN AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR CHILDREN, THAT IS ABOUT
OF OUR CHILDREN, THAT IS ABOUT PUTTING MORE RESOURCES IN TO
PUTTING MORE RESOURCES IN TO PUBLIC EDUCATION.
PUBLIC EDUCATION. PAYING OUR TEACHERS BETTER.
PAYING OUR TEACHERS BETTER. UNDERSTANDING THAT OUR SYSTEM IS
UNDERSTANDING THAT OUR SYSTEM IS UPSIDE DOWN WHEN WE FUND SCHOOL
UPSIDE DOWN WHEN WE FUND SCHOOL DISTRICTS BASED ON THE TAX BASE
DISTRICTS BASED ON THE TAX BASE OF THAT COMMUNITY SO GUESS WHAT?
OF THAT COMMUNITY SO GUESS WHAT? >> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. >> THE LOWEST TAX BASE HAS THE
>> THE LOWEST TAX BASE HAS THE FEWEST RESOURCES AND NOT BY
FEWEST RESOURCES AND NOT BY COINCIDENCE HAS THE HIGHEST
COINCIDENCE HAS THE HIGHEST NEED.
NEED. IT’S BANANAS THE WAY WE’RE DOING
IT’S BANANAS THE WAY WE’RE DOING PUBLIC EDUCATION IN THIS COUNTRY
PUBLIC EDUCATION IN THIS COUNTRY AND WE HAVE TO GET BETTER IF
AND WE HAVE TO GET BETTER IF WE’RE GOING TO COMPETE -- IF
WE’RE GOING TO COMPETE -- IF WE’RE GOING TO COMPETE.
WE’RE GOING TO COMPETE. >> WILLIE?
>> WILLIE? >> SENATOR, PUT A BOW ON YOUR
>> SENATOR, PUT A BOW ON YOUR BACK AND FORTH WITH VICE
BACK AND FORTH WITH VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN LAST NIGHT.
PRESIDENT BIDEN LAST NIGHT. HE SAYS THAT THE CASE AGAINST
HE SAYS THAT THE CASE AGAINST HIM -- HIS COMMENTS TALKING
HIM -- HIS COMMENTS TALKING ABOUT THE SEGREGATIONIST
ABOUT THE SEGREGATIONIST SENATORS IS BONUS HERE.
SENATORS IS BONUS HERE. THAT WHAT HE WAS SAYING WAS YOU
THAT WHAT HE WAS SAYING WAS YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE WHEN
HAVE TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE WHEN YOU’RE IN THE UNITED STATES
YOU’RE IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE LIKE SEGREGATIONISTS TO
SENATE LIKE SEGREGATIONISTS TO GET THINGS DONE.
GET THINGS DONE. WE HAVE TO WIN OUT, OUR IDEAS
WE HAVE TO WIN OUT, OUR IDEAS HAVE TO PREVAIL, BUT YOU HAVE TO
HAVE TO PREVAIL, BUT YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH PEOPLE LIKE THAT IF
WORK WITH PEOPLE LIKE THAT IF YOU WANT TO WIN IN THE SENATE.
YOU WANT TO WIN IN THE SENATE. DO YOU BELIEVE HE WAS
DO YOU BELIEVE HE WAS SYMPATHIZING WITH THE
SYMPATHIZING WITH THE SEGREGATIONISTS OR DO YOU ACCEPT
SEGREGATIONISTS OR DO YOU ACCEPT HIS EXPLANATION SAYING YOU HAVE
HIS EXPLANATION SAYING YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH EVERYBODY TO GET
TO DEAL WITH EVERYBODY TO GET THINGS DONE?
THINGS DONE? >> THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT WE
>> THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT WE HAVE GOT TO FIND COMMON GROUND.
HAVE GOT TO FIND COMMON GROUND. AND I -- IN FACT, WHEN I ARRIVED
AND I -- IN FACT, WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE UNITED STATES SENATE
AT THE UNITED STATES SENATE ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, THAT WAS
ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, THAT WAS ONE OF MY MAIN FOCUS -- AREAS OF
ONE OF MY MAIN FOCUS -- AREAS OF FOCUS.
FOCUS. IN FACT, THAT’S WHY I’M PROUD
IN FACT, THAT’S WHY I’M PROUD THAT TWO OF MY MOST SIGNIFICANT
THAT TWO OF MY MOST SIGNIFICANT PIECES OF LEGISLATION ARE
PIECES OF LEGISLATION ARE BIPARTISAN.
BIPARTISAN. ONE TO REFORM THE CASH MONEY
ONE TO REFORM THE CASH MONEY BAIL SYSTEM IN THE UNITED
BAIL SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES.
STATES. AND WE HAD SPONSORS ON THAT.
