GRASSLEY: The Senate's going to start its one-month work period next week. I'll be holding meetings in 20 Iowa counties to hear what Iowans have to say and answer their questions.
In addition, on August 17th I'll have a five-day tour that is the time that I always take for ambassadors tour. This year the 12th one, every other year for 25 years.
I'm going to take these foreign diplomats from more than 60 countries on a five-day tour of Iowa in order to foster export opportunities. I started this tour in 86 in response to the farm crisis and as part of an effort to help diversify the state's economy.
Our tour showcases agriculture, manufacturing and the service sector, and that's in order to build access to global markets and to expand the state's economy.
This year tour will be Des Moines, Huxley, Carroll, Ralston, Storm Lake, Wall Lake, Sac City, Fort Dodge, Webster City, Iowa Falls, Ames, Nevada, Marshalltown, Newton and Ankeny.
We'll visit businesses, tour a family farm and end up at the state fair.
The tour is also designed to showcase Iowa's great people. Visitors stay overnight in homes of local families. They enjoy Iowa hospitality. They also see Iowa's renown workforce through our factories and business visits.
Overall, the idea is to have international diplomats know firsthand what Iowa has to offer. I've been told so many times how easy it is to learn a lot about New York and Los Angeles when on assignment here in a Washington embassy, and how this tour has given diplomats a valuable understanding of middle America, and particularly our great state of Iowa, which is then promoted to the world community.
My goal in hosting the event is to encourage collaboration and activities that benefit the people of Iowa for years to come and the jobs that are created by it.
Kerry?
QUESTION: Thank you.
Senator, before I ask my question, I just wanted to comment, that was a very nice picture of you and Senator Baucus in Time magazine this week.
GRASSLEY: Well, thank you. I'll have to read the article.
QUESTION: OK.
I wanted to ask about your statement that you put out about why you could not support Judge Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. Particularly, I'd like you to talk a little bit to us about your concern of empathy as a qualification, as President Obama has suggested. Do you think if somebody is empathetic that that colors their judgment and not -- that they would not be able to make impartial decisions?
GRASSLEY: Well, I think we got reason to believe it in her case. But you get back to a more basic question. Empathy's got nothing to do with judging. Only what the law is and what the facts as they relate to the law is what judges are supposed to be making their decisions on.
So whether or not she's empathetic and whether ti's going to influence her judging is beside the point. She said and indicated, and the president indicated that it ought to have some role. And I just say flat out it should not have such a role.
GRASSLEY: Tom Beaumont?
QUESTION: Senator, what do you make of getting hit from both sides on the health care issue?
You've got SEIU on one side; you've got some conservative groups on the other. What does it tell you, that you're taking it from both sides?
GRASSLEY: Well, I would say that we're not taking it from both sides; we're taking it from very much working with coalitions that include conservatives, like the business roundtable and like the NFIB and like the Chamber of Commerce, on the one hand.
And then you've got the AARP, that isn't necessarily left or right. And then you've got the SEIU that is very much part of the coalition.
And -- and I guess what it weighs -- what it gets down to is, it's very important to have the public weigh in on this debate, whether you're left or right.
QUESTION: Have -- we've seen -- we've seen some -- what I'm saying is we've seen some Republicans critical of you for being at the bargaining table.
Sometimes I think that they haven't read the details as closely as they could. But do you think that could cause political problems for you?
GRASSLEY: You know, if I worry about political problems, I shouldn't be in the Congress. I've got to do what's right. And I think having an important issue like health care, affecting -- you know, it's a life-and-death situation for every American because that's what health care's all about. And it's affecting one-sixth of our economy.
GRASSLEY: It seems to me like, you know, Republicans ought to be at the table. And Republicans ought to welcome somebody being at the table that is going to do things like the other bills don't do. Look at the Pelosi bill and look at the Kennedy bill.
And our bill isn't even written, so people can't comment on what I'm doing because they don't know what our product will be. And, who knows, we may not have a product. But that's -- sometime's that's the result of negotiation.
But, anyway, look at -- both of those bills add to the deficit. And both of them do nothing to cut down on the cost of health care.
And it isn't just Republicans that ought to be interested in fiscal responsibility. There's Democrats that are interested in it was well -- not as many Democrats as Republicans. And I'm one of those Republicans that's interested in -- in making sure that we -- that it is revenue neutral -- I mean, deficit neutral, and that it actually cuts down on inflation in health care. Otherwise, there's no point in our doing it.
