Transcript

Phil Harriman · Newsradio WGAN

0:00
WGA and Morning News Tuesday morning Phil Harriman has
0:04
entered our chat. Here he is.
0:07
Good morning, everyone. Nice to have you with us for
0:09
some capital insights on this Tuesday morning.
0:11
Do this Tuesday morning coffee brew with my man Matt.
0:15
I always do. It's my favorite day of the week
0:16
because Phil Harriman. Oh, I hear.
0:18
You say that with every guest. And it's always true.
0:22
It's always true. This is the real 1 though, Phil.
0:25
This is my actual favorite day. So did you have an opportunity,
0:28
Sir, to hear earlier in the program today, Mr. Angus King,
0:31
the third I did. And what was your impression of
0:34
what you heard today, Sir? I I've had an opportunity to
0:39
listen to all of the gubernatorial candidates debate
0:43
in the the studios over at WMTW. So I've gotten to know their
0:49
sort of their shtick, if you know what I mean.
0:51
Indeed, I cross reference it with the commercials that I see.
0:55
And here's my summary. All of the candidates for
0:59
governor, whether you're a Democrat or Republican, I think
1:03
are good quality candidates. And I I say that for the I don't
1:08
remember the last time I said that.
1:11
What I see though, in the Democrat Party side is that all
1:15
but Angus King the third have pretty deep pedigree in working
1:21
in state government. And it's not gone unnoticed by
1:26
me that many of them have got decades of experience as an
1:29
insider. And what I hear is we're going
1:33
to take care of healthcare, we're going to take care of
1:36
education, we're going to take care of electricity, etcetera.
1:41
Healthcare is probably the number one I hear.
1:44
You just have to elect me. And we're going to, we're going
1:47
to find more money, and this time we'll fix it.
1:50
This time will be different, right?
1:52
Except for Angus King, the third, who I think comes across
1:54
as very thoughtful. He clearly has by perhaps
1:59
osmosis through his dad when he was governor and himself working
2:03
in the Clinton administration has a a pretty good sense of how
2:07
the the engine of legislative process works.
2:12
But he's here's the distinction. He actually has lived in the
2:17
private sector in the world of affordable housing and
2:21
environmental energy. He's actually taken the risk and
2:26
created the jobs and appears to have been successful.
2:30
I I think if he's going to pull ahead in this five way race in
2:34
the Democrat Party, he's got a hammer that home because I don't
2:37
think many people really appreciate what that journey has
2:42
looked like. It's not easy dealing with state
2:45
and local government and sometimes federal government in
2:48
the regulatory arena, and he's done that.
2:50
So here's my question for you, Phil Herman, because I of course
2:53
share the perspective. I actually enjoyed that
2:55
conversation, unlike the conversation I had with Shanna
2:58
Bellows, which I thought was just vapid and empty, like there
3:01
was nothing that was he was making a good faith effort to
3:04
talk about stuff as a normal human being would.
3:07
You know, it's not just like the talking point nonsense and not
3:09
just that whatever. And I really appreciate that.
3:11
So I like certainly out of the five there, I like that kind of
3:14
thing. If we're only that, you know,
3:16
outside of what his answers were, just the fact that he's
3:18
meaningfully engaging is something that matters to me.
3:21
But does anybody in the Democratic Party want that?
3:24
That's my real question here is that that's clearly a different
3:27
thing. It's not government experience.
3:30
It's perspective on interesting and important issues that matter
3:33
to the state right now. Energy and, and, and obviously
3:38
housing and things like that. He's got some sort of background
3:41
in and has seen it in the private sector.
3:42
And he talks about stuff that isn't Donald Trump, you know, So
3:46
these things to a normal person would be good.
3:49
But the Democratic Party right now is not full of normal
3:51
people. I'm sorry to be that.
3:52
I mean, if you're listening to me and you're a Democrat, I
3:54
apologize. But that party right now is
3:57
fully captured by its progressive element.
4:00
The activist base of the Democratic Party runs the show.
4:03
And I just don't know if they have any appetite for for what
4:06
you heard. I I agree with you and I think
4:09
that's why you put in a plug at the end of your time together
4:12
letting independents know they can vote in the prime.
4:14
Is a good point. I I think you're absolutely
4:18
right. And, and their constituency,
4:20
Matt, as you know, it is the organized state employees, it is
4:27
the organized education system, it is the nonprofit
4:30
organization, it's the political consultants, the people who have
4:37
the resources to play in the game of political influence.
