An Evening With James Baker

good evening everyone I'm Ronnie's did vent director of the Center for politics and governance at the LBJ School of Public Affairs and I'd like to welcome you tonight to this very special installment of the center's perspective series as always we are very grateful to 80 for their support to the center in our activities and we are especially grateful tonight to Governor Bill Hobby for his generous support and facilitating tonight's event we have a number of special guests here tonight in a wonderful crowd and I'd like to just thank a few people for coming tonight we were delighted to have with us and the Texas Speaker of the House Joe Straus so thank you for coming we're also joined tonight I mentioned governor Hobby who's here with us tonight as well we're grateful for the support of President powers who's here our new dean ambassador Bob Hutchings thank you so much for joining us I'd also like to thank our most recent interim dean Admiral Bobby Inman thank you so much for your support and coming and perhaps an award for traveling the farthest our former dean a Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg thank you so much the mission of the center is to infuse the study of political leadership and governance with a practical perspective and one of the ways we do that is through our perspective series where we bring in leading policymakers and practitioners to share their insights and experience with the campus community and the community at large and so we're delighted tonight to have with us secretary James Baker we are thrilled that you all are here and we are all so thrilled to be partnering tonight not only with the LBJ library but with the Texas Tribune and Evan Smith our latest fellow evan is the latest fellow at the center for politics and governance he has hosted our perspective Series in a conversation style format this year we're delighted with the way it's turned out we think you will be too and so just a couple of housekeeping housekeeping issues I'm going to ask you a couple of requests if you all would take a moment to please turn off and silence your cell phones blackberries anything that might go beep in the night that's the hard part and now the good part if you'd help me start tonight's program by welcoming our gracious host the director of the LBJ library mark Updegrove Thank You Ronnie and and welcome to all of you welcome to the LBJ library I did a quick bit of housekeeping for those of you who are friends of the LBJ library part of the membership there is a reception in the Great Hall following this event and we hope you join us there for those of you who are not friends we'd love to have you and there is information about our program as you leave at the information desks we hope to see you again well about ten years ago I had the pleasure of dining with James Baker at at a dinner in his honor and he told a story that stuck with me you talked about the how strange it was to be out of public life when he would be in places and people would kind of look at him and they didn't quite recognize him and kind of approach him and see if they knew him and told a story of one gentleman at an airport who spotted him and got the got the courage to come up and he said your jim banker aren't you and secretary Baker said well why yes I am and he said I thought so house Tammy Faye but but for those of us who appreciate the great statesman and political minds of our age James Baker's at the top of that list he has served as Under Secretary of Commerce for President Ford he served as chief of staff and secretary of the Treasury for Ronald Reagan and he served as chief as chief of staff and Secretary of State for George HW Bush in recent years he has continued to be active in public life as an envoy to George W Bush on Iraqi debt relief and as co-chair of the federal election reform commission with Jimmy Carter and he remains active today as honorary chairman of the James a Baker Institute for foreign policy at Rice's at Rights University interviewing secretary Baker this evening will be our friend Evan Smith the former editor of Texas Monthly and the founder and current editor of The Texas Tribune it is my great honor to welcome to this stage secretary James a baker and Evan Smith mr. secretary how are you sir I'm fine everything thank you very much for being here we're honored to have you it's my pleasure mash a beer for a man who's about to be 80 years old you look pretty good I'm only 79 Evan have I given it away okay I thought mark story about Tammy Faye Baker was great but I want to ask you to tell one more before we get into the serious stuff about being recognized or not being recognized you tell a great story about being in your pickup truck this is after the 92 election your third yeah well I was going down to my ranch at Piersall and I was running out of gas and so I had to go off the interstate and went into welder a little town in Central Texas where there was a gas station now pulled up to the pump and there was this guy and a really ratty pickup truck there he would fill his car his truck up and I noticed he was looking at me and he was looking at me and he was looking at me and I went in I paid my bill he paid his he followed me out he came right out and stuck his face right in mind he looked to me says you're Agnew aren't you Agnew Agnew had been dead for 10 years well mr. secretary we know who you are don't worry now no fear of that there's a lot to talk about and the temptation is to go right to the Middle East which is of course an area that you know extremely well but there are two big issues that have popped on our radar screen in the last couple of weeks I want to get you all some glasses here I assure you this is not a magic trick mr. secretary hey Mark you oughta you ought to break for some glasses here okay that one okay great I look sorry all right um I'm hey Mark that's your deck it's going so far okay I met you governor hobby would spring for that I'm going to resist the temptation mr. secretary to talk about the Middle East that instead asked about two things that are on everyone's radar screen in the foreign policy arena these days first Mexico and then Israel you know that yesterday Secretary Clinton secretary gates Secretary Napolitano led a delegation of high-ranking Obama administration officials to see President Calderon to talk about the issue of violence in Mexico it obviously has a disproportionate impact on Texas I wonder as someone who is there's no problem you've not seen in no situation you haven't been asked to to comment on what you think about that and and what place the country our country has in the conversation well I think it's a very unfortunate situation of course and I think it's a dangerous situation but the trip I believe that that group of cabinet officials is a follow-on to something frankly that started in the first year or two of the Bush 41 administration called a bi-national Commission which the purpose of which was to concentrate a little more on the relationship between Mexico between the United States and our neighbor to the south during those discussions there's always a lot of focus on interdiction the drug problem trade that sort of thing I thought things were getting a little better when after passed and generated greater economic activity both for the United States and for Mexico I happen to believe as one who supported it that NAFTA was a big success but I'll be very frank to tell you Evan I don't know what the answer is to the drug violence that's going on down there now if Mexico's economy picked up that would help the immigration problem I'm not so sure it would help the drug problem as long as we have the demand for drugs that exist here on this side of the border and I'm not saying that you need to do something spectacular like legalizing drugs in this country but somehow we need to focus I think a little bit more on the demand side of the problem I don't know what the answer is to doing that one other problem and it's difficult to talk about it you can't talk about it as Jim Steinberg knows when you're an official of the State Department but when you're out you can talk about whatever you want to you and and I think