AND WE HAD SPONSORS ON THAT. SOMEONE WITH WHOM I DISAGREE
SOMEONE WITH WHOM I DISAGREE WITH MANY THINGS, BUT WE AGREE
WITH MANY THINGS, BUT WE AGREE ON THIS VEHEMENTLY WHICH IS RAND
ON THIS VEHEMENTLY WHICH IS RAND PAUL.
PAUL. >> WOW.
>> WOW. >> I WISH THE MAJORITY LEADER
>> I WISH THE MAJORITY LEADER WOULD PUT THIS ON THE FLOOR FOR
WOULD PUT THIS ON THE FLOOR FOR A VOTE WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE
A VOTE WHICH HAS TO DO WITH THE NEED TO UPGRADE AMERICA’S
NEED TO UPGRADE AMERICA’S ELECTION SYSTEM AND WHY?
ELECTION SYSTEM AND WHY? GUESS WHAT, NEWS ALERT, RUSSIA
GUESS WHAT, NEWS ALERT, RUSSIA INTERFERED IN THE ELECTION FOR
INTERFERED IN THE ELECTION FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND WE NEED TO HAVE A STRONGER
AND WE NEED TO HAVE A STRONGER SYSTEM.
SYSTEM. THE COSPONSOR ON THAT -- LEAD
THE COSPONSOR ON THAT -- LEAD COSPONSOR ON THAT IS A FELLOW
COSPONSOR ON THAT IS A FELLOW WITH WHOM I SERVE ON THE SENATE
WITH WHOM I SERVE ON THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE AND THE
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE AND THE SENATE HOMELAND COMMITTEE, JAMES
SENATE HOMELAND COMMITTEE, JAMES LANKFORD.
LANKFORD. >> VICE PRESIDENT’S POINT YOU
>> VICE PRESIDENT’S POINT YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH WHOM YOU
HAVE TO WORK WITH WHOM YOU DISAGREE --
DISAGREE -- >> OF COURSE YOU DO.
>> OF COURSE YOU DO. BUT LISTEN, THERE ARE NO
BUT LISTEN, THERE ARE NO SEGREGATIONISTS IN THE UNITED
SEGREGATIONISTS IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE TODAY.
STATES SENATE TODAY. >> YOU GOT IT.
>> YOU GOT IT. >> THANK GOD, AND I THINK THAT
>> THANK GOD, AND I THINK THAT AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO DRAW
AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TO DRAW THE LINE.
THE LINE. FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING
FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE SAYING THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THE
THAT THEY BELIEVE THAT THE RACISTS SHOULD NOT COMINGLE AND
RACISTS SHOULD NOT COMINGLE AND ON THE HEELS OF A HISTORY OF
ON THE HEELS OF A HISTORY OF EXTREME PAIN AND DAMAGE NOT TO
EXTREME PAIN AND DAMAGE NOT TO MENTION DEATH, YOU HAVE GOT TO
MENTION DEATH, YOU HAVE GOT TO DRAW THE LINE.
DRAW THE LINE. >> SO HE SHOULDN’T HAVE WORKED
>> SO HE SHOULDN’T HAVE WORKED WITH THEM IS WHAT YOU’RE SAYING?
WITH THEM IS WHAT YOU’RE SAYING? >> NO, I’M SAYING THAT THE
>> NO, I’M SAYING THAT THE CHARACTERIZATION AND THE
CHARACTERIZATION AND THE NOSTALGIA ABOUT WHO THEY WERE I
NOSTALGIA ABOUT WHO THEY WERE I FIND TO BE MISPLACED AND IT WAS
FIND TO BE MISPLACED AND IT WAS HURTFUL TO ME TO HEAR THAT WE
HURTFUL TO ME TO HEAR THAT WE WOULD BE NOSTALGIC ABOUT PEOPLE
WOULD BE NOSTALGIC ABOUT PEOPLE WHO -- IF THEY HAD THEIR WAY I
WHO -- IF THEY HAD THEIR WAY I WOULD NOT SERVE IN THE UNITED
WOULD NOT SERVE IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE.
STATES SENATE. >> REV?
>> REV? >> I THINK THE CHARACTERIZATION
>> I THINK THE CHARACTERIZATION IS THE PROBLEM.
IS THE PROBLEM. THE PROBLEM IS THAT NOT THE
THE PROBLEM IS THAT NOT THE REFERENCE -- SURE YOU HAVE TO
REFERENCE -- SURE YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH PEOPLE.
WORK WITH PEOPLE. >> SURE.
>> SURE. >> TWO THINGS THAT REALLY STOOD
>> TWO THINGS THAT REALLY STOOD OUT FOR ME LAST NIGHT IS WHEN
OUT FOR ME LAST NIGHT IS WHEN YOU RAISED ABOUT BUSING, BECAUSE
YOU RAISED ABOUT BUSING, BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE THOUGHT AND JOE
A LOT OF PEOPLE THOUGHT AND JOE AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS
AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS INCESSANTLY THAT RACISM STOPPED
INCESSANTLY THAT RACISM STOPPED IN THE SOUTH.