And I think the bottom line is I'm -- I'm focused on whether health care reform will -- will become government run or not. And I don't want it to be government run.
And -- and -- and there's a lot of other issues that are involved as well. I don't know how many times you've heard me give Senator Kennedy's example that if -- if -- if it were -- you know, let me get back: This government run stuff comes from the public option, which comes from crowding out, which then forces us eventually into a Canadian-style system.
I -- you've heard me say it, so I'm not going to go into detail about that.
But, so, you know, then when I talk about President Kennedy, if he was in England, he wouldn't be able to -- to talk.
I just had a member of the European Union Parliament talk to the steering committee this week. And -- and he's from England. And he said that 1 and 4/10th million people work for the National Health Service in England and only half of them are health care people. The other half are bureaucrats.
And he says you've got to wait forever to get service. And so, that's why I say, Kennedy being 77 years old, he wouldn't be treated effectively for it, unless you have plenty of money. And maybe in England, Kennedy would have plenty of money.
But 10 percent of the people are tired of standing in line to get health care. So 10 percent of the people buy private health insurance so they can go to the front of the line instead of standing in line with everybody else.
Now, we don't want that in America. And we're headed down a road of not having the federal government take over health care. And if we have an agreement, we are going to preserve all sorts of options for people to get health care through various forms of insurance. We're going to provide it for people that can't afford it today through helping them get private health insurance.
And we're going to cut down on costs. And every Republican out there in Iowa or anyplace in the United States ought to be interested in all those things.
Now, I heard one of our leaders say to this European parliamentarian. He says, "We're not -- we're not against doing something for health care. We are -- it's a question of when and how."
GRASSLEY: And so one of our leaders, who presumably speaks for 40 members of the Senate, would be saying to those Republicans in Iowa, it isn't a case of doing it or not; it's how and when.
QUESTION: Thanks.
GRASSLEY: Let's see. That was Tom. Joe, Omaha?
QUESTION: Yes, Senator, I was just curious if you could talk, a little bit, about how what you hear when you're back home will influence the way you approach health care and how do you view some of these stories about, you know, people being bussed in from different areas to town halls to try and, sort of, swarm lawmakers and that sort of thing, and just how -- what you hear when you're back home, how is that going to influence, you know, the debate here in Washington?
GRASSLEY: Well, don't forget I've already been in 71 counties. So I've been influenced an awful lot already. And I think you get, overwhelmingly, that people don't want the federal government taking any more.
And you usually get it stated in a way -- "Well, they've nationalized the banks and General Motors. Are they going to take over our health care system, too?"
Now, I have a few people that want Canadian-style health care come. I have a few people that want public options. And -- but I'm not aware of, in Iowa -- nobody's ever been bussed in to my town meetings. And if they were bussed in, we'd have to hold the town meeting out in the -- in the -- in the city square, because most of the rooms I meet in, there's room for 50 to 75 people that normally come, you know.
And so -- have you heard about people being bussed in, in Iowa?
QUESTION: I -- I'd heard reports of that happening in other areas, not necessarily in Iowa.
GRASSLEY: OK, but not in Iowa?
QUESTION: No.
GRASSLEY: No, OK. Well, if they do, they have a right to come. I just hope they're Iowans, you know. And I -- the reason I go to every county every year is to give the people of that county to tell me what's in their minds. So I hope that, you know, when I'm in Winterset next week, people from Madison County come, and they don't flood in from other counties and cheat the people of Madison from asking the questions, you know.
Did you have a follow-up, Joe?
QUESTION: No, I think -- I'm just curious, though. You say you've been listening -- obviously, it's been an ongoing debate. I just -- I think this will be the topic to get the most discussion when you're back there. I'm just wondering if there's anything specific you'll be, you know, looking to talk to constituents about that you want to hear from them on health care.
GRASSLEY: Well, no, I think it would be the same I've given them an opportunity to express all year, anything they want to.
In other words, I don't set the agenda. Anything can come up, you know. And we spend half of our time on health care; 30 percent on budget deficits and 20 percent on everything else, it seems like, so far this year.
QUESTION: OK.
GRASSLEY: Jim Boyd?
QUESTION: Bret Ehrlich, standing in for Jim Boyd. I just wanted to get your reaction to President Clinton -- or former President Clinton going to North Korea, how that's going to affect our relations with the North Koreans?