corruption in Mexico is one of the major difficulties with dealing with this problem is that a problem that can be dealt with it's got to be dealt with in Mexico and by Mexicans but everybody down there are sad to say not everybody that's an exaggeration but so many people are on the take and these drug drug cartels are making so much money and and and you take a federalist police officer there who's making a few pesos a day and you offer him a lot of money to let to let something come through or an attorney's head when there's drug violence it's just dark darn hard to get a whole get a handle on that what do you think President Calderon should be doing I mean I'm sure you were going to tell me I lucked into offer advice to the PLS ago but well I am even when I'm out but because I don't really know I don't have the answer to that I think he said I'm I have respect for the for that particular President of Mexico I think he's honest I think he's trying to do his best but somehow you got to grapple with and get control of that corruption problem and I'm not suggesting for one minute that it extends all the way up to the president Mexico all right let me move on to Israel mr. Netanyahu was in the States this week we seem at least if you believe Press reports to not have moved the needle terribly on the conflict over the settlements in Jerusalem you know that there was a appearance by Vice President Biden in Israel few weeks back and there was a perceived slight against this country in the way that the settlement issue was discussed by mr. Netanyahu at the time that is a continues to be a crucial relationship the United States and Israel give me your perspective on the relationship as you believe it stands right now and and this particular problem and to the degree that you can on mr. Netanyahu himself well well let me preface everything else I say with this statement I don't care whether you're a Republican or a Democrat or what administration is in power in Washington we will always be there for Israel's security that does not mean that we should excuse behavior that moves in the wrong direction in terms of US foreign policy interests and our Israeli foreign policy interests and they're not necessarily congruent in all respects we have our own foreign policy interests in that region we're obviously interested in stability Israel's our strongest ally in the region we are interested in her security but we're also interested in making sure that that she finds a way to negotiate peace with her Arab neighbors the only way is who will ever achieve a secure peace secure peace is to negotiate peace with their Arab neighbors the only border she has today that are secure or the borders with Jordan and Egypt with whom she has negotiated peace so we should do whatever we can bearing in mind that we will always be there for Israel's security to encourage her to negotiate in good faith and find a way to reach a peace agreement with their Arab neighbors the demographics are such that she if Israel wants to Maine it's Jewish character and it's dumb and it's a democratic character it cannot forever stay in occupation or possession of those Arab lands because the demographics are going to are going to go against them if you get to the point where everybody has a vote they'll be overwhelmed unless she turns to some sort of an apartheid type approach which she's not going to do so it's really important in more and more Israelis Ariel Sharon with whom president Bush 43 dealt concluded so did a hoot elemér the prime minister who succeeded in that but in order to preserve Israel's Democratic character and Jewish character she had to find a way to negotiate peace with their Arab neighbors and so it's extremely important now they're always going to be tensions in any relationship you can have tensions and relationships with with enemies you have them all the time but you can also have tensions and relationships with friends right now we've got some tensions in the relationship between the United States and Israel because when the vice president I States was over there there was a very high-profile announcement by the Israelis that they were going to expand a settlement like in East Jerusalem Republican and Democratic administrations going as far back as the establishment of the State of Israel have always said that settlements are an obstacle to peace they obviously are because the only basis for peace between Arabs and Israelis is UN resolutions 242 and 338 which require the transfer of land for peace so the minute you settle it if you start settling building buildings you foreclose any possibilities of negotiations so it's always been US policy that settlements are an obstacle to peace and there was no real need to make a high-profile announcement like that and stick it in the eye of the vice president I states and that has created some understandable tensions Secretary Clinton described it as an insult would you go so far as to say we're pretty close to it but you know I I don't know what I described that way because I made nine trips there and every time I went to Israel they announced a new settlement and so so this is par for the course so I I'm a nerd to that I'm immune from that from that but but that we don't need that we don't need that in the relationship and I think the way that Secretary Clinton and President Obama articulated their opposition to that by saying look this is not just this doesn't just go to the issue of settlements it also goes to the more fundamental issue of the relationship between there needs to be respect on both sides we need to respect Israel and her needs and goals and desires and she needs to respect us and to understand that we do have our own foreign policy interests in that region right what do you think about mr. Netanyahu is a leader of that country well Bibi is a good guy in my opinion motor even though I barred him from the State Department when I was Secretary of State and I'll tell you why I did that I mean I don't mind saying it out loud he went out in Israel in Tel Aviv and did something not unlike what's just happened with his settlement he went out and he said American policy in the Middle East is based on lies and distortions and I saw that in my office on the 7th floor of the State Department and I said wait a minute I said we wouldn't take that from the Deputy Foreign Minister the Soviet Union we're damn sure not going to take it from the Deputy Foreign Minister of Israel to whom we give all this largest courtesy of the US taxpayer to read and so I barred him from the State Department now we've become good friends since then I see him a lot when he comes to United States he wrote me a very very long and effusive letter of apology but I think and I may be wrong about this I think he's a lot more pragmatic than people think he is I really honestly believe that he would love to be the Prime Minister of Israel who brings peace to his people I really believe that and I predicted a year ago that he would make a deal with serious so far that prediction is not looking very good but but I still believe that is possible there's still time mister there's still time that's that's exactly right as a segue into the Middle East and the issues of Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran I believe General Petraeus was the one who said this week that he believed for us to have peace in the Middle East we needed to see peace between Israel and Palestine correct did his deep you agree with General Petraeus I agree with his statement to that effect it is one of the overriding issues in if you know foundation issues in the Middle East and we've got to find a way to to make that happen and I happen to believe that this administration has a wonderful opportunity to do that talk about that well I think everybody understands that time is running out they've got a big problem I say they our administration has a problem because the Palestinian polity is divided pretty hard negotiate peace when you don't have all the Palestinians at the table and today you've got her masa on the one side that we will not deal with because they're a terrorist organization neither will Israeli and then you've got the Palestinian National