Exclusive - Nancy Pelosi Extended Interview Pt. 1

  • Aired:  01/30/14
  •  | Views: 208,192

In this exclusive, unedited interview, Nancy Pelosi discusses the Affordable Care Act and government's intrinsic inefficiencies. (8:16)

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]>> Jon: WELCOME BACK.

MY GUEST TONIGHT IS THE HOUSEMINORITY LEADER AND SERVES

CALIFORNIA'S 12th DISTRICT.

PLEASE WELCOME BACK TO THEPROGRAM NANCY PELOSI.

[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

HOW ARE YOU?

>> I'M OKAY.

>> Jon: HOW ARE THINGS?

>> GREAT.

>> Jon: HOW IS YOUR HEALTHCARE COVERAGE?

>> I'M COVERED.

>> Jon: COULD YOU GET ONLINEARE THINGS GOOD?

>> THINGS ARE GOOD AND THINGSWILL BE BETTER.

YES.

>> Jon: VERY GOOD.

EVERY TIME I SEE CONGRESSPEOPLEON TELEVISION, THE QUESTIONS

THAT THEY ARE ASKED ALWAYS HAVETO DO WITH THE POLITICS.

>> RIGHT.

>> Jon: WHO IS -- HOW IS THATGOING TO EFFECT THE POLITICS.

WHO IS GOING TO RUN IN 2016.

ALL THAT.

LET ME ASK YOU IN TERMS OF LIKEGOVERNANCE --

>> RIGHT.

>> Jon: -- IS IT SURPRISINGTHAT THERE'S NOT AS MUCH TALK

AND THOUGHT ABOUT THE MECHANICSOF GOVERNANCE AS THERE IS TO THE

POLITICS AND CONFLICT?

THE WHOLE IDEA IS REALLY ABOUTTHE SUBSTANCE.

>> Jon: CORRECT.

>> AND THE VISION THAT YOU HAVEAND HOW YOU -- WHAT YOU KNOW

ABOUT IT AND HOW YOU PLAN TOEXECUTE AND HOW YOU CAN ATTRACT

PEOPLE TO IT.

AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A BIGDIFFERENCE AS THERE'S ALWAYS

BEEN A TRADITIONAL DIFFERENCEBETWEEN DEMOCRATS AND

REPUBLICANS.

>> Jon: RIGHT.

>> RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A SCHOOL OFTHOUGHT IN THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN

CAUCUS THAT IS ANTI-GOVERNMENT,ANTISCIENCE ANTI-OBAMA.

THEY HAVE A TRIFECTA THATENABLES THEM TO VOTE AGAINSTEVERYTHING.

AS YOU SAW IN THE STATE OF THEUNION THEY COULDN'T APPLAUD FOR

EVERYTHING.

HARD WORKING FAMILIES EVOKE NORESPONSE.

>> Jon: THEY ALSO HAVE, FROMWHAT I UNDERSTAND, VERY

SENSITIVE HANDS.

IF THEY WERE TO CLAP IT COULDCAUSE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF

PAIN.

I THINK IT HAS MORE TO DO WITHTHAT.

[ LAUGHTER ]IT PUTS THE ONUS IN SOME

RESPECTS ON THE DEMOCRATS TOPROVE THEIR CASE MAYBE A LITTLE

BIT MORE FORCEFULLY ABOUT THECOMPETENCE OF GOVERNMENT.

HOW DO YOU FEEL LIKE THAT ISGOING BECAUSE ON OUR END IT

LOOKS LIKE IT'S A BIT CHAOTIC.

>> IT LOOKS THAT WAY.

>> Jon: I HAVE ANOTHER WORDTHAT I USE FOR THAT ENDS IN

SOMETHING TERRIBLE.

>> AWW.

>> Jon: WHY DO WE HAVE SO MUCHTROUBLE EXECUTING THE PLANS WITH

ANY KIND OF EFFICIENCY?

>> WELL, AGAIN, IF YOU AREDEALING WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO

NO AGENDA,NOTHING IS THEIR AGENDA AND

NEVER IS THE TIMETABLE IT'S VERYHARD TO NEGOTIATE WITH THEM.

