107th Congress; sit down interview with new Senator Jon Corzine

He doesn't have it yet, does he have anything to do with it? He's a little room. Really? Nothing more to film. Well, I'll have to talk to him. We can say that we interviewed and then Senator Williams' conference room. We can show what he has to work on. All right. All right. So let's kick it off with the orientation. You had an orientation, Senator Byrd. I understand, led at least one of the sessions, history. Senator Byrd's written literally four volumes on the history of the Senate. And so he capsulized it into less than an hour. Okay. But this is one man that is as enthusiastic about the Senate today as he was seven terms ago. Okay.

He's coming in. What was the biggest surprise? What if you liked so far and what you learned in terms of the orientation? Well, in all fairness, Jim, there has been very little interaction other than the orientation, which was enough to have one really get excited about sort of the awesome process of being a senator. But you know, there has been limited exposure, holiday season. There is also the practical issue that we have this 50-50 Senate. And I think Senator Alot and Senator Dashold are still negotiating on how it's going to get organized. And so just understanding the complications of how you organize the Senate, I think was probably the most-singing part of that two-day period. Mostly, most historical circumstances, I know what committees I'm going to be on. You'd know more about what the schedule was going to look like. And you'd be laying it out.

But right now, talking about how you can organize the Senate, how bills are going to be presented. To the Senate, there's a whole insider process that is yet to be decided. And slowed down more so, I guess, because of the 50-50 split, is that right? And you know, the whole delay that came with the presidential election, I think, put that off. I think, though, that there's hope that that'll get done this week, hearing some discussion about it. You know, it's because some of the staff that you might want to hire, some of the people that you would bring into your team, might want to be framed in the context of the committee assignments that you have, and the work that you will be required to do. And right now, we're kind of open-ended on that. Yeah. When will you know, do you think? As I said, I hope towards the end of this week, but I've heard some prognosticators talk about the first of March. So it's really an open-ended question.

Is that other question still out there? Is Minority Leader Dashel still fighting over a 50-50 committee assignment? Well, there's a whole series of things. Are you going to have co-chairmen of the committees? Are you going to have 50-50 assignments? Are you going to have conference committees that include Democrats in an effective way, or Bill's going to be able to be submitted? Who's going to get the most staff? Who gets access? It rooms to have discussions. There's a whole series of things that go into actual, the process of legislating that are on the table. And it's really up to Senator Dashel and Senator Lot. Now, you come out of that Wall Street milieu where you were the commander of the ship, as it were. How drastic a change is it Wall Street to Capitol Hill? Well, I'm not watching the markets every moment of every day. But, you know, the fact is that the people in the Senate are very able, many, if not most.

You have to work as a team, you have to work in the context of a community of interests if you want to get things done. And that was true on Wall Street, as much as it is, I think here. We have some pretty strong-willed people, some of the people that I worked with in Wall Street were strong-willed. So I think there's similarity there. On the other hand, the issues are much, much broader. The need to make sure that you don't lose contact with the broad constituency that I represent now, I think, is a pretty broad change from the world that you're about. And then there's the seniority system, which was probably the thrust of your question. I am a freshman senator. A freshman senator, in and of themselves, are limited to some degree because of their lack of seniority and their ability to get things done within the structure of the Senate. But that takes time, and I think people understand that.

And I think over a period of time, hopefully we'll be able to be part of the appropriations process, a part of things that I think will end up making a big difference with the state of New Jersey. Meaning that you would like to be on the appropriations. Absolutely. And I think it's highly unlikely or improbable that that would happen in the first two-year cycle. But maybe if I've made strong case about the appropriateness of that within the context of the needs of New Jersey and my own background and skills and interest, I think you can end up having a real opportunity to have that happen two years or four years out. Even in view of what your agenda is, I mean, how realistic is your agenda, the universal education, universal health care, universal higher ed that is? And in view of the Republican majority-racer than as it may be? Well, I think the educational agenda is much more likely to come to fruition early than my desire on universal access at health insurance.

It doesn't mean that I'm not going to push on that and stay committed to that as an agenda item, but with a Republican presidency, I think it's going to be hard to think that you're going to be able to get that. We want to make sure that the proposition is on the table. With respect to higher education, hope scholarships and or financial support, I think it's just a matter of what format that comes by. There was a general consistency, both of Republican and Democrats, to believe that we ought to invest more in higher education. The Hope Scholarship Program, which is an accountability program, relates a lot to the kinds of things that I hear the President-elect talking about. I think there will be a strong debate about making education a higher priority in our budgeting and political debates.