Authority with whom with whom we deep do deal they they control the West Bank hamas-controlled Gaza but the fact of the matter is we had that same situation back when I was Secretary of State because we could not deal with the PLO Palestine Liberation Organization they were a terrorist organization the Israelis wouldn't deal with them we wouldn't deal with so we found a construct that would enable us to talk to two people who were sympathetic to the PLO position we found people we found Palestinians from within the territories and we began to negotiate with them with the approval of the Israeli government by the way and let me just digress here for many because you asked about Bibi I dealt with a really hard line Israeli Prime Minister I dealt with it sucks Amir who when Bibi Netanyahu was first Prime Minister of Israel said he was squishy and soft that's how hard the guy was that I dealt with right but we made progress and we got the Arabs to change 25 years of policy and come to the table face to face to negotiate peace with Israel so back to back to the the split in the Palestinian polity maybe maybe there would be a construct or a cut out way to to start dealing indirectly with with Hamas get them and and so you bring them into the equation because you're never going to get peace as long as you have half the Palestinians not at the table and I think they ought to take a look at what we didn't in in 91 and see if that something like that doesn't work all right well let's move into the to the question of Iraq and Afghanistan first Vice President Cheney has now said somewhat famously that he believes the country is less safe today than it was when President Bush was in office do you believe that I don't know whether that's true or not nobody will ever know a lot of nobody will ever know how do you know how does he know my good friend even and he is he's my very good friend matter of fact I want to tell you something I was you probably don't know it everybody thinks that George HW Bush got me on national politics he did he helped a lot without him I would never have been in national politics but it was Dick Cheney who picked me out of obscurity as a Deputy Secretary of Commerce and made me the first of all the delegate hunter for Jerry Ford like in the nomination fight against Ronald Reagan and then chairman of President Ford committee and that was when the Busboys the vice president was chief of staff to President Ford that's when wets Ben Dick Cheney was chief of staff as president he was a 32 year old chief of staff so he really as much as anybody got me in national politics how do you know he's right up I have no no well then let me ask a good political point by the way explain well because because it's been proven that that when you when you talk about the security of the American people it resonates with the American people right but if you can't prove that it's true that is it a heading the same view it's helpful for his this side of the political equation is damn hell yeah that's what I'm saying right but the substance of it so much you don't know who knows okay then let me ask you to stay away from the politics for a second and simply characterize in a substantive way how you think the administration has done first on Iraq and then on Afghanistan as one of the people who knows those 2-cent mean ran not Iraq Iraq I want to enter on Iraq about the prosecution of the Iraq war in the Obama administration and the prosecution of Afghanistan as the president has now laid it out well how do you believe that the president is doing on those two well let me preface that by saying two years I said to some people upstairs there there are a number of things that this administration has done in foreign policy that I agree with I just mentioned one on the arab-israeli that's a conflict there are others one of them has to do with Iran but you're not asking me that well as far as as far as Iraq is concerned I think that what they're doing is the right is the right thing to do to continue to to gradually draw down our forces we now have a crunch point in Iraq because you had an election that like our election they were so damn close you remember what happened in 2001 yeah I think I do act okay so and other neat A's I had a lot of people call me when I was down there in Florida and they say what's the matter with you Americans a cradle of democracy you can't even run election what's going on there and they would be former foreign ministers or prime ministers I dealt with and I'd say well mr. Minister let me tell you what's going on here I'd say the rule of law is going to prevail we're working through a very very emotional situation here in this country but we're doing it according to the rule of law and that's going to prevail and I dare say if this was happening in your country there might be tax in the streets and some of them had to acknowledge that there might be much so now they've got a difficult thing in Iraq very close election the part of the prime minister of Iraq made a state with two days ago that's very very disturbing he said we want to have a manual recount it reminded me of the request for manual recounts but anyway he said we want a manual recount of all the votes and if we don't get it and he said and I'm making this request as commander-in-chief of the Iraqi armed 400 so right so we're at a difficult point but you're asking me whether I agree with what this administration has done in terms of prosecuting the Iraq war I do current strategy they've done the right thing on Afghanistan I think that I don't think President Obama had any other option than to send in some additional forces after he said in the campaign that that was the just war and Iraq was the unjust war so he pretty much had to put his money where his mouth was and he did he made a mistake in my opinion by setting a date for beginning the withdrawal of those forces you you don't send 30,000 brave young Americans into a combat zone and say but we're going to start pulling them out on such-and-such a day that doesn't help you win that war so what with respect to that one issue I disagree with him on his conduct of Afghanistan so the better the better course to pursue mr. secretary would have been to send the troops in and then just not Telegraph a potential you know yeah don't telegram no dankey then you can pull them out whenever you think the situation on the ground justifies that let me see one other thing about Afghanistan that I I'm bad Jim steinberg's here because he's he's not right now up there and in the corridors of power and they may have thought about this they may not we're over there in Afghanistan with a hundred thousand American troops and we're taking care of a problem that yes was a problem for the United States but it's also a problem for Iran it's a problem for India for Pakistan it's a problem for China they don't have in Russia all those countries right or would be adversely impacted by an unstable Afghanistan and they're not doing a damn thing so what would be wrong with getting them all together and working doing major league diplomacy and saying hey look we all have a community of interest here you know when the Iraq when when President Bush 43 first sent troops into Afghanistan we talked to the Iranians and cooperated with them because they do have an interest in a stable Afghanistan and there was cooperation I think a conference of all of those countries say in effects in okay what are we going to do about this problem because it is a big problem and I'm not at all sure that we're going to be able to prevail the way we are now it was interesting to me to see any other day that that we're beginning to talk to some of the Taliban which is something I think we should do here for that I'm for that because I think that the Taliban can be bought and if they can't be bought they can be rented so we ought to talk to you'd be willing to do that yeah I think we ought to talk to of course you know give up anything by talking well but I don't believe mr. secretary that the u.s. became the world's policeman as far as Afghanistan goes in the last year this it was not the case that we had more multilateral cooperation on Afghanistan previously and it went