Transcripts

text | pdf |

---

GARY EICHTEN: Today on Midday, you have a chance to talk with Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone. Let's get right to it. There is a great deal to discuss-- health care, economic plan, foreign policy. Senator, thanks for coming by.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Thanks, Gary. I do have one dramatic announcement. I just found out two minutes ago, seriously, that our baseball team last night beat Jesse Helms' baseball team. And that was a victory for freedom.

[LAUGHTER]

GARY EICHTEN: A small blow but nonetheless. Now, Senator, let's start off. We'll get the calls all lined up here and talk a little bit about health care. Senator Durenberger, apparently, is out today, suggesting that given the political realities, the costs involved in all, he's suggesting that what the administration should do is, the President should introduce those parts of his health care plan that would reduce costs now, put off the business about universal coverage until some money starts coming in to help pay for that expanded coverage. Do you think that makes any sense?

PAUL WELLSTONE: No, I think that the vast majority of people, the vast majority of families, can't wait. Bill Clinton was, in part, elected president because he, unlike George Bush, said that we ought to have universal health care coverage. And when I go to cafés in Minnesota, the first question people put to me is, Senator, will I be covered, and will my loved ones be covered. And the second question they put to me is, will it be a decent package of benefits. And the third question is, will I have some choice of doctor. And the fourth is, will it be affordable.

The way you contain the costs is, you apply the tourniquet where it should be applied. And that is with the administrative bloat and the profiteering. And that means insurance companies, for a change, have to be accountable, pharmaceutical industry as well. And consumers have to be in more of a decision-making role.

The way you don't control costs is by cutting into benefits and services for people. I think it would be a huge mistake. And I have said this to Mrs. Clinton over and over again, you have to be bold. And it has to be a decent package of benefits tilted toward preventative health care and family practice.

And another way in which I disagree with Senator Durenberger is, I think, frankly, this is an area where, if you invest some resources now, take the preventative health care part, it more than pays for itself. We're much better off as a people. We're healthier. We then don't go to as many of the big hospital costs. We have a better workforce. Our children do better in school and all the rest. We can't put this off.

GARY EICHTEN: Senator, you've been advocating the so-called single-payer system, a modification of the Canadian-style program. If the administration doesn't come up with that program, are you going to be able to support what they have anyway?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I hope so. I mean, I introduced, in the Senate side, the American Health Security Act, which the single-payer part is the best part of it because it presents the alternative to 1,400 different insurance companies and is, by far, the best cost containment strategy.

But, Gary, you don't have to get 100% of what you believe in. And I've been working day after day with the task force. And I think the direction they're going in is the direction that I believe in. And I'm hoping to be able to support what they unveil. But there are some key decisions that have to be made yet. And I am worried about that.

If the benefits are scaled back, if they're worried about senators who threaten to filibuster, if the insurance industry, essentially, is going to dominate the whole thing, if States don't have a choice so that those States that want to go single payer can go single payer, then-- and if these alliances are purchasing, cooperatives are not really consumer organizations, and if doctors don't have the freedom to have a good patient-doctor relationship-- I'd be very worried.

But I believe that what is going to be unveiled is going to be a package of benefits and a health care plan that I can support even if it isn't everything I believe in. And by the way, then I think we're going to have a one big political war in this country.

And I have some indignation about this because the people who are talking about going slowly, they've been talking about this forever. They haven't believed in universal health care coverage or national health insurance. But I'll tell you something. I think it's a central issue in people's lives. And I think it's time now to take the case to people in the country.

GARY EICHTEN: Do you think it makes sense? There's a report, I think, from the Wall Street Journal today that the administration is thinking pretty seriously about putting off the announcement of the health care plan, maybe until September. Let the dust settle over the economic plan first. Do you think that makes some sense?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I think no. But I think what does make sense is to get done, or through, with the Reconciliation Bill, the budget, which has to go to Senate Finance committee and then onto the floor of the Senate. I think that's a really highly significant battle. I mean, it's all about the economy. It's all about how much goes to deficit reduction, how much goes to investment.

And I think that one step at a time, you can only focus on so much. I think that should be first. I believe that is going to be the main business of the Senate in June after we finish with government reform campaign finance reform. But then I think health care needs to be unveiled. I don't think it can wait till the fall because this is a test case of the 103rd Congress.

And I may have a different view about this. But I've said it, again, to Mrs. Clinton and, certainly, we'll say it to the President, I think that if people filibuster this one because the insurance company doesn't like this or that and the other because the pharmaceutical companies don't like cost controls or annual budgets or all the rest, let them do it. Draw the line, and let people in the country take a close look at what's going on.

US News and World Report, this sounds like a high number, but nevertheless, it's their number. I brought this out on the floor of the Senate and the debate on campaign finance reform, '90 to '92 cycle, $41 million was spent, according to US News and World Report, by health care industry, broadly defined, on campaigns. I mean, they have a lot of money.

And I think this mix of money and politics-- and they're having their own way-- versus what's good for consumers and most of the people in Minnesota is outrageous. I think we should battle this out. And I believe we should pass good health care reform in the 103rd Congress. So the sooner we get going, the better.

GARY EICHTEN: Our guest today is Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone. Let's go to our first caller. Hi, you're on Minnesota Public Radio.

AUDIENCE: Hi. Yes, Senator. First of all, condolences on losing your informal debate with Barbara Carlson.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, I don't think I lost that debate.