GRASSLEY: Well, first of all, we ought to be very thankful that these two young girls are home safely. In the process of that happening, a former president of the United States doing that enhances the credibility of Kim Jung Il at a time when the biggest and meanest dictator in the world should not have that sort of recognition.
GRASSLEY: And -- and that's the sad part of it, particularly when they're shooting missiles into the air. Particularly when they're trying to develop a nuclear bomb. Particularly when they have people starting to death and all that. We should be cognizant of the negative things that go along with the good thing that President Clinton did.
But, you know, Kim Jong Il or his predecessor has lied to three presidents. President Clinton was the first one. President Bush. And now, President Obama. They always say they're going to do things, and they never do them. So they're outright liars.
And we shouldn't give our -- our blessing to that sort of a guy. And in a sense, that's what you do when you have a former president having audience with him.
QUESTION: Senator, what's your thoughts on this cash-for- clunkers? Do you think it's been successful? And do you think that more money will be set aside for it?
GRASSLEY: Well, I think you can quantify that the money was used up faster than ever. And so, it's been a success from the standpoint of what it was supposed to do.
Is that the best way to do it? You might say it's better than the rest of the stimulus bill, because the stimulus bill only 10 percent of it is spent and you can't say that that 10 percent's done any good yet because it's too small of an amount.
The economy seems to be turning around, but you can't give credit to the stimulus with so little money spent.
So it gets down to two things then in regard to your question. Number one I wrote a letter to the Secretary of Transportation. And I did it in response to a letter I got from automobile dealers in Iowa telling me five things that have to be clarified and straightened out. And a lot of it deals with red tape. But a lot of it deals with lack of clarity on what the regulations are. And we need to clear that up before I'm going to vote for any more money.
And then the money ought to come out of the -- if -- it needs to be offset by some of this unused money that's now in the stimulus package.
QUESTION: Hi, Senator. Just to follow up on that last question, I was wondering if you thought that it was kind of, I guess, a government problem, in the sense that it was organized poorly in the first place that has made all these problems with it now.
GRASSLEY: Oh, totally. Totally. Yes, totally a government problem. You can't blame the automobile dealers for anything.
QUESTION: And so, that's why you said you want to just support rewriting the bill before you'd support giving any more money.
GRASSLEY: I'm not sure we need to rewrite the bill. I think what we have to do is have these regulators and the Cabinet people in the Transportation Department go ahead and clarify a lot of things and eliminate a lot of red tape, I think.
I've gone through the list. Anybody else want to jump in?
QUESTION: Senator, I have a follow-up question on health care. You have spent so much time on it and have a lot of resources at your disposal and understand it. Do you think the average citizen, whether they're for it or against it, with all of the different programs that are kicking around in the House and the Senate, do you think the average citizen really has a grasp of exactly what the issues are and what it would mean to them, depending which program was adopted?
GRASSLEY: Well, the answer is yes from this standpoint, but this doesn't deal with detail. And so I'd say maybe no to the detail, but yes to this overall issue.
This issue comes on top of the stimulus and the bailout and record deficits and long-term national debt as a result of what's going on right now, and they don't see it happening anything. Then they hear us talking about spending a trillion dollars and they think it's a trillion dollars of new money as opposed to reordering things within health care. And they -- they just think that Congress has gone bananas.
And so they fear, and particularly they fear because 82 percent of them are satisfied with the health insurance they have now.
Now, a lot of those same people would also come up saying, "Yes, there's things wrong with our health care system. We ought to do something about it." But they don't see what we're doing in Congress doing anything but probably hurting them to some extent, the extent to which they're satisfied with what they have.
And so it's that thing that is overriding in people's minds.
Then also overriding is the fact it's very confusing. First of all, everybody thinks it's coming from the president because they call it Obamacare. In fact, you folks in the media call it Obamacare.
Well, there isn't any Obama bill. There's a lot of Obama principles, and he's got a lot of interest in getting something passed. But -- so you got a few people don't like Obama, so that helps -- that helps make it negative.
And then you've got the Pelosi bill and you've got the -- the Kennedy bill, not -- not being deficit neutral and not cutting down on health care costs, and people -- that's a negative to people.
And then they -- then they're talk -- there's a lot of talk about the government taking over health care and if you have a public option, that's the end result of that within a few years. You know, they just don't like it.
And then there's a general distrust of Congress to begin with, or there's a general distrust of Washington generally and particularly when you put the word bureaucrat with Washington.
OK? Anybody else? OK. Thank you all very much.
QUESTION: Thank you.