away in fact all along it's been primarily if not entirely our folks over there yeah but we did have some help in we did have some help back back there when we first went in when President Bush 43 sent our first troops in there the Iranians actually helped us so if the Obama administration made an effort to reach out to as you say Iran and other countries and said look this is our problem not just the problem and they were reluctant or unwilling entirely to to commit troops what would you have the administration do at that point well what they're doing now continue apace what they're doing now with the first act which is to try and win it militarily and right and win it without any help from any adjacent countries it's going to be a tough row to hoe is even the Defense Secretary has said that on many occasions is it winnable sir I wonder you know we talked about Mexico you said well this is a huge problem is intractable it's been ever thus and I'm not certain that we can do anything about it can we in fact do anything about Afghanistan well we can't unless we can somehow establish a government there that is credible and right now there's some serious question about that any because I had an it but first you got to decide what is your goal if you is your is your goal the nation built in Afghanistan or is it to create a government there I think it I think it's to establish a government there that can control events within Afghanistan that's a much more modest goal is I think that's what the administration's goal yes and and I don't think you know I think that President Obama will have significant pressure from his constituencies to to get out of there at the first opportunity that's why I put that date on there right because he had a lot of pressure from his political allies are you a Karzai fan no not not a fan of Cortana what's your annoying I don't know I should say this I don't run my business you're not a thing I've never met yeah yeah what's the administration's position be with regard to President Karzai President Karzai is the only is the only game in town right now he's the only one we're not going to not gonna be anybody we just had an election and we acknowledged the election we acknowledged the results of the election regardless of what the deficiencies I work with yeah got to work with them yeah so you like what the president's doing on Israel you like what the president's done on Iraq you like but for the date certain what the president's do another gana Stan yeah what don't you like that the president is doing in foreign policy well I don't think we handle Honduras very well I mean that was a that we there was a little knee-jerk liberal reaction to that that I thought was regrettable because I don't think that was a political I don't think that was a military coup and the normal nature of things and South American military could and we fumble around with it for a long time and right and we finally got it right but it but it was not it was not handled a particularly well I hope that we're not by with all this spending out before we get out of here we ought to talk about one of the biggest I was facing country there's big debt bomb we got out there and I worry about what that may do or not do to the readiness of our forces and to our spending on the fence okay well let me get to Iran and then we'll get into some domestic stuff so what to do there obviously to do I support what's being done I mean I'm not one of these people who thinks you either talk to people or you shoot at I mean there's they're there they're there middle ground there there is not an either/or situation and I'm I one of these people who thinks about talking to an enemy you somehow getting something you don't if you know what you're doing so I think talking to them is a good I so sitting down with with with Iran which was a campaign issue after all in the last presidential race you actually support the idea of sitting down of offering to you because they won't sit with us right just like when when I was Secretary of State we were we had a policy that we would meet with Iran at any time provided it was an official level right and we would discuss all the issues between us including support for terror but they had vilified us as the Great Satan for so long they couldn't sit with us they didn't have the political support domestically so what do you do in Iran you talk to them you support the Reformers in the streets that's not an either/or either some people will write oh you can't talk to that regime you strengthen it and you cut the ground out from under the Reformers in the streets well what the hell do you think we did for 40 years with the Soviet Union we talked to the Soviet Union for 40 years and every time I'd go over there or any other Secretary of State we would work with the dissidents and people who were being persecuted and we got many many Soviet Jews to emigrate and so forth so that's the same pathway we ought to go with Iran we ought to not we ought to recognize that military action to end arraign Iran's nuclear endeavors desires is if he had best the one thing it will do in my opinion is strengthened that hardline regime and here we are by offering to talk to them I think we've generated or helped generate a substantial political opposition to that hardline regime and the worst thing in the world we could do is to eat is to drop a bomb on the times which is one of their nuclear plants I mean I think they learned from the Osirak reactor of that in 1982 with the Iraqis when the Israelis took it out to harden everything has moved all around the country we might be able to delay their getting a bomb but I don't think we can prevent it militarily and I know that the Israelis I say I know I'm pretty sure the Israelis cannot prevent it either they might delay it but they came to the prior administration the Israelis and asked for overflight rights refueling capabilities bunker-busting bombs and deconfliction codes and president 43 said no that's not in our national interest so I think we need to recognize that military action is not a simple Oh we'll do a surgical strike and that will end Iran's nuclear efforts that's just not true and the last thing I would I would do is is not forget about deterrence deterrence and when you talk talking about deterrence that doesn't mean you're saying well well then you're just saying Iran should have the bomb I'm not saying that Iran is a huge force for instability in that part of the world and we should do everything we can to deny them a nuclear weapons capability but we ought to also realize that deterrence has worked in the past it worked for 40 years against a much stronger opponent in the Soviet Union and we kept the peace by these 35 and in those days 6,000 nuclear warheads that we had and I don't know why we can't quietly pick up the phone and call that government over there whether it's a head ayat or whoever it is to say hey you even so much as blink you develop a nuclear weapon and you even so much as blink at our friends in the region and those friends are Israel Saudi Arabia Jordan Egypt and the Gulf states or at US and guess what it would be a really bad thing for you because we have 3500 strategic nukes it takes us 20 seconds to rima Mon you and by the way they've just been reamed on you now now I don't think I'm serious you're pretty good at just may I observe that Jim's gonna have a hard time but but let me taste them I might have one also actually well let me tell you something those I've told us may be crazy but they have a strong interest in self-preservation and we could I mean this is a message I think they would understand just one last point on Iran you said that we ought to be dealing with the Reformers did the administration do enough to deal with and support the Reformers during the election I think so yeah they were they were a little tentative at first but they came around and I think they did I think they did and and you know when I say support the Reformers I mean more than just rhetorically we ought to be sending Farsi language broadcasts in there we ought to be doing the very same things we did with the Soviet Union during the Cold War and I think we probably are doing a lot