SO WE ARE RESPONSIBLE.

IN OTHER WORDS CALL USRESPONSIBLE.

THEY KNOW WE'RE GOING TO VOTENOT TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT AND

VOTE FOR THE BUDGET NO MATTERHOW UNPLEASANT IT IS.

THE CHOICE IS TO BEIRRESPONSIBLE OR WE DON'T WANT

TO BE FEAR-MONGERS BUT TOEXPLAIN THIS IS BAD NEWS.

WE WANT TO BE POSITIVE.

>> Jon: I MEANT MORE IN TERMSOF WE'RE GOING TO SET UP A

HEALTH CARE WEB SITE THAT IS ANEXCHANGE.

PEOPLE ARE GOING TO COME TO IT.

WHY IS IT SO HARD TO GET ACOMPANY TO EXECUTE THAT

COMPETENTLY?

>> I DON'T KNOW.

[ LAUGHTER ]AS ONE WHO -- THAT'S MY

QUESTION.

>> Jon: LET ME GET THE HOUSEMINORITY LEADER I CAN ASK HER.

HOLD ON.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU DON'T KNOW?

HOW DO YOU NOT KNOW?

>> IT'S MY RESPONSIBILITY.

WE WORKED VERY HARD TO HONOR THERESPONSIBILITY TO PASS THE BILL

THAT HONORS THE BELIEFS OFTHE FOUNDERS LIFE, LIBERTY TOPURSUE

YOUR HAPPINESS.

>> Jon: REALLY.

>> IF YOU WANT TO BE A WRITER, ACOMEDIAN, A CAMERA PERSON, IF

YOU WANT TO START A BUSINESS.

>> Jon: THOSE ARE THEORETICALI'M TALKING ABOUT PRACTICE.

>> THEY ARE ACTUAL.

FOR US THE VISION WE HAVE ISACTUAL LEGISLATION THAT MAKES

LIFE BETTER FOR PEOPLE WAS OURCONTRIBUTION TO THE FUTURE THAT

THEY WOULD HAVE.

THAT WOULD BE A WEB SITE THATDIDN'T WORK IS APPALLING, SO

SHAMEFUL.

SO I SHARE THE CONCERN THAT THEPUBLIC DOES BUT IT IS GETTING

BETTER.

>> Jon: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT I GUESS TO BACK THAT UP, THEPOINT IS IF YOU HAVE TWO SCHOOLS

OF THOUGHT.

ONE SCHOOL IS THOUGHT ISGOVERNMENTS HAVE A ROLE IN OUR

LIVES TO HELP IMPROVE THINGS ANDWE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN

PEOPLES' LIVES.

GIVEN THAT THE OTHER IS ITREALLY ISN'T.

AND THE GROUP THAT MAKES THATARGUMENT WHEN THEY

EXECUTE THAT PLAN -->> IT SHOULD WORK.

EXACTLY.

NO, AGAIN.

>> Jon: FOR INSTANCE, ARE THERETHINGS IN THE PROCUREMENT

PROCESS?

HAS THE REGULATION BECOME SOONEROUS THAT GOVERNMENT CAN NO

LONGER BE AGILE ENOUGH TO TACKLETHE PROGRAMS?

>> LET ME SAY THAT ONE OF THETHINGS IS A PROCUREMENT PROCESS.

EVERYBODY KNEW ABOUT THAT.

THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR THIS WEBSITE NOT TO WORK.

THERE'S NO EXCUSE.

THOSE WHO WORKED THE HARDEST TOMAKE SURE WE HAD HEALTH CARE,

BUT IT WILL WORK AND THE POLICYIS SOLID.

>> Jon: BUT THERE'S CLEARLYSOMETHING SYSTEMIC GOING ON THAT

IS MAKING THE V.A. UNABLE TODEAL WITH THE BACKLOG.

TO MAKE US UNABLE TO DEAL.