IN THE SOUTH. YOU CAME OUT OF THE NORTHWEST.
YOU CAME OUT OF THE NORTHWEST. I CAME OUT OF THE NORTHEAST.
I CAME OUT OF THE NORTHEAST. >> THAT’S RIGHT.
>> THAT’S RIGHT. >> WE WERE BOTH BUSSED.
>> WE WERE BOTH BUSSED. WE FACED THE SAME PROBLEM.
WE FACED THE SAME PROBLEM. >> THAT’S RIGHT.
>> THAT’S RIGHT. >> I WAS RAISED -- AND THE CIVIL
>> I WAS RAISED -- AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS BEFORE ME, JOHN LEWIS,
RIGHTS BEFORE ME, JOHN LEWIS, JESSE JACKSON, THEY GREW UP IN
JESSE JACKSON, THEY GREW UP IN THE SOUTH.
THE SOUTH. WE WENT THROUGH IT IN THE NORTH
WE WENT THROUGH IT IN THE NORTH AND THAT’S WHAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT
AND THAT’S WHAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT THAT LAST NIGHT AND I WISH YOU
THAT LAST NIGHT AND I WISH YOU SHOULD EXPLAIN THAT.
SHOULD EXPLAIN THAT. AND WHAT SHOWED ENCOURAGE IN THE
AND WHAT SHOWED ENCOURAGE IN THE GENERATION WHEN WE BEGAN TO
GENERATION WHEN WE BEGAN TO CONFRONT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
CONFRONT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM YOU TOOK A LOT OF HITS
SYSTEM YOU TOOK A LOT OF HITS GOING IN THE SYSTEM TO FIGHT
GOING IN THE SYSTEM TO FIGHT INSIDE EVEN THOUGH SOME IN THE
INSIDE EVEN THOUGH SOME IN THE COMMUNITY SAID WE DON’T WANT TO
COMMUNITY SAID WE DON’T WANT TO BE DEALING WITH SOME PROSECUTOR,
BE DEALING WITH SOME PROSECUTOR, NO, WE NEED TO -- AND YOU
NO, WE NEED TO -- AND YOU CHANGED THE PROSECUTORIAL
CHANGED THE PROSECUTORIAL SYSTEM.
SYSTEM. SO YOU HAD -- THERE WAS GENDER
SO YOU HAD -- THERE WAS GENDER BIAS AND YOUR OWN COMMUNITY SAID
BIAS AND YOUR OWN COMMUNITY SAID WHAT ARE YOU A COP, NO, I’M HERE
WHAT ARE YOU A COP, NO, I’M HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT GRANDMA
TO MAKE SURE THAT GRANDMA DOESN’T GET HER HOUSEBROKEN
DOESN’T GET HER HOUSEBROKEN INTO.
INTO. >> THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT.
>> THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. I GUESS PART OF IT AS YOU
I GUESS PART OF IT AS YOU MENTIONED IT THAT WAY, REV, I’M
MENTIONED IT THAT WAY, REV, I’M NEVER GOING TO HEAR THAT YOU
NEVER GOING TO HEAR THAT YOU DON’T BELONG HERE.
DON’T BELONG HERE. I DON’T HEAR THOSE WORDS.
I DON’T HEAR THOSE WORDS. AND SO ON THE ISSUE OF
AND SO ON THE ISSUE OF SEGREGATION TO YOUR POINT AND
SEGREGATION TO YOUR POINT AND BUSING, IN FACT, I JUST GOT A
BUSING, IN FACT, I JUST GOT A NOTE FROM -- THIS IS ACTUALLY --
NOTE FROM -- THIS IS ACTUALLY -- THIS MATCHES -- BLENDS BOTH OF
THIS MATCHES -- BLENDS BOTH OF YOUR POINTS FROM A RETIRED
YOUR POINTS FROM A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER WHO DREW UP IN
POLICE OFFICER WHO DREW UP IN BROOKLYN WHO WAS BUSSED IN THE
BROOKLYN WHO WAS BUSSED IN THE ’70s IN REACHING OUT TO TALK
’70s IN REACHING OUT TO TALK ABOUT THAT SHARED EXPERIENCE.
ABOUT THAT SHARED EXPERIENCE. WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT WE NEED TO
WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO REFORM SYSTEMS IN AMERICA,
DO TO REFORM SYSTEMS IN AMERICA, I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THERE IS
I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THERE IS AN IMPORTANT AND A VALUABLE ROLE
AN IMPORTANT AND A VALUABLE ROLE TO HAVE FOLKS ON THE OUTSIDE, MY
TO HAVE FOLKS ON THE OUTSIDE, MY PARENTS WERE ACTIVE IN THE CIVIL
PARENTS WERE ACTIVE IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.