AUDIENCE: OK. But apart from this or that program, I have just a real basic question to ask you. I know you mentioned this morning that you felt that our $4 trillion deficit is proof that the Reagan past tax cuts were a mistake. Yet federal tax revenues more than doubled in the '80s, while federal spending tripled. It still seems to me the basic Republican point is true. We're not taxed too little. The government spends too much.

And don't we need to get beyond the redistribution of wealth ethic to the production of wealth, that ethic? And don't we need to put the government on a real diet, rather than a false one, and allow enough money in the private sector, so we can really produce good private sector jobs?

PAUL WELLSTONE: There are a lot of different parts to your question. And I'll try and be brief on each because I know other people are calling in. I think the last part, I very much agree with, which is, time to get back to productive investment in the economy and away from the wheeling and dealing and paper entrepreneurship and merger mania and all the rest. And I would put a very strong emphasis on small businesses because that's entrepreneurship, and it's businesses owned by people that live in communities and care about communities. I have no quarrel with you on that at all.

On the issue of government spending, yeah, I think there's been too much government spending. But the question is, where. It's a matter of priorities. Yeah, I think there's been way too much spending on programs like Star Wars, like stealth bomber, like super collider, like Space Station, and all of the rest.

When you move beyond the military budget, the Pentagon budget, let me just remind you that then what we're talking about is social security and Medicare. And I don't hear people talking about dismantling two programs that have worked very well for older Americans.

Then the next big item is the interest on the deficit. And therefore, we need to bring down that annual budget deficit each year. But I would argue that, in fact, we haven't spent enough money on education, on children. I think that's one of the huge scandals in our country, the ways in which we have abandoned children. I don't think we have invested enough money in job training and health care, law enforcement. So it depends upon the areas. I think that we spend too much money in some areas, not enough money in other areas.

And I think that now what we're looking at is both spending cuts, and it's a question of where you cut. And I think we should cut in some areas and being honest about raising the revenue so that we pay as we go, and we raise the revenue for what we say we should do. And my quarrel with what Reagan did is, just look at the figures, just look at the figures. They're compelling. The tax cuts were for wealthy, high income, and middle and working people got socked with it.

GARY EICHTEN: Another caller is on the line.

AUDIENCE: Hi. Good afternoon.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Good afternoon.

AUDIENCE: Senator Wellstone, I applaud your commitment to health care and the environment and your political courage and integrity.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Thank you.

AUDIENCE: I want to ask one thing, or a couple of things, of you, and that is that you give more attention to children and family issues.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yes.

AUDIENCE: And I think that the best way you can further the cause of social justice and human rights in our own society is just by addressing how children and families are treated. And one other thing I would like to ask you is, I would like you to speak out on behalf of human rights in Colombia, South America. And that's all I have for you this morning.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Thank you. And the human rights issues abroad, I want to be real consistent on. And it saddens me a little bit what you said because it is heart and soul. And I think, probably, I do as much work and care as much about issues that affect children and families and education as anything. I was a teacher for 20 years. And please believe me, it is a major, major priority.

And I have the help of my wife, Sheila, who is really, based on what she's learned from Minnesotans, doing a lot of work when it comes to issues of family violence, a lot of work on a couple of great pieces of legislation, I heard. I hope it's true that NBC Nightly News is interested in doing a piece on a bill we're introducing on the Children's Safety Act, based upon some wonderful work in Minnesota.

Another issue, which is dealing with family violence, and people in the medical profession being trained to understand it when they see it, and there's a lot more that we want to do. And so I very much appreciate what you're saying. What Sheila knows, she's learned from Minnesota, does a lot of work with GW hospital and emergency room, a lot of work with battered women's shelters.

And what we're doing in Minnesota is really just about the best in the country in this area. And we've got a ways to go. But it's just great to be able to borrow from the people in Minnesota and what they're doing in communities and take it to Washington and try and elevate it as a national model.

GARY EICHTEN: On the human rights issue, do you think the Clinton administration has essentially turned its back on the human rights issue in Bosnia by adopting the Safe Haven plan, which looks like it's never going to get off the ground at all?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Gary, just one thing, I should have mentioned Kim Cardelli, who is the woman who has just done the most work when it comes to visitation centers and safety for children and mothers. I want to mention that because we're borrowing from her work.

The answer, this is a painful question for me because for the past year, I have sat on the floor of the Senate, and I've said it publicly-- and I think it's a minority position I don't think most people agree with me-- that the international community should have taken military action. I felt that way a year ago. Now it's becoming more and more difficult. I still feel that way. I think it's genocide. And I think the administration has been very inconsistent in its policy in Bosnia.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go to another caller. Hello?

AUDIENCE: Hello?

GARY EICHTEN: Yes, your question, please.

AUDIENCE: Yes. Hi. I'm a family practitioner who is a member of physicians for a national health plan. And I just want to make that statement that not all physicians are members of the AMA, which is the second largest PAC in the country. And thus, you can see the influence that goes on from that direction. But I guess my question is, $50 billion is estimated for the cost of treating tobacco-related illness every year.

It seems to me that before-- what we need with a health plan is something that addresses this terrible problem, a problem even when you're talking about abuse of children, as we see the advertising industry of the tobacco industry, looking at the number of children who become addicted to nicotine at such a young age. What plans, Senator, do you have to try to curb this enormous problem?

PAUL WELLSTONE: First, thank you for your work as a family doctor and thanks for the support for single-payer. And I think we're at the bargaining table. And I want you to know, I feel like we are helping to shape this legislation. Second of all, on the AMA, I do want to mention that it's been great to work with the American Medical Association again, with Shiela, on the issues of domestic violence. They're doing some good work.