of that we're doing a lot of covert stuff I'm sure which we ought to be doing ok let me come back home and do a little bit of domestic stuff before we get into the Q&A if that's ok we witnessed like it or not a historic moment this weekend in this country the passage of health care reform and then the president's signature on that legislation on Tuesday you have been part of a number of administration's advise presidents you've seen a number of presidents well intentioned talk about health care reform of different sorts in this country not be able to get it passed could you reflect on this moment and if you want to get into I hope you will the specifics of what has just passed and been made into law talk about the impact on us on this country I got to tell you I don't know anything about health care really except that I'm 80 years old and and when they say they're going to pull the plug on grandpa and grandma I'm grandpa so I I don't so my number one question about this bill has just passed they said they're going to say four hundred and thirty six billion dollars in rent Medicare cuts you don't think that doesn't worry me at 80 it does yeah because I don't want somebody I don't want some bureaucrat saying what kind of treatment I can get in the latter stages of my life now more importantly if we were really dedicated to the idea of reducing healthcare costs why isn't there anything in that bill about tort reform or medical malpractice reform which is one of the most significant costs in our health care system so I I have some some problems with the with the bill do you not believe the CBO's numbers mr. secretary that shows that over a period I think you have to believe CBO I suppose will come down well the reason I say that is because we used to use CBO that's right so they can't just be right in you like no they say I'm happy right when they don't so you heard me say we have to believe CBO yes sir but but nobody but you know when we passed the Medicare prescription benefit no when we passed Medicare sorry Medicare passed way back there when it's going to be nine billion dollars it costs something in the neighborhood of 75 or more I mean that's how far things they can be what they can really be wrong right so you don't really know but I'd like to I'd like to ask me from the standpoint of someone who's lived there in that White House at the right hand of the president yes sir I think the president made a fundamental mistake in not sending up his own bills but in subcontracting out his policy to the leadership of the Democratic Party in the House and Senate because those elements of the Democratic Party but I think are the most radical maybe left would be a better way to put elements of that part of the party in 1981 when we came in we had a Democratic House Ronald Reagan and George Bush we had some we had a terrible economic situation we focused with laser-like intensity on that economic situation not on some peripheral issues some of which might affect the economy like health care and I think the president should have focused on the economy first and for loans and I don't think he should have subcontracted out his policy he should have sent his own bill up there he talked really in a wonderful way about bipartisanship during the campaign now you'll get a bigger argument some people say well the Republicans weren't interested in my partisanship you don't even get one vote they won't work with you well guess what you've got to give people a buy-in on the takeoff of the policy if you expect to get them to come across and vote for you what did we do in 81 we sent our own reductants spending bill up in our own tax reduction billet and then we went to the conservative or more moderate Democrats and we work with them and we brought them across so we had a bipartisan economic program that gives the congressman or the Senators the ability to go home and say look what I got you in the president's economic package or in the president's health care he could if he'd done this with the with he would in my opinion he would have gotten some Republican to come across and support him on health care but that's not the way he did it he gave it to the to the furthest left leaders and let them write the bill I think that was a mistake yeah I really do and I think that was a function of have they looked at what happened to the Clinton health care and decided we're not going to do it that way we're not going to send our own bill up there and get skewered we're going to let them craft it up there and we'll sit lay back here and then take a position at the very end well that's what he did anyone so you know winning is winning on a win is a win I've been in there and it's better a wind it is to lose and so you can't fault it too much but it's it's not good to pass legislation that is this as you were as you said historic and fundamental without any support from the other side of the aisle and the other mistake I think they made was not prioritizing there's too many in there's too much stuff coming cap-and-trade stimulus healthcare jobs bill whatever it might be you would have put the economy I think we should have put I think they should have put take time let me ask you about the tone of our politics as it relates to this health care bill you are mr. Republican your Republican bona fides are without question you're an establishment person to whom others look to for support and for guidance and for how to behave temperamentally you are the model for a lot of Republicans in this state is James Baker's Republican Party the kind of party that would use the N word against a african-american member of Congress or the F word against a gay member of Congress I don't think so yeah what has happened to the tone of this politics in this country the opposition the stuff has become so divisive and personal and ugly I I was telling governor IB and I were talking on the plane coming up here and I said you know Bill I think I think the two biggest problems facing our country today are this huge debt bomb that's ticking out there we haven't talked about this yet but I'm going to put on my Treasury secretary hat and tell you we have a GDP a debt to GDP ratio of a hundred percent for three the next three years debt to GDP of a hundred percent we haven't been there since World War two and there's no real way out so that's one of the problems he has big the other big problem and and I don't want to put words in the governor's mouth but I think he agrees with me is our political dysfunction which is what you're talking about and we are in a sad state in this country where you no longer have any you know when President Johnson was president he was a man he was the master at reaching across the aisle and bringing Republicans across to support initiatives that he thought were good policy when Ronald Reagan was there he and Tip O'Neill would work together they never agreed on anything in policy terms and they'd fight like hell all day long and then they'd go and have a drink in the evening and and wait until the next day but you don't see that anymore you know you don't see the ability to disagree agreeably with people or to be a political adversary but not a political enemy our politics has gotten so ugly we got to find a way out of that and I was interested to read just a day or so ago on a column by Tom Frieden whose New York Times reporter and actually he was the New York Times reporter on my airplane for four years when I was Secretary of State and one of the things he suggests and I don't know whether you ever get this done or not is to take the redistricting process out of the hands of the professional politicians and put it in put it in their hand give it to a Independent Commission appointed of people maybe some maybe technocrats that might help a little bit but but primary the primary system as the governor said on our flight so the primary system is a big problem but part of this problem too because well because it means that Democrats have to run more and more over to the left to get the endorsement of their party and Republicans have to run more and more over to the right I'm a firm believer that you that you have to govern from the center if you don't if you if you can't