RIGHTS MOVEMENT. MY SISTER AND I JOKE WE GREW UP
MY SISTER AND I JOKE WE GREW UP BEING SURROUNDED BY ADULTS
BEING SURROUNDED BY ADULTS MARCHING AND SHOUTING.
MARCHING AND SHOUTING. THERE IS ALSO A ROLE TO BE
THERE IS ALSO A ROLE TO BE INSIDE THE ROOM WHERE THE
INSIDE THE ROOM WHERE THE DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE.
DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE. AND TO HELP INFORM AND INFLUENCE
AND TO HELP INFORM AND INFLUENCE PROGRESSION AND CHANGE AND
PROGRESSION AND CHANGE AND REFORM FROM THAT PLACE.
REFORM FROM THAT PLACE. THAT HAS BEEN THE KIND OF
THAT HAS BEEN THE KIND OF APPROACH THAT I HAVE TAKEN
APPROACH THAT I HAVE TAKEN THROUGHOUT MY CAREER.
THROUGHOUT MY CAREER. INCLUDING TODAY.CAREER,
INCLUDING TODAY.CAREER, INCLUDING TODAY.
INCLUDING TODAY. >> JOHN HELLMAN.
>> JOHN HELLMAN. >> WE JUST TALKED ABOUT CRIMINAL
>> WE JUST TALKED ABOUT CRIMINAL JUSTICE.
JUSTICE. I WAS WATCHING "13th" THE OTHER
I WAS WATCHING "13th" THE OTHER DAY FOR A REALLY GOOD TIME.
DAY FOR A REALLY GOOD TIME. REALLY GOOD MOVIE.
REALLY GOOD MOVIE. IT TALKS ABOUT A THING ABOUT
IT TALKS ABOUT A THING ABOUT WHICH THERE’S BIPARTISAN
WHICH THERE’S BIPARTISAN AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE TO
AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE TO DISMANTLE IT, RIGHT?
DISMANTLE IT, RIGHT? THAT’S WHAT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
THAT’S WHAT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IS ABOUT.
REFORM IS ABOUT. YOU WATCH THAT WHOLE MOVIE, A
YOU WATCH THAT WHOLE MOVIE, A LOT OF THE BLAME LAYS WITH THE
LOT OF THE BLAME LAYS WITH THE 1994 CRIME BILL.
1994 CRIME BILL. >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. >> THREE STRIPES AND YOU’RE OUT.
>> THREE STRIPES AND YOU’RE OUT. MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES,
MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES, DISPARITY BETWEEN CRACK AND
DISPARITY BETWEEN CRACK AND POWDER COCAINE, DEATH PENALTY,
POWDER COCAINE, DEATH PENALTY, ALL THAT STUFF.
ALL THAT STUFF. NO ONE MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
NO ONE MORE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE 1994 CRIME BILL THAN JOE BIDEN.
1994 CRIME BILL THAN JOE BIDEN. SO I ASK THE QUESTION AS WE GO
SO I ASK THE QUESTION AS WE GO FORWARD, IT’S AN ISSUE THAT
FORWARD, IT’S AN ISSUE THAT MATTERS TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, BUT
MATTERS TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, BUT ESPECIALLY AFRICAN-AMERICANS.
ESPECIALLY AFRICAN-AMERICANS. WHAT ROLE DO YOU THINK THE
WHAT ROLE DO YOU THINK THE DEBATE OVER THAT SET OF ISSUES
DEBATE OVER THAT SET OF ISSUES AND VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN’S ROLE
AND VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN’S ROLE CENTRAL ROLE IN IMPLEMENTING
CENTRAL ROLE IN IMPLEMENTING SOME OF THOSE POLICIES IS GOING
SOME OF THOSE POLICIES IS GOING TO HAVE IN THIS NOMINATION
TO HAVE IN THIS NOMINATION FIGHT?
FIGHT? >> WELL, WITHOUT ANY QUESTION,
>> WELL, WITHOUT ANY QUESTION, THE ISSUE OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO
THE ISSUE OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO REFORM THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
TO REFORM THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM I THINK IS GOING TO BE A
SYSTEM I THINK IS GOING TO BE A FRONT AND CENTER ISSUE IN THIS
FRONT AND CENTER ISSUE IN THIS CAMPAIGN BECAUSE IT IS AN ISSUE
CAMPAIGN BECAUSE IT IS AN ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE FRONT AND
THAT NEEDS TO BE FRONT AND CENTER IN AMERICA.
CENTER IN AMERICA. AND THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT
AND THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THAT CRIME BILL CONTRIBUTEDED TO
THAT CRIME BILL CONTRIBUTEDED TO AMERICA’S MASS INCARCERATION
AMERICA’S MASS INCARCERATION PROBLEM, INCLUDING THE FUNDING
PROBLEM, INCLUDING THE FUNDING AND BUILDING OF STATE PRISONS.