Third of all, a couple of things, and it's not just a question of me, but a couple of things are going to happen. I think you're going to see a sin tax passed, which will be a pretty stiff tax on every pack of cigarettes. Now, the question is whether the demand is inelastic or elastic. Hopefully, that will cut way down. And I think it's very appropriate to have that sin tax passed.

Above and beyond that, I don't know if I can take the lead because I feel like I'm ready to collapse on the basis of what we're trying to do, but I would very I'd be very supportive of going after the tobacco subsidy. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to be subsidizing tobacco, given the tremendous cost to the nation of it.

And then, finally, I just want to end on one note. I was in Morris at an elementary school. And I was asking the kids what the issues were of concern to them. And one little boy said to me-- I think he was a first grader-- he said, I think that we should outlaw candy cigarettes because they encourage kids to smoke. I don't think that's going to be a priority for me in the Senate. But it was an interesting perspective.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go to another caller. Hi. You're on Minnesota Public Radio.

AUDIENCE: Hi. I have a question, not how to spend the money, tax, or something like this. I have a question on the point of living in Croatia when you have knife on a neck. This is the point of living. And I'm interest in if America wants to come there or America have a plan, why America wait support of Europe? Because everybody knows what's the politic in the past there. And I don't know.

GARY EICHTEN: What do you--

PAUL WELLSTONE: I wished, I wished that I had words that could speak to the pain that you feel. And I am very sad to say to you that I feel as if Europe, once again, and I think the United States as well, is not going to become involved in any kind of way that's really going to stop the genocide.

And for that, I think the international community should be ashamed. That's my own position. And I therefore agree with you. But I am only one person, one Senator. And I do not believe in the country right now, there is support for any kind of major international, albeit international, military action.

GARY EICHTEN: Why do you suppose the Europeans are so reticent to get involved in that situation?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I think, first of all, all of the countries, including ours, Gary, are under economic stress. They have a lot of domestic problems. And I think the mood piece in each of these countries, and including in the United States, is not one that supports this kind of involvement. That's number one.

Number two, I think there's a tremendous amount of trepidation about getting involved in the middle of a war, which would mean the loss of lives. And that's a great concern in this country. When people say that to me, I can't be self-righteous. I mean, I get very frightened about that, too. I just honestly and truthfully believe-- I mean, people said, well, Paul, what about the Gulf War? I mean, what's the difference?

And there's two answers, and not that people would necessarily agree with me, but they're honest. One is, I just felt that in the case of the Gulf War, it was a war about oil. And I feel that this has been more a war, this is a case of genocide. And the second thing is, I felt like I actually supported-- I may have said this in a show with you-- the deployment of troops.

GARY EICHTEN: Right.

PAUL WELLSTONE: I didn't think that there had been a real effort for a political settlement or negotiations and then military action, but not before. I think in Serbia, you've had negotiations and so-called truces, ad nauseam. And so, to me, it's a different situation.

The other thing, which is very difficult to say is, I've talked to all three of our children who are in their 30s, and I would apply this to myself as well, if God forbid, they went and something happened, I would feel like it was for the right reason. I feel that strongly about it. I didn't feel that way in the Persian Gulf War. But I don't think that this is where most Minnesotans are. And I understand why people have a different view. And I don't think the United States or the international community is going to do much. I mean, I really don't.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go to another caller. Hello. You're on Minnesota Public Radio.

AUDIENCE: Yes. First, I'd like to thank you, Senator Wellstone, for making yourself so accessible.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Thank you.

AUDIENCE: And I also support your advocacy for a single-payer health care system. And my question concerns the health care system. As you're probably aware, insurance companies, like Blue Cross and most other third-party payers, systematically discriminate against people with psychiatric conditions--

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yes.

AUDIENCE: --and severely limit reimbursement for psychiatric treatment, particularly psychotherapy. I'm wondering what you think of parity, the principle that coverage for psychiatric conditions and psychiatric treatments should be the same as coverage for other medical disorders and treatments?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Timely question. I was just out of Spring Lake Park, meeting an organization, Rise. It was the Rise office that does some wonderful work with people with disabilities, including people who are struggling with mental illness in relation to vocational services. And there were people from around the state that were there that work in the mental health and substance abuse area.

I'm a very strong supporter of the principle of parity. And I think we've got to get beyond the stigma, and much of mental illness is diagonalizable and treatable. And I have to say that a person who's become one of my best friends in the Senate-- big surprise, and one of my favorite pictures is of the two of us, kind of supporting each other, hugging each other-- is Pete Domenici from New Mexico, a conservative Republican but whose politics is personal.

His daughter has struggled with mental illness. And he and Nancy are really feel strongly about this. I feel very strongly about this as well. And I think I'm a very strong supporter of the parity principle. And I'm hoping that will be a part of the package of benefits. There's enormous pressure, again, to scale back on the mental health and substance abuse part of the health care benefits. But I think it should be in there.

GARY EICHTEN: Other callers on the line with a question for Senator Paul Wellstone. Hello.

AUDIENCE: Yes. I have a question about NAFTA. But first, I want to show that I have a great deal of respect for Wellstone. And I'm in support of many of the things that you're trying to do in Washington. I just hope you keep up the fight.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Thank you.