And even today, we hear President-elect talking about formulating his educational policy. So there will be a big debate in the Congress, and I think I can be a meaningful part of that. I just can't imagine the Republicans in Congress wanting to put a guy with as liberal and agenda as you have denunciated over the months of the campaign on the Appropriations Committee in charge of the purse strings, or helping you say where the purse, you know. Frankly, the way the process works, it is the leadership of the individual parties that make that judgment. It's not a trend lot decision. It's not a Republican party decision. It's what the Democratic Party would do. You know, the reality is, Jim, I think I can speak to economic issues with some authority based on my background. I think a lot of people use the term a liberal agenda when, in fact, if people listened, I believe we ought to be paying off the national debt. I think fiscal responsibility is something that I truly believe in. We kept interest rates low during the Clinton years because there was a strict adherence to fiscal discipline.

I don't think that is inconsistent with a belief, particularly in a period in time when, by either by one estimate, we have $5 trillion worth of surpluses over the next 10 years or six if you use the Congressional Budget Office numbers that we should invest back in health care and education. I think you can do those things. We need to make sure that we don't run back into deficits. President-elect Bush has been talking down the economy somewhat, saying it may be on a downturn, may be slowing. That would give more impetus, he says, for his tax cuts, or maybe the political analysts say that, that he's saying this because of the tax cuts in any event with your expertise. Do you see the economy slowing and do you see a need sort of a two-part question and do you see a need for tax cuts because of it? On balance, I think we're going to have a soft landing. If the Federal Reserve moves relatively expeditiously and I think a little more boldly than 25 basis points or a quarter of 1 percent in its January decision-taking, if they move half of 1 percent and then they have a series of cuts, I think we can come out of the slowdown, which was probably appropriate as hot as the economy was earlier.

In 2000, I think we can have a reasonably strong economy and avoid a recession. If we are slow on monetary policy, if we look as if we're trying to undermine the psychology, which is one of the things that I don't think is really healthy and the political debate to throw fear into people's minds about what the state of the economy is. Well, I think that the result may be that. I'm not sure that was the intention. I think maybe the intention was exactly what you said trying to justify a tax cut.

I think a different shaped tax cut is appropriate, tucked in the debates and in the dialogue of the campaign that we ought to raise the talk of the lower two brackets, which would provide a tax cut for lower and metal income families. I think that would be much more stimulative than this across the board tax cut. I think it also needs to be framed so that it comes sooner than the phase in that the Bush proposals had, which I think take probably too long to be stimulative for the current moment in time. So I think that I think there's room for tax cuts. I'll be supportive of them and particularly if they're shaped in a way that I think is sort of fair and balanced, and they're more targeted towards near-term response than stretched out over a decade.

Sounds like yours take a far different shape than the President-elect's would. Is the Congress and the President-elect are they going to be able to work together? I think they will. I think everybody has to give and take a little bit on where we go in this process. And I think there is a genuine desire for bipartisanship, if you will, for a coming together on things where there's agreement. There is general agreement on a prescription drug benefit for seniors. There is a general agreement that education ought to be on a higher plateau of priorities for the society. There is a real belief that we need some kind of fiscal stimulus given what the current state of the economy is. And I think there's a real commitment to paying down the national debt. And then you've got other social security issues, a lockbox, I think, is generally perceived as a good thing. There's a desire to address a number of issues that I think we have common ground on.

The administration would be part of that, too. Sure, obviously. You'll be sitting as a freshman with Hillary Clinton. You've met with her. I saw at least the pictures on the television and newspapers, the two of you together. Have you talked policy? And what do you make of this star in her own right, the first first lady ever to win? Well, I think it's perfectly natural that she's a star. I think she has anyone who has been a first lady, often ranks at the most admired and recognized individual in our society. She comes to her political life with that as a foundation for that process. She's a very able person. She's, in my view, whether you agree or don't agree, have to believe she's thoughtful about the kinds of things that she wants to talk about. It so happens that in many areas she and I agree on a lot of issues. Did you talk policy with her? Yeah, slightly. But this was a quick two-day period where we were focused on the history of the Senate, the rules and ethics and organizing the Senate office. I've spent some time in conversation with the first lady over the years as one has been reasonably active in democratic politics.

I knew her before. We have many common friends and I think that we'll have a good, solid working relationship. I think not certain of this, but since she's number 97 in the seniority list and I'm number 98 will probably be around each other a lot just because desks and offices and all those kinds of things will sort out that way. I look forward to it. She's a nice woman. She's a nice woman. Absolutely. I think she has tremendous amount to offer to society. I don't expect that we will always agree on everything, but I think it's one of those relationships that we can have a healthy discussion about. Is she a good presidential candidate for 2004? Oh my goodness. We just finished getting through with the presidential race. It took a long, long time. I think most of us need to, including the first lady, get focused on being very good senators and representing our constituencies. I think one of the great opportunities that I have both with the Senator Schumer and Senator Clinton is to make sure that the Northeast gets better representation with regard to our needs with regard to financial issues.