AND BUILDING OF STATE PRISONS. BUT THE WAY I THINK ABOUT IT IS,
BUT THE WAY I THINK ABOUT IT IS, YES, AGAIN, WE MUST REMEMBER
YES, AGAIN, WE MUST REMEMBER HISTORY.
HISTORY. WE MUST NOT SUGAR COAT IT AND
WE MUST NOT SUGAR COAT IT AND LET US MOVE ON.
LET US MOVE ON. SO MY FOCUS WHEN IT COMES TO
SO MY FOCUS WHEN IT COMES TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IS ON
CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM IS ON ISSUES ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO
ISSUES ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO AROUND BAIL REFORM.
AROUND BAIL REFORM. MY ISSUE IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO
MY ISSUE IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO ABOUT HAVING A DEPARTMENT OF
ABOUT HAVING A DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE UNLIKE THIS DEPARTMENT
JUSTICE UNLIKE THIS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE UNDER DONALD TRUMP
OF JUSTICE UNDER DONALD TRUMP WHICH IS TRYING TO TURN BACK THE
WHICH IS TRYING TO TURN BACK THE CLOCK AND REVIVE THE WAR ON
CLOCK AND REVIVE THE WAR ON DRUGS, WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO
DRUGS, WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO UNDERSTAND DRUG POLL NEEDS TO BE
UNDERSTAND DRUG POLL NEEDS TO BE GROUNDED IN NATURE, IT SHOULD
GROUNDED IN NATURE, IT SHOULD NOT BE A CRIMINAL JUSTICE ISSUE.
NOT BE A CRIMINAL JUSTICE ISSUE. >> DO YOU THINK JOE BIDEN HAS A
>> DO YOU THINK JOE BIDEN HAS A LOT TO ANSWER FOR IN THAT
LOT TO ANSWER FOR IN THAT CONTEXT?
CONTEXT? BILL CLINTON A COUPLE OF YEARS
BILL CLINTON A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO HAD TO BASICALLY COME OUT
AGO HAD TO BASICALLY COME OUT NAACP AND SAY I’M SORRY FOR THE
NAACP AND SAY I’M SORRY FOR THE 1994 CRIME BILL.
1994 CRIME BILL. >> AND YOU HAVE TO ADD BERNIE
>> AND YOU HAVE TO ADD BERNIE SANDERS TO THAT ISSUE, AS WELL.
SANDERS TO THAT ISSUE, AS WELL. BERNIE SUPPORTED THE BILL, TOO.
BERNIE SUPPORTED THE BILL, TOO. >> SO THAT’S MY QUESTION.
>> SO THAT’S MY QUESTION. IF YOU WERE -- I MEAN, PART OF
IF YOU WERE -- I MEAN, PART OF THE REASON I THINK IS JOE BIDEN
THE REASON I THINK IS JOE BIDEN CLAIMS CREDIT FOR IT AT THE
CLAIMS CREDIT FOR IT AT THE TIME.
TIME. SO I JUST ASK WHETHER DO YOU
SO I JUST ASK WHETHER DO YOU THINK HE HAS A LOT TO ANSWER FOR
THINK HE HAS A LOT TO ANSWER FOR IN THAT CONTEXT?
IN THAT CONTEXT? SHOULD HE DO WHAT BILL CLINTON
SHOULD HE DO WHAT BILL CLINTON DID AND APOLOGIZE BECAUSE BILL
DID AND APOLOGIZE BECAUSE BILL LITTON DID THAT BACK IN 2015 OR
LITTON DID THAT BACK IN 2015 OR 2016.
2016. IS THAT IMPORTANT?
IS THAT IMPORTANT? >> I’M NOT GOING TO TELL JOE
>> I’M NOT GOING TO TELL JOE BIDEN WHAT TO DO, BUT WE’RE ALL
BIDEN WHAT TO DO, BUT WE’RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO SPEAK FOR OUR
GOING TO HAVE TO SPEAK FOR OUR RECORDS, PERIOD.
RECORDS, PERIOD. >> BUT A LOT OF YUCK PEOPLE
>> BUT A LOT OF YUCK PEOPLE TODAY ARE GROWING UP IN HOMES
TODAY ARE GROWING UP IN HOMES WHERE THE FATHER WASN’T THERE
WHERE THE FATHER WASN’T THERE BECAUSE OF THAT CRIME BILL.
BECAUSE OF THAT CRIME BILL. YOU KNOW, WHEN I CAME OUT AND
YOU KNOW, WHEN I CAME OUT AND MARCHED ON THAT CRIME BILL IN
MARCHED ON THAT CRIME BILL IN ’94, MOST OF THE CONGRESSIONAL
’94, MOST OF THE CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS WAS WITH THAT.
BLACK CAUCUS WAS WITH THAT. BUT THEY DON’T UNDERSTAND, IT
BUT THEY DON’T UNDERSTAND, IT BROKE DOWN A LOT OF OUR
BROKE DOWN A LOT OF OUR FAMILIES.