AUDIENCE: Let's see. About NAFTA, as far as I had seen, we had studied NAFTA in a class that I was in. And they talked about how it was basically structured around the free flight of capital. I'm wondering, in your opinion, what would be the effect of opening up the flight of labor and allowing people to move freely back and forth across the border?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, the first point to make is that right now, whether or not there is or is not a North American Free Trade Agreement signed, I think on an annual basis, there's been about $65 billion worth of investment in Mexico. I mean, US companies can go to Mexico now, and many do. So you have that, if you will, capital flight going on at the very moment that we speak. And not signing a NAFTA agreement won't stop that. Sometimes I think people forget that.

I mean, now, as far as the North American Free Trade Agreement is concerned, I wouldn't support it as presently constituted. I've said that over and over again. And when I visited Tijuana, that made me even feel more strongly about this position. I'm in favor of a North American trade agreement of some kind, but not the one that was initially negotiated by the Bush administration.

There has to be a social contract. There has to be a trade agreement, whereby there is an agreement to adhere to the same labor standards on the part of Mexico and health and safety and environmental and human rights standards. And without that, two things are going to happen. I think, one, you will see an exodus of more jobs from our country. But the other thing is, it's a foreign policy issue. I do not believe that it is true that the Mexican people have benefited as a result of US companies going over the border.

GARY EICHTEN: Won't they just continue it? I mean, if you don't sign the NAFTA, don't work out the NAFTA, I mean, as you point out, I mean, already, there are a lot of companies operating down there. No reason they would stop doing that.

PAUL WELLSTONE: That's right. That's why I said, Gary, that I actually would-- that's why I made that point. It gets to be complex here. But again, right now you see people, they live in shanty towns. It's simply not true that this has led to any real uplifting of their living standards.

Therefore, what I'm saying is, I'd like to see a trade agreement. I think you could have a trade agreement that would be good for people in our country and good for people in Mexico. I just don't think this one is. And we'll see what kind of changes are made. But at this point in time, I wouldn't support it.

GARY EICHTEN: How do you think that's going to play out? Do you think they're going to put the squeeze on the Mexicans enough to get an agreement that you'd be comfortable with?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I think that they're going to have to. I don't think there's the support for it right now in the country. I don't think it would pass in the House and the Senate as it's presently constituted. Whether or not they can or cannot, I don't know. I think the NAFTA agreement is in a lot of trouble at the moment. But my position has never been, no, never. It's been, yes, if.

GARY EICHTEN: Mm-hm. I have to ask you about another trade. The Clinton administration has decided to extend most favored trading status to China for another year. There are some conditions, I guess, if they improve their human rights position over the next year. Are you satisfied with the way the administration has handled that?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, I wouldn't have minded the cutting off of trade. But I will vote for it. But I'll emphasize in the vote that this is a one-year probation. I mean, I think that they did a pretty good job of conditioning this upon China living up to basic human rights standards not only within its own country in relation to the people of Tibet. And if that doesn't happen after a year, I think I'd be leading the charge to revoke most favored nation.

GARY EICHTEN: Do you think that would actually occur, though? I keep hearing about that every year. Well, we're going to extend this and do that. And the other thing--

PAUL WELLSTONE: I don't know. I mean, I hope so. I mean, people find all sorts of reasons to say that-- first, there's the argument that it hurts us economically to revoke it. And then, second of all, there's the argument that the economic ties lead to great improvement of human rights. I don't, to tell you the truth, buy that. So I would hope that this is not just words, and that after one year, we take a close look. And if there hasn't been real change in China, we would revoke it.

GARY EICHTEN: Another caller is on the line. Hi.

AUDIENCE: Hello. Hello. I'm calling from Duluth.

GARY EICHTEN: Yes, sir.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Hi.

AUDIENCE: I'm wondering if Senator Wellstone could help us check out something concerning illegal transfer pricing in crude oil. I've heard that it's draining $85 billion out of our economy every year. And that money, if turned loose, would generate half a trillion dollars of activity in our country. And the transfer pricing that's going on is illegal.

GARY EICHTEN: What is that?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I'd love to know.

GARY EICHTEN: What is transfer pricing, sir?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I'm not sure. Let me put it this way. I would love to be the expert on it. I'm not. When you say, check this out, I'd be pleased to do that. And please, do me a favor and call the Northern Minnesota office in Virginia and talk with Kim Stokes or Jim Shaw. I wish you would. And if you can just give them whatever information you have and your name and phone number, we'll get back to you. I will definitely check into it.

AUDIENCE: Because we've heard also that there's a protectionist scam going on in sugar that's sucking $3.5 billion out of our country every year--

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, it depends on what--

AUDIENCE: --to a small group of people.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yeah. Although, again, what appears to be protectionist scam to some people, to sugar beet growers, is a fair price in the marketplace. And it's a whole issue of what some people call subsidy. And other people say, it's a decent price.

AUDIENCE: But not like the transfer pricing thing.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, it may or may not be. Again, I'd have to check into your numbers. I don't think so. No, I think it's a different issue. I think it's quite a different issue. But I would be pleased to check into it. Please call our office. I'm sorry to have to say that to you. But right here on the show on Midday, I can't give you a real specific answer. But I've got some great people that work with me on energy policy.

GARY EICHTEN: Thanks for your call, sir.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yeah, thank you.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's move to another caller. Hi. You're on Minnesota Public Radio.

AUDIENCE: Hi. Good afternoon, Senator Wellstone.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Good afternoon.

