One on One with Nancy Pelosi
By Roger Williams
Last November, U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, joined Sen. Tom Daschle to form the Democratic Party's top leadership in Congress. In so doing, Pelosi became the first woman in the nation's history to serve as House majority or minority leader. She holds that important office at what is obviously a critical time for our nation because of state and local budget crises, proposed tax cuts and much more.
It's also a critical time for the Democratic Party, which in less than three years has absorbed electoral defeats for the Presidency and both houses of Congress.
That puts Pelosi on a political hot seat, but it also gives her major opportunities to make a real mark on America's present and future.
What's it like being the first woman in your post?
It is a great honor. The election of a woman to lead a major party does not just end an old era, it launches a new one. I am grateful to my colleagues for their confidence and proud of my party for leading America closer to the ideal of equality that is both our heritage and our hope.
We have a dynamic leadership team that looks like America. Our diversity, both in the leadership and in the caucus, is a part of our strength.
What is the proper role of the federal government in easing the state fiscal crises?
The federal government needs to help the states at this difficult time. At a minimum, we need to fund the programs, such as education and Medicaid, that the federal government mandates. We also need to help with the new homeland security costs, many of which are borne at the state level.
In the House Democratic economic-stimulus proposal, we provide $31 billion in assistance to states and localities; $10 billion of that is aid to the states for homeland security, and $10 billion of it for a one-year increase in the federal share of Medicaid costs.
There is $5 billion for aid to the states for infrastructure and $6 billion that gives state and local governments discretion to spend according to their needs.
The President's plan, by contrast, would worsen most states' fiscal outlooks by eliminating the tax on dividends. Most states base their collection on the figures taxpayers use on their federal forms. In California, for example, eliminating the tax on dividends would reduce the state's 2003 revenue by $1.18 billion — an unnecessary burden on my state.
The Bush tax-cut proposal has taken a lot of hits. What do you think of it?
The tax cut the President is proposing is the wrong plan at the wrong time. We need an economic stimulus plan that is fast, fair and fiscally responsible. Instead of a fast-acting plan that boosts the economy now, the bulk of the Bush provisions will occur years from now. Instead of fairly impacting all working Americans, the vast majority of the benefits in the President's plan will go to the wealthiest 5 percent. And instead of being fiscally responsible, it will greatly increase the federal deficit over the next decade — just as the Baby Boom generation becomes eligible for Social Security and Medicare.
Even Mr. Bush's own economic advisors say it won't create enough jobs to make up for those lost in the past month, let alone the past two years.
It's also the wrong time for that plan. With large budget deficits already predicted and massive spending on the war and on reconstruction, it is irresponsible to have another enormous tax cut for the wealthy.
From the outset, the Bush administration has been decidedly anti-union. What can be done to combat that?
From the moment he assumed office, President Bush has waged an all-out assault on American workers. The President wants to deny the right to union representation, whether it is airline screeners, dock workers or federal employees. In a convenient exception to his rhetoric against excessive government regulation, he wants to cripple unions with the burden of itemizing even the smallest expenses.
Now he wants to replace overtime with comp time. He wants to gut the 40-hour workweek and call it "flexibility," which really means flexibility for employers and lower wages for workers. This Republican Congress has been more than happy to comply with his agenda.
Democrats will fight to protect the fundamental American right to a union. We will fight to give unemployed workers the help they need to get back to work. And we will fight to preserve the integrity of the 40-hour week.
Many observers fault the Democrats for lacking a clear, compelling message in last year's congressional elections. What does your party stand for?
As House Democratic Leader, I promise you that Democrats will offer bold alternatives that provide the American people with a vision of hope and opportunity that is grounded in our priorities: the safety and soundness of the American people. We must keep Americans safe and our economy sound.
Democrats will offer clear choices about the future of this country — a safe and prosperous America; good jobs with good wages; a strong, vibrant economy; a meaningful prescription drug benefit; quality education for American children; and a well-protected environment for generations to come.
Never again will the Democratic Party go into an election without a Democratic message saying who we are, what we stand for and what we will fight for.