FAMILIES. PEOPLE WERE DOING UNFAIR LONG
PEOPLE WERE DOING UNFAIR LONG SENTENCES BECAUSE OF THAT CRIME
SENTENCES BECAUSE OF THAT CRIME BILL AND KIDS WERE GROWING UP
BILL AND KIDS WERE GROWING UP WITHOUT A FATHER.
WITHOUT A FATHER. THAT’S REAL AND THAT’S NOT GOING
THAT’S REAL AND THAT’S NOT GOING AWAY.
AWAY. >> AND IT WAS DURING THAT ERA
>> AND IT WAS DURING THAT ERA WHERE DEMOCRATS, THERE WAS THIS
WHERE DEMOCRATS, THERE WAS THIS SWING.
SWING. BECAUSE LET’S GO BACK, RIGHT, TO
BECAUSE LET’S GO BACK, RIGHT, TO DUKAKIS’S CAMPAIGN.
DUKAKIS’S CAMPAIGN. REMEMBER WILLIE HORTON AND
REMEMBER WILLIE HORTON AND REMEMBER DUKAKIS AS GOVERNOR OF
REMEMBER DUKAKIS AS GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS WAS A LEADER ON
MASSACHUSETTS WAS A LEADER ON WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO TO HAVE
WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO TO HAVE RE-ENTRY INITIATIVES, TO HAVE
RE-ENTRY INITIATIVES, TO HAVE RELATION
RELATION REHABILITATION.
REHABILITATION. AND THEN THERE WAS THAT ONE GUY
AND THEN THERE WAS THAT ONE GUY WHO DID AWFUL THINGS AND DUKAKIS
WHO DID AWFUL THINGS AND DUKAKIS TOOK THE BLAME FOR THAT.
TOOK THE BLAME FOR THAT. AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, DEMOCRATS
AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, DEMOCRATS WERE LABELED SOFT ON CRIME.
WERE LABELED SOFT ON CRIME. WHEN YOU WERE SOFT ON CRIME, YOU
WHEN YOU WERE SOFT ON CRIME, YOU LOST ELECTIONS.
LOST ELECTIONS. THAT WAS THE INTERPRETATION.
THAT WAS THE INTERPRETATION. SO SWING, LET’S BE TOUGH ON
SO SWING, LET’S BE TOUGH ON CRIME AND IT WENT TO AN EXCESS.
CRIME AND IT WENT TO AN EXCESS. AND IT ENDED UP LEADING TO THE
AND IT ENDED UP LEADING TO THE ISSUE AND THE PROBLEM OF MASS
ISSUE AND THE PROBLEM OF MASS INCARCERATION IN AMERICA.
INCARCERATION IN AMERICA. THAT’S WHY I’VE ALWAYS SAID,
THAT’S WHY I’VE ALWAYS SAID, LET’S REJECT THE FALSE TWIST
LET’S REJECT THE FALSE TWIST THAT YOU’RE SOFT OR TOUGH ON
THAT YOU’RE SOFT OR TOUGH ON CRIME AND LET’S TALK ABOUT BEING
CRIME AND LET’S TALK ABOUT BEING SMART ON CRIME.
SMART ON CRIME. THE GOAL SHOULD BE PUBLIC SAFETY
THE GOAL SHOULD BE PUBLIC SAFETY AND ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO
AND ONE OF THE BEST WAYS TO ACHIEVE IT IS TO DEAL WITH
ACHIEVE IT IS TO DEAL WITH PREVENTION FIRST INSTEAD OF
PREVENTION FIRST INSTEAD OF REACTION.
REACTION. >> SENATOR, ON HEALTH CARE LAST
>> SENATOR, ON HEALTH CARE LAST NIGHT, YOU WERE ASKED TO RAISE
NIGHT, YOU WERE ASKED TO RAISE YOUR HANDS IF YOU BELIEVE
YOUR HANDS IF YOU BELIEVE ELIMINATING PRIVATE INSURANCE
ELIMINATING PRIVATE INSURANCE SHOULD BE PART OF THE MEDICARE
SHOULD BE PART OF THE MEDICARE FOR ALL PROPOSAL.
FOR ALL PROPOSAL. YOU AND BERNIE SANDERS BOTH
YOU AND BERNIE SANDERS BOTH RAISED YOUR HANDS.
RAISED YOUR HANDS. YOU’VE BEEN ASKED AND CLARIFIED
YOU’VE BEEN ASKED AND CLARIFIED THIS QUESTION A COUPLE OF TIMES
THIS QUESTION A COUPLE OF TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF THE CAMPAIGN.
OVER THE COURSE OF THE CAMPAIGN. SO ONCE AND FOR ALL, DO YOU
SO ONCE AND FOR ALL, DO YOU BELIEVE PRIVATE INSURANCE SHOULD
BELIEVE PRIVATE INSURANCE SHOULD BE ELIMINATED IN THIS COUNTRY?
BE ELIMINATED IN THIS COUNTRY? >> NO.