AUDIENCE: Yes. Vice President Al Gore has been a backer of, what's been termed, the information superhighway project, and also, I suppose, in the project, to computerize the White House. I wonder if you're involved in this project at all, and if you're aware of the fact that the University of Minnesota is recognized as a world leader in this field with many of the projects that it undertakes and also having one of the largest computer networks. And I wonder if you'd be in a position to present some of the U of M's achievements to him when he's in the area tomorrow?

PAUL WELLSTONE: He's coming today.

AUDIENCE: Today, yes.

PAUL WELLSTONE: And they just called last night and said that they had wanted that I was to spend a little bit of time one on one. And so I'll use that as an occasion to talk about our work here in Minnesota at the U of M and in the State. And as to the first part of your question, I'm very interested in technology policy in general. I think we paid a huge price as a nation for not being more in the cutting edge of technology policy, and definitely do plan on being working with the vice president and others in this area.

GARY EICHTEN: By the way, Senator, what's your sense-- traditionally, vice presidents have been like fifth wheels. Do you get the sense that Vice President Gore has a responsible position in the administration, or is it more ceremonial as tradition would have it?

PAUL WELLSTONE: No. Well, I think it won't be just ceremonial. I mean, he's very, very bright and, I think, gets very high marks as a policy person. I think he's a substantive person. And I think it's been rough sledding for him at the beginning, as it has been for the administration period. And the media, sometimes, can be brutal.

And there's been a little bit of this, even a few cartoons of Mrs. Clinton being the vice president, and then where is Al Gore? And I think that's unfair. I mean, I think he'll be an essential part of the administration, and by no means just a figurehead, much in the same way that Vice President Mondale played that role.

GARY EICHTEN: Is the Clinton administration been pretty much in disarray, as far as you can tell? I mean, you keep hearing about that.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yeah. I mean, to a certain extent, yes. I mean, I think mistakes have been made. And I think that's undeniable. The one thing that I just have to say on your show, Gary, and in Minnesota, in my own state of Minnesota, is that I'm a big believer, based on personal experience, that in politics, several months can be a lifetime.

And I remember a time when I was elected in Senate and came out against the war and some other things. And boy, for a while, you just have to keep your confidence. And it can be tough. And it can be painful. And plummeting in the polls, and all of a sudden, people have buried you and said, it's all over.

And I have said that I've talked more to Mrs. Clinton than the president. But I will say that to him. You just have to own up to your mistakes if they've been mistakes. And you have to keep your confidence in who you are and what you believe in and move forward. And my guess is that, several months from now, it'll look quite different. But clearly, they've got to do better. And I think President Clinton will do better. And I he'll be a good president.

GARY EICHTEN: Why do you think his approval rating plummeted so much? I mean, he never started that high to begin with, of course, but it's just drop like a rock.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, I think I can answer that. People listening might have a different interpretation, but I think that the mood of the country is such that there's quite a bit of indignation and cynicism about politics, quote, "politicians and public life." And it doesn't take much for people to lose confidence and lose faith because they don't have a lot of faith to start with.

And so I think as soon as there were, from the point of view of people, signs that this wasn't the person they voted for, people began to get pretty angry. I think, probably, of the things that happened, probably the thing that hurt the most, to tell you the truth, was the haircut. I'm serious about that. I'm perfectly serious about it. It is a really big deal to people. People understand it all too well. What is somebody doing getting a $200 haircut? I mean, what in the world is that all about when so many people are struggling? And I think that hurt the president.

Now, here's the good news. There are big, big issues in this country-- health care, the economy, jobs. And we could go on. I'll just mention those two, education, and I think he's substantive and cares fiercely about it. And I think when he gets back on track, he'll end up being a very good President. But this has been a rough time for him. And as I say, as it turns out-- I hope this doesn't sound like name dropping-- he called the other night, sort of surprising. That hasn't happened to me. President Bush didn't call too many times.

And Shiela and I were gone. And so by the time we called back, it was 12:00. And they said that he-- what did they say at the White House-- that he had turned in for the evening. And I don't know what it was about. But I will tell him at a personal level that I just think you have to keep your confidence, dig deep within, and you will be a good president, very good president.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go to another caller. Hello. Your question for Senator Wellstone?

AUDIENCE: Good afternoon. I'd like the Senator to comment on the BTU tax. I perceive this tax to be pervasive and that fully expect industry will just pass these costs on through to the end user. And we'll all pay more as opposed to just a simple gas tax, which, one, it's my opinion that that tax is one that the consumer can choose to pay, he can alter his driving habits and buy a higher mileage car, et cetera, two, it directly reduces air pollution, and three, it would reduce our dependence on foreign oil. I'll hang up and listen to the comments. Thank you.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, I actually disagree with you, except for one part of the question, which doesn't mean I'm, quote, "right" and you're, quote, "wrong." It just means there's an honest disagreement. I think the Btu tax, as originally designed, was elegantly designed. And people have forgotten about it where the import was the highest. And then you got to the oil, and that was the next highest. And then you went down to cleaner fuels and some of which were exempt altogether, including renewable energy sources.

To my mind, the shame of it is as follows. I mean, I looked for adjustments in the Btu tax. I knew that needed to happen, and I felt it should. But with a Btu tax, David Morris, our own David Morris in Minnesota, has made, I think, a real important analysis, which is, actually, there were alternatives.

There were ways in which farmers, for the additional cost, 6% let's say, plus, could, in conservation practices, save that energy. There are ways in which industry could become much more energy efficient, so on and so forth. There were clear alternatives, which not only would have been better for the environment, but whereby people had options.