I think Senator Moynihan and Lautenberg and others have pointed out over a long period of time. We are not getting our fair shake and I think we need to fight for that and we need to do that together. You mentioned all those other senators. You don't mention Senator Torres-Cellie. Have you spent much time getting to know him? Since we're sitting in Senator Torres-Cellie's office and Senator Torres-Cellie has been a fundamental part of the reason I came to this whole process. I hope people understand that we're going to have a great relationship. We're going to work very, very strongly together. Because in the past, it's not been that way. Traditionally, at least in the recent past, the two New Jersey's two US senators, although of the same party as you two are, have not gotten along that well at least. It's been somewhat cool. We're going to be very good colleagues. I consider Senator Torres-Cellie, Bob, a friend. Is someone whom I intend to work with, have a consistent dialogue.

Again, don't expect that we will always agree on everything. But that's okay. I think we can have good discussions about how we get things done for New Jersey, how we perceive what is good for the country on a lot of policies as a very able man. I intend on working with him very closely. Who will serve as your mentor in this? I think Bob will be a part of that process. I hope I have a continuing dialogue with Senator Lautenberg. Senator Lautenberg has been terrific on transportation issues, on health care issues, on gun violence issues. I intend to have an ongoing dialogue with him as I do with Senator Torres-Cellie. Governor Whitman as EPA chief, what do you make of that pick? What do you think of that pick? Any concerns?

Well, I think every president ought to have the right of picking people to fill important roles unless you have very, very strong reasons to oppose a nomination. I think Senator, excuse me, Governor Whitman, is a strong voice for New Jersey within the administration. I think that's good. I think she has a reasonably decent record with regard to the environment. I am very much supportive of the Open Space Initiatives. I wish she had funded environmental enforcement more than what was the case during her tenure. But I think she will be confirmed in the first instance, and I think she will do a good job. The, some in the minority community are asking that she bring racial profiling to the table and environmental racial profiling to the table. Do you feel that she should do that? Well, I think there are issues there that would be, well, she would be well served to attend to. You know, actually she's been pretty good with regard to brownfield efforts and the rehabilitation of some of our urban community.

I think that addresses that. But I think she needs to be attentive to that on a, obviously, a nationwide basis. I think the whole issue of racial profiling more generally and take it away from the environmental considerations needs further examination and transparency, which I hope that she'll be willing to answer questions and be a representative. I see change within the administration that should be a voice in addressing it as a national problem as one that she has a lot of experience on. A Bush administration you're talking about. Okay. How about diversity in your own ranks, your own staff, Senator Tourselli was criticized some years back for not having enough again by some leaders of the minority community. You said that you're working toward a more diverse staff.

You wanted to reflect New Jersey. How's that going? I think it's going reasonably well at this stage. We have a number of offers out to, I think, very key people who will be representative of a very broad, diverse element. We want to make sure that happens. We also want to commit excellence. And I think in both diversity and excellence, I feel confident we'll get to very good in results. We're going to go slowly on hiring some of the staff as I said before. We don't yet know what committees we're going to serve on. And I think some of the actions that you take with regard to hiring should be focused on the kinds of activities that you're going to be responsible to address inside committees. Just a couple more questions. Your family, are you going to move them down here? I recognize a couple of the kids are older. Jennifer is about 30.

Josh is 24. Right. These are election night figures that may change since Jeff free is 18. 18. Joanne gave me these at night. Are any of them going to move down with you? I don't think so. I'm going to get a place here. I think what we're going to do for the first two or three months. I think we're going to try to find out what the schedule is. Well, the process works and then make a decision on housing. I'm going to spend a lot of time in New Jersey. It's not that long a commute. I believe there's a parts of New Jersey that are not as acquainted with me as an individual. I'd like to see I'm not as acquainted with all the needs of some of the local concerns. I want to make sure that I'm spending a lot of time in New Jersey early on. You combine that with a need to understand what the schedules like and the uncertainties about committees and all those. I think it's better. We just we stay fluid in the near term.

The political campaign you said it thickens the skin. You said that election night. It's pretty harsh. Members of the senator treated like royalty around here. You may have noticed. Maybe not yet. Maybe even not freshmen. Now we'll go look at your own office. I'll take you downstairs and you'll see a difference between a senator who's been here four years. It's our daughter, Sally, and the new kid on the block. So how do you ensure that you don't get soft, that you don't get out of touch? We were talking to Marjoracama earlier, the dean of the delegation and she says Tip O'Neill gave her some advice and that was all politics is local. Stay in touch at home. Well, I think I already acknowledged that I think that's very important. We've been active since the election about moving around yesterday. We were in three different venues for swearing ends of local officials that were acquainted with and interested in the issues. And Tom's River and Prospect Park and Elizabeth. We're going to stay active on the ground in New Jersey because I think that is how one stays in touch with the people that you're choosing that you have an opportunity to serve.