>> NO. >> YOU DON’T?
>> YOU DON’T? BUT YOU RAISED YOUR HAND LAST
BUT YOU RAISED YOUR HAND LAST NIGHT.
NIGHT. >> BUT THE QUESTION WAS WOULD
>> BUT THE QUESTION WAS WOULD YOU GIVE UP YOUR PRIVATE
YOU GIVE UP YOUR PRIVATE INSURANCE FOR THAT OPTION AND I
INSURANCE FOR THAT OPTION AND I SAID YES.
SAID YES. >> I THINK YOU HEARD IT
>> I THINK YOU HEARD IT DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHERS, THEN.
DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHERS, THEN. >> PROBABLY, BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT
>> PROBABLY, BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT I HEARD.
I HEARD. >> BY THE WAY, WE HAVE A RULE BY
>> BY THE WAY, WE HAVE A RULE BY THE WAY IN FUTURE DEBATES.
THE WAY IN FUTURE DEBATES. NO MORE HAND RAISING.
NO MORE HAND RAISING. SERIOUSLY, IT --
SERIOUSLY, IT -- >> EXACTLY.
>> EXACTLY. >> BUT I DO WANT TO -- I DO WANT
>> BUT I DO WANT TO -- I DO WANT TO ADDRESS THIS.
TO ADDRESS THIS. >> BY THE WAY, HOLD ON ONE
>> BY THE WAY, HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
SECOND. >> I AGREE WITH NO MORE HAND
>> I AGREE WITH NO MORE HAND RAISING.
RAISING. >> THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
>> THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. SO LET’S SLOW EVERYTHING DOWN
SO LET’S SLOW EVERYTHING DOWN FOR A SECOND BECAUSE DONALD
FOR A SECOND BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP HAS BEEN TWEETING, WILL BE
TRUMP HAS BEEN TWEETING, WILL BE TWEETING ABOUT DEMOCRATS WHO
TWEETING ABOUT DEMOCRATS WHO WANT TO TAKE AWAY PEOPLE’S --
WANT TO TAKE AWAY PEOPLE’S -- 180 MILLION PEOPLE’S HEALTH
180 MILLION PEOPLE’S HEALTH INSURANCE.
INSURANCE. YOU’RE SAYING THAT YOU DID NOT
YOU’RE SAYING THAT YOU DID NOT MEAN THAT LAST NIGHT, SO EXPLAIN
MEAN THAT LAST NIGHT, SO EXPLAIN TO US.
TO US. >> NO, NO.
>> NO, NO. I AM A PROPONENT OF MEDICARE FOR
I AM A PROPONENT OF MEDICARE FOR ALL.
ALL. PRIVATE INSURANCE WILL EXIST FOR
PRIVATE INSURANCE WILL EXIST FOR SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE.
SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE. BUT UNDER MY VISION OF MEDICARE
BUT UNDER MY VISION OF MEDICARE FALL, ONE, WE WILL EXPANDS
FALL, ONE, WE WILL EXPANDS COVERAGE TO INCLUDE CAN DENTAL,
COVERAGE TO INCLUDE CAN DENTAL, VISION, HEARING AIDS, XH IS A
VISION, HEARING AIDS, XH IS A BIG ISSUE FOR OUR SENIORS.
BIG ISSUE FOR OUR SENIORS. ALSO THIS, LISTEN, THE INSURANCE
ALSO THIS, LISTEN, THE INSURANCE COMPANIES FOR YEARS HAVE BEEN
COMPANIES FOR YEARS HAVE BEEN PUTTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO
PUTTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO AN ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN AND A
AN ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN AND A LOBBYIST CAMPAIGN THAT IS TO TRY
LOBBYIST CAMPAIGN THAT IS TO TRY AND CONVINCE AMERICAN FAMILIES
AND CONVINCE AMERICAN FAMILIES YOU NEED YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY
YOU NEED YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY TO HAVE YOUR DOCTOR.
TO HAVE YOUR DOCTOR. WELL, THAT’S A MYTH AND IT’S A
WELL, THAT’S A MYTH AND IT’S A FALLACY.
FALLACY. 91 PERGS OF THE DOCTORS IN
91 PERGS OF THE DOCTORS IN AMERICA ARE IN MEDICARE.
AMERICA ARE IN MEDICARE. SO YOU WILL NOT LOSE YOUR
SO YOU WILL NOT LOSE YOUR DOCTOR.
DOCTOR. AND THE OTHER PIECE OF IT IS
AND THE OTHER PIECE OF IT IS THIS.
THIS. AND IT’S THE EXAMPLE I GAVE LAST
AND IT’S THE EXAMPLE I GAVE LAST NIGHT.