I think the signal of it was in the right direction, albeit some of the bite of it, I think, needed to be taken away. I worry about that. I think the tax at the pump is the most regressive. In the urban metro areas, yeah, we can talk about public transportation and people, not everybody needs to drive. But in rural Minnesota and rural America, there are a whole lot of people I know who drive 100 miles round trip for a $4.50-an-hour job. I don't think they have any alternative whatsoever. I think it's extremely regressive.

And by the way, the cars that they have are the older cars. They're the cars that are the least energy efficient because they can't buy some of these newer cars that are higher mileage. And so I'm very worried about this alternative. And I'm not at all sure that I'm going to support it. I'm not saying that I'm going to oppose it. But I do have these questions in my own mind, as I do in any further cuts in Medicare.

GARY EICHTEN: Seems like the big challenge right now is getting his plan through the Finance Committee, right?

PAUL WELLSTONE: That's right. And the other thing that annoys me-- I mean, it is my nature to like people-- but, I feel like Senators Boren and Breaux, both of whom, I know, they come from oil states, petrochemical-based states, and they've been able to, because they're swing votes on that committee, exert a lot of leverage.

Maybe some of the rest of us are going to have to exert different kind of leverage. Gary, I hate to do that. Our support is conditional upon-- I came out strongly in favor of the original budget proposal. And I went out to rural Minnesota. And I had farmers and other people tell me they didn't like the Btu tax.

And I didn't talk out of both sides of my mouth. And I said, I think it's going to stay in. And I will support it. I'll try and make adjustments, but I will support it. But now, I'm not so sure. It depends upon what they put into place. I think the caller has a good point on its effect on industry. But in general, I think I disagree. And I'm not real comfortable with where, I think, they're heading right now. I mean, well, enough said.

GARY EICHTEN: All right.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yeah, sorry, because other people are calling in. Sorry, everyone. I won't talk anymore.

GARY EICHTEN: No. It's interesting. Let's go to another caller. Hi. You're on Minnesota Public Radio.

AUDIENCE: OK. I recently wrote to Mrs. Clinton and said, there is no room in the health care budget for profit for insurance companies. You would have to be Jack the giant killer to get them out of the picture. But I think you're equal to the job. Now, I would like to ask Senator Wellstone, what's the realistic possibility of getting the insurance companies out of that picture?

PAUL WELLSTONE: It's slim. I mean, I'm in agreement with you. I mean, I really think the virtue of the bill we introduced in the Senate, and that Jim McDermott in the House and John Conyers, is that it eliminates to greatly reduces the role of the insurance industry, as should be the case. I think the insurance industry will have a role in Mrs. Clinton's plan, the President's plan.

But I do think there's going to be major reform. And it will be community rating. And a lot of the abuses, I think, will be ended, specifically, the ways in which insurance companies deny insurance to people because of a prior or a current health care condition. So it won't be what you and I want, but I think there will be much more a stringent and strong regulation. That's not satisfactory to you, I know. But you asked me what were the, quote, "realistic chances."

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go to another caller.

PAUL WELLSTONE: They got a lot of clout.

GARY EICHTEN: Right. Your question, please.

AUDIENCE: Hello, Senator.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Hi.

AUDIENCE: Before I begin with my little agenda, I want to compliment Mark Anderson. If you keep him aboard, I'll be the first Genghis Khan conservative voter for your re-election.

PAUL WELLSTONE: He'll really appreciate that. Thank you.

AUDIENCE: Are your other aides of that level?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I won't be Mr. Self-promoter, but I just have to tell you that, I don't know, I think we get about 500 calls a day now in the office, and I think about almost, maybe, 3,000 letters a week, maybe not quite that many.

AUDIENCE: You're overload.

PAUL WELLSTONE: And people, people in the office really work hard to try and come through for people.

AUDIENCE: Burnout so that he can stay aboard.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, I'll tell him that. Really, he'll really feel good about that.

AUDIENCE: But I have some-- I'll try to raise them as briefly as I can-- medical issues. First, the forgotten group, public employees from various jurisdictions-- I'm from the city of Minneapolis-- who approach 65 and have to buy their Medicare out of pocket. You had the Medicare and the Medigap, and it's a draconian portion of ours.

PAUL WELLSTONE: That is correct.

AUDIENCE: OK. If you just bear that in mind.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Oh, I know that. Yes.

AUDIENCE: Second, which gets no publicity, the ERISA escape hatch for the self-employed. Small groups are getting together in Minnesota to join the self-employed escape hatch, or self-insured, pardon me, the self-insured escape hatch. They don't contribute to that 2% hospital tax.

PAUL WELLSTONE: That is correct.

AUDIENCE: It will be the corner shoemaker or the corner barber or the farmer, who will have to eat the whole damn thing.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yeah. Well, Minnesota State and Minnesota, as you know, is seeking that, an exemption from ERISA, and on the Senate side--

AUDIENCE: Hawaii has it. And does it work?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, I think, in order for the Minnesota plan to go forward, I think we have to get the exemption. And I'm going to work very hard for it.

AUDIENCE: I'll raise a couple of other issues.

GARY EICHTEN: Very briefly.