govern from the center you're not going to have lasting lasting impact but I but I also from I also think generally speaking you win elections from the center-right generally speaking you win elections from the center not from the fringes but our primary system encourages fringe candidacies much more I mean it just it's very tough so your message to the people on both sides frankly you've gotten so angry and are behaving so unpleasantly out in public on our politics it would be Parlin down or keep it up or tone down tone it down part of this though well but politics is a bloodsport you know I mean it's not beanbag and so you got to have wedge issues and stuff like that but but it our politics has gotten has gotten really really very ugly let me ask you one more question before we open it up for questions from the audience speaking of politics you endorsed senator Hutchison in the governor's race yeah will you be endorsing governor Perry I'm a Republican and I don't want to see the Republicans lose 11th seats in the Congress by virtue of redistricting in Texas this coming year does that answer your question well it's it is is my question sort of but I didn't hear yes and to borrow a phrase a date certain well yeah I didn't say there was a date circa well is it how about a date uncertain but he knows he knows I'm going to support it so you will support you have an au-pair absolute okay very well I'll support the Republican nominee I think it's going to be governor Perry well I'm not aware of another one on the ballot so I suspect that that's going to be mr. secretary it is as always an honor and a pleasure to sit across from you and I thank you very much I can discern gotcha question so debate mark we're okay on time to have questions for secretary we have microphones I believe as always in the aisle and I encourage anybody in the audience with a question for the secretary to come up come forward we'll recognize you and acknowledge you and please forgive me if I know you and don't recognize you because my eyes are terrible my name is Koch Wilson Jim Baker and I were in law school together which is now take this opportunity to unleash what you wanted to say about the debt bomb about what he's a gentleman who was in law school with you he says yep was asking if you would take the opportunity to unleash what you wanted to say about the debt bomb I thought you did a pretty good summary of it well you free to go forward the only additional thing I would say is that there is absolutely the only way we get out of this this problem is to find a way to cut spending and there is absolutely no support no political will in either party to cut spending you cannot get get out of this if you think you can get out of this by raising taxes without any spending restraint you're wrong why because you raise those taxes and the Congress will spend that and they'll spend more on top of it so if you don't have spending restraint you never get there by raising revenues I'm not saying raising revenues is not worthwhile upon occasion because it is particularly when you have a fiscal hole to dig out of like we've got but it's no good to do it without spending restraint and right now there is no political will and on the part of either party to come spend you believe it's on either party there's no well I think it is I mean we we just passed Medicare I mean a medical prescription bill without specific provisions to pay for it in the last administration now we've passed a health care bill that they say is going to be paid for by requiring people to buy it to purchase and carry Medicare the constitutionality of that by the way is going to be subject to a lot of court challenges by attorneys general from maybe 10 or 12 and other people including this including here right is there a way for us to cut ourselves cut the budget out of the problem sir without without without considering new taxes there a way for us to make enough cuts to get ourselves out of the problem absolutely but there's no political will to do it yeah you bet okay you bet mr. bailout mr. secretary if you had a couple of minutes or a minute to tell one of your grandchildren about the essence of Ronald Reagan how would you do that I would tell him but I started by saying you know well how long would that grandchild be now I've got 17 of them which I'd start by saying you know when Ronald Reagan was president he was worried about your future and and even though he ran a deficit for the first three years or four years of his presidency he cut tax rates so substantially that it generated such economic growth that we ultimately came into surplus and we were in surplus for two or three years during the Clinton years much of that is attributable in my view to the fact that we reduce the margin top marginal tax rate from seventy percent to twenty eight percent during Ronald Reagan's presidency an economic growth generated a ton of revenues for the for the federal government and I would tell them that that I am really sad about the situation we are in today as a country when we are running debt to GDP ratios of 100 percent haven't been there since World War two and that doesn't count what's going to happen when the baby boomers hit Social Security and Medicare that doesn't count Social Security Medicare explosions that are that are yet to come so I just think it's so it's a very very damaging situation and if you I try not to be too partisan but let me make one statement that's factually you will see you will think is partisan but in 15 months president obama has increased our debt-to-gdp percentage more than Ronald Reagan did in eight years now that's staggering I mean we are we are spending money like drunken sailors we own banks we own our automobile companies are all government-owned now we own AIG the biggest insurance company in the world we now just passed this this huge health care bill and they're good they're strong arguments for passing it the idea of pre-exists to getting rid of pre-existing conditions the idea that a country such as ours should have 30 percent of its people with absolutely no health care those are all important things I understand that but what's happening to us fiscally and economically is really scary at least it is to me several minutes ago you talked about Afghanistan and Tennessee and you said that you disagree with President Obama on setting the troop withdrawal date so how would you address this new development when several days ago one of the most prominent Afghani insurgent leaders Jalal edema TR actually sent a delegation to Kabul to talk to President Karzai the delegation proposed a 10-point plan many experts actually call it one of the greatest breakthroughs during the whole war and the spokeperson the spokesperson for this delegation he actually said that they would not have done it if not for President Obama actually setting the withdrawal date plan that that encouraged them to actually negotiate so how would you address that new development and whether you think it's actually a good thing well that's an argument for setting a deadline but I think there are other arguments against it because I think what it does with those those Taliban who don't send a delegation to Kabul they know when we're going to start pulling out and when you're going to when you're in a war it's not a good idea I don't think to tell your enemy well we're going to fight you for six months and there were no year and then we're leaving thank you ma'am secretary Baker of the Commission President Obama wanted to establish to become more frugal in our running of our government it wasn't supported by the Republicans why was that well I don't think he was supported by the Republicans because they saw it first of all it had a majority of Democrats on it and the Republicans knew they'd be out voted and they thought that that they would vote new taxes without any spending restraint so they didn't support mr. mr. Baker mr. secretary they found Alan Simpson insufficiently conservative as an appointee to that Commission who did well I believe some of the opposition to the appointment of the Commission was a tellenson no no there was no appointment there was a name flow no no no I know she's talking about