NIGHT. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE IN
DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE IN AMERICA ARE AFRAID TO WALK INTO
AMERICA ARE AFRAID TO WALK INTO AN EMERGENCY ROOM OR A DOCTOR’S
AN EMERGENCY ROOM OR A DOCTOR’S OFFICE OR A HOSPITAL BECAUSE
OFFICE OR A HOSPITAL BECAUSE THEY’RE LOOKING AT A $5,000
THEY’RE LOOKING AT A $5,000 DEDUCTIBLE?
DEDUCTIBLE? IT’S BECAUSE THE INSURANCE
IT’S BECAUSE THE INSURANCE COMPANIES KEEP JACKING UP COSTS
COMPANIES KEEP JACKING UP COSTS AROUND PREMIUMS, COPAYS AND
AROUND PREMIUMS, COPAYS AND DEDUCTIBLES AND THEN LET’S TALK
DEDUCTIBLES AND THEN LET’S TALK ABOUT THE PHARMACEUTICAL
ABOUT THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES, WHO I HAVE TAKEN ON.
COMPANIES, WHO I HAVE TAKEN ON. AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, I TOOK ON
AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, I TOOK ON THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES AND
THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES AND I WON.
I WON. AND I WILL TELL YOU PART OF WHAT
AND I WILL TELL YOU PART OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO REFORM THIS
WE NEED TO DO TO REFORM THIS HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IS BRING DOWN
HEALTH CARE SYSTEM IS BRING DOWN COSTS.
COSTS. WHEN WE HAVE EVERYBODY IN ONE
WHEN WE HAVE EVERYBODY IN ONE SYSTEM MEDICARE FOR ALL, HE CAN
SYSTEM MEDICARE FOR ALL, HE CAN NEGOTIATE AGAINST THE
NEGOTIATE AGAINST THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES AS A
PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES AS A GROUP AND WE CAN ALSO XHINISH
GROUP AND WE CAN ALSO XHINISH THE POWER THAT INSURANCE
THE POWER THAT INSURANCE COMPANIES HAVE HAD TO MAKE
COMPANIES HAVE HAD TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT KIND OF
DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT KIND OF HEALTH CARE YOU GET INSTEAD OF
HEALTH CARE YOU GET INSTEAD OF YOUR DOCTOR MAKING THOSE
YOUR DOCTOR MAKING THOSE DECISIONS.
DECISIONS. >> TO BOIL IT DOWN, MEDICARE FOR
>> TO BOIL IT DOWN, MEDICARE FOR ALL, AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE IF
ALL, AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE IF THEY WANT IT, BUT THEY HAVE
THEY WANT IT, BUT THEY HAVE PRIVATE INSURANCE, THEY KEEP IT.
PRIVATE INSURANCE, THEY KEEP IT. >> FOR SUPPLEMENTAL.
>> FOR SUPPLEMENTAL. FOR SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE.
FOR SUPPLEMENTAL COVERAGE. OTHERWISE, THEY’RE IN MEDICARE
OTHERWISE, THEY’RE IN MEDICARE FOR ALL.
FOR ALL. >> SO IN SAN FRANCISCO LAST
>> SO IN SAN FRANCISCO LAST NOVEMBER, YOU SAID YOU WERE
NOVEMBER, YOU SAID YOU WERE GOING TO TALK TO YOUR FAMILY ON
GOING TO TALK TO YOUR FAMILY ON STAGE AT THE KNOW YOUR VALUE
STAGE AT THE KNOW YOUR VALUE EVENT AND TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR
EVENT AND TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU WILL RUN.
NOT YOU WILL RUN. I WILL JUST SAY AS WE CLOSE,
I WILL JUST SAY AS WE CLOSE, WE’RE SO GLAD YOU’RE RUNNING?
WE’RE SO GLAD YOU’RE RUNNING? SOMETHING IS HAPPENING WITH
SOMETHING IS HAPPENING WITH WOMEN THIS POLITICAL CYCLE.
WOMEN THIS POLITICAL CYCLE. I’M REALLY GLAD.
I’M REALLY GLAD. THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU VERY, VERY MUCH. >> I KNOW YOU HAVE TO GO.
>> I KNOW YOU HAVE TO GO. THE MOST IMPORTANT THING,
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, WILLIE, THE SHOES.
WILLIE, THE SHOES. >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. >> IT’S THE SHOES.
>> IT’S THE SHOES. SHE’S GOT THE CHUCKS.
SHE’S GOT THE CHUCKS. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE’VE GOT ANOTHER HOUR AHEAD AND
WE’VE GOT ANOTHER HOUR AHEAD AND ANOTHER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.
ANOTHER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE. SENATOR MICHAEL BENNET IS COMING
SENATOR MICHAEL BENNET IS COMING UP.
UP. "MORNING JOE" IS BACK IN A

カマラ・ハリス上院議員ジョー・バイデンと私には意見の相違がある｜モーニング・ジョー｜MSNBC (Sen. Kamala Harris: Joe Biden And I Just Have A Difference Of Opinion | Morning Joe | MSNBC)