AUDIENCE: The global budget, forget it. Why is not a neurosurgeon worth $500,000 when shortstops, quarterbacks, and rock stars are worth $5 million?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, we're together on two out of three. I think the reason I'm very much in favor of a cap or a global budget and, for that matter, a capital budget too. Gary, what we're talking about here, so that it doesn't get too technical, is that part of the health care equation is security for people, decent benefits. And part of it is what is the cost containment. And there has been discussion, and I think it should happen, that there are annual budgets that have to be lived, lived within or--

GARY EICHTEN: Basically, one big pile there is one kitty.

PAUL WELLSTONE: I didn't say that.

GARY EICHTEN: When that kitty disappears, then they portion that out.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Now, the question, and the answer to the question is that I don't think we allocate. There are certain decisive areas of social life where the market criteria isn't the only criteria. And you don't allocate health care like you do baseball, haircuts, or color TV. I think that's the answer.

And I think that there will be accountability vis-a-vis providers. And some of the people who are making $500,000 will make less. By the same token, I have to tell you that family doctors, pediatricians, nurses, and a lot of other people will, I think, get better reimbursement and should.

GARY EICHTEN: Very briefly, Senator, and I want to get to another caller. Is there any concern in the back of your mind that the policymakers in Washington, yourself included, are going to make such drastic changes in the health care system that we've got in this country, that what's good about it is going to get messed up, that we're going to lose the really good parts of the system with all the tinkering?

PAUL WELLSTONE: If it's tinkering, I think I have a real concern. I think the answer is, without trying to sound arrogant, no, I'm not worried about the fundamental change because I think we need it in terms of how we finance and deliver health care.

What I'm worried about, Gary, and actually have said, is that there will be so many different accommodations to this power group and that power group and that power group that it will become so jerry-rigged and so complicated that we'll end up-- the worst case scenario, which may be what you're talking about, is a change or a reform whereby people are paying more, receiving less, with less of a choice. That would be the kiss of death.

And I have over and over again said that cannot be the direction we go in. I don't think it will be the direction we go in. No one's talking about giving up on high quality care. No one is talking about, quote, "rationing." I mean, that's what we have right now, is the rationing.

And I think the reforms that people are talking about are right on the mark, including new ways of delivering care out into communities where people live, including changing the insurance company equation so that insurance companies have to, at the very minimum, live up to some decent regulations. I think what the direction it's going in is the right direction.

GARY EICHTEN: Another caller is on the line.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Can't give up on high quality care. If you do that, you're in real trouble.

GARY EICHTEN: Another question for Senator Wellstone. Hi. You're on Minnesota Public Radio.

AUDIENCE: Hello.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Hi.

AUDIENCE: Senator Wellstone, two or three weeks ago, I heard a report on NBC TV that the head of the CIA, Mr. Woolsey, is asking for $800 million additional for the budget of the CIA. Now, with the country needing health care, and we got to bailout the S&Ls, and we have homeless people, do you think the President will stand for anything like that from the CIA?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I don't know what the President's going to do. But I mean, supposedly, we're not supposed to-- it's just the black hole budget. People don't know exactly what it is. But I think the figure I keep hearing is that CIA budget is something like $30 billion a year or thereabouts. I don't think the CIA needs any more money. And I hope the President doesn't appropriate any more.

It's a matter of choices. I mean, when people in Minnesota say to me, we should spend less money, I always say, well, yeah, we should in some areas, but not in others. And I don't think it makes a bit of sense. So I think I would agree with the import of your question. But I can't tell you what the President's going to do. I'll tell you what my input will be.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go to another caller. Hi.

AUDIENCE: Hi. Good afternoon, Senator. I have a question regarding Northwest Airlines. Being an employee there for 25 years, I'm a little concerned. What are your feelings if, for instance, the concession package never reaches an agreement, or they are unable to reach an agreement? Are your feeling, are we going to become another Eastern Airlines with the primary problem being the huge debt when the airline was purchased?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Right. Well, I can tell you right now that when you say, are you concerned, yeah, I mean, because Northwest Airlines' right up there with 3Ms, one of the largest employers in the state. And every time I go to a employees picnic like machinists-- I can remember going on Hudayriyat Island right here in St Paul-- and I see all the people and their 30s with their children, they work for Northwest Airline, you bet, I'm really worried about it, and the one place I can't answer the question.

And people have come in from Northwest Airlines across the board and have met with us and have explained the situation. I mean, what I really don't understand very well, I don't understand these leveraged buyouts and the high finance of it all. I mean, when I say, I don't understand it, I mean, I think I don't much like it. It's what I'm really saying.

At this point in time, I do hope some kind of a, quote, "package" can be put together. I really hope that all employees, the employer can come together and that Northwest Airlines can get its economic act back together and can survive as an airline. I think it's very important that had happened for Minnesota. But I am very, very worried about it, very worried about it.

GARY EICHTEN: Do you think the airline industry has gotten to the point where the federal government ought to think about a Chrysler-style bailout of some of these companies?

PAUL WELLSTONE: I think that it's gotten to the point where you're going to have to the original, quote, "deregulation didn't work." I mean, it didn't. We were supposed to have more competition. And then all of a sudden, for a while, you had the people springing up. And then what happened, Gary, is that the few just pretty much took over the market, and most left.

And I think there's going to have to be more of a federal government role. I don't know whether it would be Chrysler bailout, or whether it would be more public-private partnership, hopefully, more proactive than having to bail out at the very end. But the airline industry is very, very important to this country in terms of, I was talking to a caller earlier, on the technology part. You can almost argue it from a national interest point of view. So I think that this is a real important area of economic life.

GARY EICHTEN: Go to another caller with a question for Senator Wellstone. Hello.