And if you back away from that, I think it's very easy to get out of touch. I'm not going to just be a national senator. We're going to represent New Jersey, New Jersey's interests. And I plan on working very hard at that. And your top priority there, New Jersey's interests, your top priority in the Senate? Well, I think a term from now or two terms from now, if I'm graced with that good fortune, I would like to have been an effective part of putting in place a reform of our health care system. Everyone has access at it. And you know, by the way, that has a lot to do with New Jersey. 60% of our hospitals in New Jersey are now operating in the red. We're seeing a real erosion of the fundamental basis on which health care is delivered to people in New Jersey and across the country. So I'm going to work on that on a long-term basis. But there is also this great need, in my view, for New Jersey and the Northeast to get a greater share of the tax dollars, which we are funding so much of what else is going on in this country.

And I think that's on transportation. That's on environmental cleanup. We have the most super fun sites in the country in New Jersey. I'm going to work pound the table to represent our interests on those issues. Great. Thanks very much. Appreciate it. Can we just get a couple others? Because you really did have a lot of this stuff. Yeah, I was going to ask you what you're going to spend the money on if you got it back. But you mentioned a couple of things. You said the environment. Absolutely. Our school's environment and health care. Very, very clear where the priorities are. Transportation. I think the, you know, we were talking about Senator Clinton. I think for the region, this getting another, getting a rail tunnel under the Hudson River is absolutely essential for the long run economic development of the region. It's great for New Jersey, but it's also going to be good for New York City. I think those kinds of things, you're not going to happen day one down here.

But, you know, I'll put a stake in the ground and I'm going to be working my tail and already communities. But we're going to have in not just sort of worker bees, but senior staff levels will have a pretty full complement of a diverse community. Right now, the deputy chief of staff is African-American. And Darius Gore, we've hired one of our LAs. The first L legislative assistant is African-American, came from the campaign. We've got. Christy Davis, going to be part of your group. She's going to set up her own business. We've got a couple of had an offer out already to legislative director that's African-American. Got an individual. That's what affirmative action is about making sure you reach out to find qualified people. That's what we're going to do.

We believe that we went through a whole interview without talking. Okay. But it did. It haunted you through the campaign, the money issue. And do you think that that'll be a thing in the past now, free you up to work more on your agenda? Or folks going to be after you to say, sign on with McCain Fine Gold now? First of all, I've already sat down with Senator Fine Gold, who is a terrific, terrific person. Very smart, able. And I've already made clear to him that I would like to be a sponsor. McCain Fine Gold, and I think we'll be in that process. Frankly, he and I talked about going back to the original McCain Fine Gold structure, which had public opening up of airwaves as a concept embedded in it, which is where the direction I think we have to go if we're going to control the cost of campaigns. And he and I will be very cooperative in addressing these issues. I think I have a responsibility to do that and will. Yes, I think that there will be lingering commentary and focus on the overall expense or cost of my campaign.

I would like to see that changed. I'd like to start with by not having a primary next time, which might be able to decide divide by two. But I think it is important that we address campaign finance reform in this country. It should be a priority. It's going to be a big debate about whether it is the first issue on the agenda, which Senator McCain said they'll be blood on the floor if it's not. The president-elect has said it should be a lower priority relative to some other things. I will be one of those that say it should be first-order priority, along with electoral reform and funding to make sure that we're addressing some of the weaknesses of a pretty self-evident through the Florida process. I really want to keep you on the floor saying it's first-order priority and you're going to hear some of your colleagues on that same floor talk about John Corazon spending $65, $66 million on a campaign and how wrong that was and wrong-headed or whatever.

Jim, I think that the message that I tried to bring to the people of New Jersey as a complete outsider to separate campaigns, very hard fought, not inconsistent with the cost of the funding of the New York election, which really didn't have primaries, is telling that there's a problem about how one speaks to the public. In a very high-cost media market like Metropolitan, New York, Metropolitan, Philadelphia, if you're going to get to the voters and you're going to use television, you're going to spend a lot of dough, and I think what we need to do is figure out a way to have the airwaves open on a responsible basis for people to have their dialogue with the public. And I tend on working on that.

Why is it the number one priority, though? Why is it priority? Well, I think that there is a lot of rushing or... Well, I think that there has been a long-term bias building the system to not face the issue, and it has been so discussed by so many people who are part of the political process as they run for office, and there is a need to turn to this and address it directly. It's really been a part of the process, particularly the closure process that's kept this from being addressed. Now it looks like it should be, and we ought to seize the moment. Okay, thanks a lot, Jim. Appreciate it. It was great. Thank you.