OBAMA'S IT GUY, HE'S CLEARLY ABRILLIANT GUY, HE ARRANGED ALL

OF OBAMA'S INTERNET CAMPAIGNSTUFF.

HE WOULD FIND YOU, YOU WOULD BEIN THE BATHTUB AND YOU WOULD GET

AN E-MAIL. IT WOULD BUBBLE OUTOF THE WATER,

HEY, HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUTGIVING US MONEY.

>> CLASSIFY THOSE WHO BATHE.

THEY KNOW WHAT WE DO.

>> Jon: THAT GUY COULDN'TFIGURE OUT THE PROCESS.

HE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TOBID FOR THAT CONTRACT.

HE SAID IT WAS A 300-PAGEDOCUMENT.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S OBSCUREDLIKE THAT PURPOSEFULLY SO THAT

THE LARGER COMPANIES HAVE ANADVANTAGE BECAUSE THEY HAVE

TEAMS OF LAWYERS AND THINGS THATCAN DO IT.

>> DOESN'T MATTER.

WHAT MATTERS IS IT SHOULD HAVEBEEN PREPARED FOR.

THERE'S NO EXCUSE.

>> Jon: SURE.

>> ALL THAT IS -- OKAY.

>> Jon: I'M NOT PRESENTING ITAS AN EXCUSE. I'M PRESENTINGIT AS DO WE

HAVE A FOUNDATIONAL PROBLEM.

DO WE HAVE CORRUPTION IN THESYSTEM THAT NEEDS TO BEADDRESSED

TO GIVE US THE CONFIDENCE THATMOVING FORWARD WE CAN EXECUTETHE PROGRAMS BETTER.

>> I DON'T THINK THERE'SCORRUPTION. THERE MAY BE A RISKAVERSION WITH GOING WITH THEKNOWN AND

NOT BEING ENTREPRENEURIAL ENOUGHTO SAY -- QUESTION WHETHER IT'S

REALLY GOING TO DO THE JOB.

I WOULD SAY THIS IN TERMS OF THEBACKLOG AT THE V.A., AGAIN

HORRIBLE BUT BEING ADDRESSED.

AND THE FACT THAT THE V.A.'SCOMPUTERS CAN'T TALK TO THE

DEFENSE DEPARTMENT TO GET THEINFORMATION.

>> Jon: SEEMS INSANE.

>> STUNNING BUT DO SOMETHINGABOUT IT.

OKAY, OKAY.

>> Jon: I WAS GOING TO SAYTHAT TO YOU.

[LAUGHTER]I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO SAY THAT

TO YOU.

[ LAUGHTER ]IS THERE SOMETHING -- THIS IS A

GOOD POINT THOUGH: IS ITPOSSIBLE THAT THE PEOPLE WITHIN

THE SYSTEM DON'T HAVE ENOUGHDISTANCE FROM IT TO SEE THE WAY

THAT PEOPLE IN CONGRESSIONALOFFICES END UP GOING AND BECOME

LOBBYISTS AT THE CORPORATIONS.

THE CORPORATIONS LOBBY TO GETARCANE THINGS PUT INTO THE

REGULATION THAT MAKES IT HARDERFOR SMALL BUSINESS.

CAN THE CONGRESS MAYBE NOT SEETHE CORRUPTION INHERENT IN THAT.

>> THE REVOLVING DOOR IS NOT SOMUCH CONGRESS AS THE EXECUTIVE

BRANCH.

ON NSA, NSA THE -- ONE OFTHE PEOPLE WAS HIRED THERE WASFROM A

COMPANY THAT -->> Jon: SURE.

>> THEY GOT ALL THE CONTRACTSAND HIRED CONSULTANTS.

>> Jon: SOME FOLKS FROM YOUROFFICE HAVE GONE TO WORK FOR

BOEING.

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT.

>> Jon: I DO.

[ LAUGHTER ]WELL, WHO?

WELL WHO?

I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY -->> Jon: STICK AROUND.

WE'RE GOING TO GO TO COMMERCIAL.

WE'RE TALKING TO NANCY PELOSI.

WE'RE COMING BACK.

Loading...