a statute of a piece to a proposal for legislation that I'm talking about the Commission I'm sorry yeah yeah but she but there was a there was a staff there was a proposal for legislation and the Republicans didn't support that man that's that's a question no I was the Commission that was going to work together bipartisanly yeah but it was was to be established by by congressional action by legislation in the House and Senate that's what this would that's what the Republican didn't support now President Obama has appointed a commission by executive order and the Republicans are appointing their members so they are participating in that I'm sorry sir the last time that we faced a suicidal enemy it took two nuclear bombs to get their attention today that is clearly not an option but enhanced interrogation certainly is an option in dealing with prisoners of any nationality that engage in or support suicidal terrorism I think there should be no restrict on the effective use of this method because these people by their action have forfeited all their human rights do you have a question sir what do you think I got my answer what do you think I think you need to I think there can be upon occasion a basis for enhanced interrogation techniques when somebody let's say is captured on a battlefield should not and cannot in my opinion rise to the level of torture which is prevented and prohibited by the Geneva Convention to which we are a party so I would be opposed to using I would be opposed to using any of those techniques that that cross that line into torture that's pretty hard to say what kind of techniques you're talking about you're probably talking about waterboarding yes is that right is that that is that the only one I'm not an expert in that field I feel that that the Obama administration has has been very wussy on this regard was he would see I'm not sure with that's an adjective but that's fine actually squishy thank you sir yep okay man yes mr. Baker sir you had talked about talked in your talk about Iran being a destabilizing force in the Middle East yeah and I wanted to know and you also talked about our automatic I would say knee-jerk support for Israel Israel has a nuclear weapon Iran does not have a nuclear weapon whether or not they are building one Israel has attacked Iraq as you notice as you noted in 1982 and their nuclear facilities extra to just reduce Italy why is it that why do we support Israel why must we support Israel we support Israel because we we have an affinity with them not culturally for one thing they've been a very strong ally of ours for another but we should not make it a knee-jerk type support that's the point I was making but but we should support them they are a strong ally in the region and we will continue to support them there are a lot of reasons for that some of which are political but we will continue to support them so it's a fact of life but we should make sure that in supporting them we we encourage them in every way we can to do what we think is best for them and for our interests in the region and that is negotiate a secure peace with their neighbors we ought to do everything we can to encourage them to do that and when they stick it in our eye we ought to have that pardon me ba ll s to stand up and say nah we don't take that from our best ally friends don't do that to friends and that's what the administration just did and they're to be commended for thank you hi sir I feel very privileged to be asking you this question thank you for the opportunity here you played a pretty important role in the end of the Cold War and the question I had for you as Ward do you how do you envision at then and how the war on terror of reluctant boy nobody can answer that question I don't think anybody has a crystal ball that would that would answer that question for you but I do think this I think we need to be more cognizant of our soft power capabilities in this country we need to do a better job of understanding that every Muslim is not a terrorist we need to make sure we make that clear make that clear to people around and we ought to use our hard power and our south power but when but when we have people who attack us we should fight back without without any quarter as far as I'm concerned I mean you take what happened on 9/11 I mean that there's no there's absolutely we should give no quarter in that time that part of the war on terror but we need to use our soft power in a little bit better way thank you I'll ask another question mr. secretary since there's someone else behind me well I might do a 180 there and say that there is but that's okay don't know but you ma'am you go ahead please feel free know there is so bye behind you but that's okay just briefly wool universal healthcare help the economy because we'll have a well citizenry have a what well a citizenry it will be well they can work why shouldn't we have universal health care and do what it takes to get the ball rolling well thank universal health care doesn't mean everybody's going to be well health care and health care you have you have health care you have health care to take care of sick people I know people are going to prevent to prevent that well some of you little baby what a massive question some of is preventive true but you're going to still have sick people and that's the purpose I suppose of why it's important to cover the thirty million people who were not covered until day before yesterday actually they won't be covered until 2015 because the taxes kick in soon but the coverage doesn't start for some time that's part of the way you make it fiscally neutral ma'am sir you seemed rather reluctant during your conversation to explicitly support Governor Perry in the race this year and I was wondering if you could say a few words about the talk that's been around that he may be setting up a run for the presidency future say if you were question is asking if you would say a few words about the taught that Governor Perry is considering running for president Hey look I've done fundraisers for Governor Perry in his prior races for public office I when I was Treasury secretary I started doing fundraisers for him I've always supported him I will support him in the next go-round as Evan pointed out I happen to think that Senator Hutchison would make a damn good governor of Texas so I supported her she's a personal friend I've worked with her for many years in the Republican Party it doesn't have anything that doesn't say anything about my lack of support for Governor Perry in the general election I happened to be a Republican I've spent a lot of my life trying to build a Republican Party not just in Texas but nationally when I became a Republican in nineteen in 1970 there weren't any Republicans in Texas I mean it was a hanging offense to be a Republican attack well you made a point when you endorsed that at Hudson you made a point of saying very clearly this is not not for him that's right it's for her that's correct right that's absolutely right not to the questioners point what do you think about Governor Perry is a potential presidential candidate that was I believe the cola i think that i think that i think that we Republicans ought to develop as many first-rate candidates as we can and he would certainly be my preference over any democrat who was running I think that was quite clear enough actually mr. secretary I hate to be partisan but you forced me into it oh you've been nice for a while you go ahead and say what you want that's fine sir mr. Baker thank you for being in Austin today you're a great American and a better Texan and that's important to all of us my question is and for those of us who are working in this country and paying our taxes and proud of that I am what do you feel about jobs the fact that many people don't have them and that we are nearing unemployment rates that are staggering how are we going to put people back to work in this country so that they can pay tax and taxes and be good Americans and Texans well that's something that the administration is now working on we just passed a jobs bill with with bipartisan support by the way I don't know what the count was but there were no say was better than pretty