PAUL WELLSTONE: And I'm sorry, I can't. To the caller who asked, I wish I could-- I mean, part of that is this anxiety behind that call, which is, I've worked for 25 years. I feel like I'm twisting in the wind. What is going to happen. And I follow these negotiations like everyone else does and get informed. But I ultimately don't know. I hope it's going to work out for the airline and for you who called? I'm sorry. I don't know people's names today.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's go to that next caller. Hi.

AUDIENCE: Hi. I'm calling from Duluth. Good afternoon. First off, I want to say, Senator Wellstone, I think you're the best Senator in the Senate.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Well, that's more than deserved, but thanks. Could we conclude the show right now?

AUDIENCE: Comment, one, I'm also a single-payer supporter. I'm a medical student at UMD. And I'm also a member of Physicians for a National Health Program.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Right.

AUDIENCE: And so I'm glad to hear so many people are calling in support of single payer. Why do you support that?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Thank you. The single-payer constituency, I have to say this is a pretty fired-up constituency. I said this to Ira Magaziner, who's chairing the Health Care Task Force, and to, again, Mrs. Clinton, who met with the coalition. Senator Moynihan, who's Chair of the Finance Committee, Senate Finance Committee, is very important in this area, said to me, he said, I was on a call in a show in New York for an hour, and all I heard was single payer, single payer.

And I mean, it's Public Health Association, nurses, a lot of doctors, Consumer Federation, a lot of unions, a lot of community groups, citizen action. I mean, there's a lot of energy behind it, and I think, given the fact that everybody discounted us and said, well, it's the insurance industry, they're marginal, they won't have any say.

The articles that have been written-- this will make you feel good-- in the last month have suggested otherwise. And I feel very good about that. And I think it's because of people around the country that have done good grassroots organizing.

GARY EICHTEN: I think we have time for one more caller or two more. Hello. Your question for Senator Wellstone.

AUDIENCE: Am I on?

GARY EICHTEN: You betcha.

AUDIENCE: Yes. Senator Wellstone, do you know who Ms. Quam works for, first of all?

PAUL WELLSTONE: Yes.

AUDIENCE: OK. The President, according to the Star Tribune, made $7,836,000 last year. Yes, this is unconscionable, when two of my kids can't afford health care. One is in a dangerous occupation, and the other one is a starving artist.

PAUL WELLSTONE: You should mention the organization that, first of all, Lois works for.

GARY EICHTEN: Talking about Lois Quam, who is a Minnesotan, a member of the Health Care Task Force, Hillary Clinton's task force.

AUDIENCE: She is not unbiased. She couldn't be. Now, Medicare system is called "insurer's license to steal" from the Pioneer Press last year. I wonder if you know about that.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Let me take a quick crack at this because I don't want to run out of time. And on this one, we're probably going to disagree. I think $7 whatever million, or whatever, made by a for-profit holding company in health care, is just simply not defensible. I feel very differently, however, about Lois Quam. Lois Quam is on leave. And I think the work she's been doing in DC has been magnificent.

And I do not believe that there's a one-to-one correlation, necessarily, between where people work and what they end up doing. She has been, I think, probably one of the most important individuals in the task force. And my dealings with her have been very, very positive. I just have to say that I have not seen her in there trying to represent any particular network. And people give her the highest marks. I mean, if it was otherwise, I'd say so. But I feel really proud about what she's done in Washington.

GARY EICHTEN: Let's get one more question on. Hello.

AUDIENCE: Hi.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Hi.

AUDIENCE: I just want to thank Senator Wellstone. I've never seen anyone answer more questions than he has. And my concern is about a phrase that he used last night, "democracy for the few." I'm real concerned about the lack of democracy in this country, and so are groups like the Kettering Foundation where they support citizens in politics. How can people get involved in the political process and arrest this decline, this dangerous decline, of democracy in this country?

PAUL WELLSTONE: It is very dangerous. And I was talking about that in relation to health care but other things as well. Do we have a system of democracy for few, or democracy for the many, which it should be? Let me try and be brief because we're going to run out of time.

I am really worried that the anger that people have about politics gets translated into people just opting out, and just saying, we want nothing to do with it, the hell with it all, and a kind of across-the-board denigration of all public service and all people in public service.

It really worries me because I don't feel that way about public service. And I think it'll just lead to decline of democracy. What can be done? My one little dream is, I'd like to see people when it comes to the Washington end. Because I'd like to see people in Minnesota, if you will, what's the word I'm looking for, lead the way.

I'd like to see accountability sessions in every congressional district, and two senators brought back home, where people themselves organize it. We come home all the time. And people only ask us to answer questions but to ask us, where do you stand, yes or no? What are you going to do? It can be respectful. But I think it can be direct. And it would be a really good thing to see for Republicans and Democrats.

In other words, only so many people can come to DC. It's an expensive airplane trip away. And when people come to DC to visit with me, I don't mean to offend anyone. I know it's Minnesotans, but I also know it's a tiny slice of the population of Minnesota that's really in there.

But we come home all the time, and I think it would be great if, in every congressional district, people would organize a forum and have us there and put the questions and ask us, yes or no. And I think it'd be the thing that people could do all over the country.

GARY EICHTEN: Thank you, Senator.

PAUL WELLSTONE: Thank you.

GARY EICHTEN: We're out of time. Thanks so much for coming in. I'd like to thank all of you who've been on the line with your questions and comments and all of you who've been at home listening through the program. Senator Paul Wellstone, our guest today on Midday.