good yes okay a little little better than health care well he wouldn't take much to be better than health care with so you know look you're talking to you're talking to somebody who ran against Ronald Reagan I ran George Bush's campaign against Ronald Reagan for the nomination in 1980 and I was stupid enough to characterize the Reagan economic program as voodoo economics and and then I then I ended up being Ronald Reagan's White House chief of staff now how that happened I'll never understand it maybe it maybe it speaks to the broad gauge nature of Ronald Reagan but then even more amazingly I became Ronald Reagan's Treasury secretary so I am a reformed drunk when it when it comes to supply-side economics so I really hate to see us jacking up taxes at a time when the economy is really in bad shape I don't think I think most people now agree that raising taxes and bad economic times is not the right thing to do but you got to understand you're talking to a Ronald Reagan Republican so that's naturally where I'm coming from but I would submit to you that when we did it it worked it did work so we need to we need to be thinking about that a little bit more to instead of just raising them let's be thinking about what we can do to generate economic activity because that's where jobs are created when the president says mr. secretary that he means to cut taxes on the middle class and he has tax cuts that's great this plan you take him in his work that's great yeah but let's see it where's the meat where's the beef what do you say where where is the legislation yeah I think that's what no I don't think so I don't find that hard to be the stimulus package seven hundred and fifty billion dollars was a collection of a lot of items that a lot of the pooh-bahs in the Democratic house had been trying to pass for a long long time that's what that was and there were some tax reductions in there not many not too significant and not for very long but you know we're going to let the Bush tax cuts expire that's fine but that is in fact a tax increase so taxes are going to go up a lot more than just what you see that are going to be levied on you here to pet to pay for this health care for the first time in your lives your if you make over $250,000 a year you're going to as a couple you're going to be taxed on your interest income on your passive income if you have any rental income or any royalty income or any interest income you're going to be taxed on it to pay for the health care of it now that's not something that's going to generate that that's not something that's going to generate economic activity okay mr. secretary I'm very clear on what you're against let's talk about what's your for well I mean we're those in the absence of those increases can you tell us sir what you'd be for in view of your feeling that no tax increases what would you how would you propose to the questioners point which was we bring the jet world to bring jobs back what would you stimulate the economy well I think the job already mentioned the jobs program that they past would be one thing but I'm not a Keynesian when it comes to economics and so I don't I don't really believe that that government programs are the way to to bring jobs back it was it was a good thing to do at the time we did it the stimulus package I think still hadn't kicked in still the money hadn't still hadn't been spent but I'm that's just not my philosophy of economics I happen to believe that if you lure marginal tax rates you generate a great deal more economic activity and growth and that creates jobs all right the gods of time are telling me one more question is that right what is mr. Baker yeah sir you indicated you're concerned about our increasing national debt yeah you also stated that you did not see in the appetite among the Democrats or the Republicans to stop the spending do you believe that term limits would be a solution for that and do you think we will see term limits I don't think we'll see term limits and I don't believe it'll be a solution because it's funny when they get up there and Disneyland on the Potomac whether they're there for one term or five terms they still like to spend because that's what their constituents like so it's really easy to spend it's hard to be against spending did I tell them the story that I told you about my kid when I was campaigning as Attorney General no I like you too I'm gonna I'm gonna tell you once it's a great story to entice on a program you'll be rewarded for staying I got to fly back to Houston I gotta fly back to Houston but I know I'm in Austin and I know I've sounded a lot like a doctrinaire Republican tonight and I apologize for the wholly by comparison to the rest of the city but that's because hey because that's what but that's because that's what I am so I apologize for them but I got to tell you that that after I had the I was a democratic lawyer in Houston until 1970 when I lost a wife to cancer I had a good friend at the time named George Bush she was my tennis partner and he came to me he said you know bake he said you got to get your mind off your grief and help me run for the Senate here in Texas I said well George that's a great idea except for two things number one I'm I don't know anything about politics because I was apolitical my grandfather used to tell the young lawyers who came to work for our firm in Houston if you want to be be a good lawyer work hard study and keep out of politics and that was my life for the first 40 years I didn't I did vote occasionally but not often and I stayed out of politics so I told George when he asked me to help him with his Senate race I said well I that's great he said for two things one I don't know anything my politician two I'm a Democrat he said you know we can fix that latter problem and we did and I became a Republican and I went up there and and a few years later I found myself running President Ford's campaign against Jimmy Carter chairman of the campaign seven years after being a democratic lawyer in Houston Texas and I never will forget we lost that election by only ten thousand votes out of 81 million votes were cast you turn ten thousand votes around in Ohio and Hawaii and Ford would have been elected in Carter wooden and I remember thinking to myself at 3 o'clock in the morning boy is this bizarre 7 years ago you were a democratic lawyer in Houston Texas and now you've run a campaign for a Republican presidential for an incumbent Republican president in what is obviously going to be the closest presidential election of your lifetime who knew that so so anyway I got by then I got interested in politics and I lost I thought you know I'm going to try my hand at this game I've been a lawyer for 17 years I'm gonna go home and Texas and run for office so I filed to run for attorney general here in Texas because I've been a lawyer for a long time and I thought legal ability might make a difference little did I know and I filed a run for attorney general and I never will forget one hot summer day I'm campaigning somewhere up in the Panhandle and I see some people over the shopping center and I go over there to give them some campaign literature and bear in mind now I've gotten a lot of face time on national television as Ford's Campaign Chair so I go over to give campaign literature to this group and I see this guy and I handed to like this stick it out for him to take and then offer my hand introduce myself to him he looks at me and he's to say said anybody ever tell you you look like Jim Baker and I said yes sir often this guy never batted an eyelash he looked he looked back at me said doesn't it piss you off well like that like hey that was the first clue I had that I might not win that race with you that's right well I like when you end on a good story let's just call it at that please join me in welcoming again please fun take your head again some colorful thank you thank you you

Channel: TheLBJLibrary

Views: 37,822

Keywords: James Baker, LBJ Library and Museum, George H. W. Bush, Dan Quayle, Ronald Reagan, The White House, The Velvet Hammer, Time, Magazine, Persian Gulf War, White House Chief of Staff

Id: hnNBHCner8E

Length: 73min 30sec (4410 seconds)

Published: Tue May 15 2012