4:42
They're they're the ones who are the most, as you say, activists.
4:49
They're on the field, they're suited up and they want to win.
4:51
So then you wouldn't expect him to win then?
4:55
Not unless he can really amp up the volume.
4:58
I think his commercials there. Have you seen those?
5:00
Where? He's playing hockey.
5:02
That's a good. Yeah, and he's saying, you know,
5:03
most people were in politics want to take off the gloves and
5:06
fight. I want to keep the gloves on,
5:09
roll up our sleeves and let's get to work so that we can score
5:13
and win. So I, I think the the imagery
5:16
and the message are genuine. And if you're a Democrat leaning
5:21
voter, he's got to be very appealing to you.
5:24
Question is how deep and how wide and how loud can he bring
5:29
his message in the next month? Right.
5:32
I don't know, man. I don't know.
5:33
I I see. Here's The funny thing about all
5:35
this is as the parties have grown more strident and they've
5:38
gotten more aggressive and they've disliked each other
5:41
more, you know, they sort of like drift to each pole and each
5:44
opposite end. If either one of them would just
5:47
start nominating like rational people that are decent human
5:51
beings or whatever, it would make a huge contrast.
5:55
You know, like if if this was like, you know, Angus King the
5:58
third against like a right wing troglodyte, right?
6:00
Like, you know, he would win like 30 points, like he would
6:04
crush it, right? That's what that's what powered
6:07
the Democratic Party in the 1990s and early 2000s was that
6:10
kind of candidate. They lost so repeatedly to the
6:14
Republicans in the 80s and very early 90s that they were like,
6:17
my God, we got to do something else.
6:18
Maybe we should take like a breath and be more normal, be
6:22
more rational, be more middle of the road, be more something like
6:25
that. And they did and they won.
6:27
And now the response is the opposite.
6:29
You know, it's like we're losing because Shanna Bello said this
6:32
to me. We're losing and we're not doing
6:35
well when we win because we're not progressive enough.
6:39
We're not far enough to the left.
6:43
What do I what do you do with that?
6:45
I. Don't know, I'm beside myself.
6:48
I'm I'm stunned. He's stunned.
6:50
Like he's stunned. Speechless.
6:51
Speechless. Really.
6:52
We're going to. We've got to run faster to the
6:54
left. She said that I, I asked her a
6:59
question. It was basically I just to
7:01
paraphrase it, it was like you guys have been in control with,
7:05
you know, this party in the Blaine House, in the House and
7:09
the Senate the entire time. The last eight years, these
7:12
problems have all gotten worse. Why should I believe now is
7:16
different? Like, why would your solutions
7:18
do what these ones didn't and whatever else?
7:20
And she went into the I'm not Janet Mills, like I'm not a
7:23
member of her administration. And really, they didn't go far
7:26
enough. If they had, it would have fixed
7:28
it, but they didn't, so we have to.
7:31
That's an actual argument she made.
7:33
So they spend $4 billion more than when Governor LePage was in
7:39
office, and they still have high healthcare costs, high
7:44
electricity costs, low test scores, drug problems, homeless
7:47
problems. How, how?
7:51
How is that a winning message? Oh, now you're stunned.
7:55
I mean, it isn't, I don't think that it is, but it is a winning
7:59
message in the primary. See, this is one of the issues
8:02
here is that you have this competing set of incentives for
8:06
these candidates. You have to first win your
8:08
primary. So in either in either party
8:10
right now, you have to cater to your sort of base right.
8:14
And the base over on the left to me is a radicalized and much
8:20
further left version of what happened.
8:23
I mean, for years the was that the Republicans were the
8:25
radicals or whatever, but the ideological variety that you get
8:30
from the Republican Party and the the sort of, I don't know,
8:34
like the disagreements inherent there and the type of rhetoric
8:37
they have and what not. It just, it does not at all come
8:40
close to what you see on the left right now.
8:43
So, but that's what the party base wants.
8:46
The party base has so put their chips in the middle of the table
8:50
on Donald Trump being the essence of all that is evil,
8:54
that it's almost driven, driven them mad in a in a way.
8:57
And because they keep losing to him, they get even more mad
9:01
about it. And then they go further over
9:04
there and they get further away from what I think is rational, a
9:08
rational candidate. I, I want to amplify what you
9:11
just said. There was an announcement late
9:13
yesterday afternoon, or at least when I got it was late yesterday
9:16
afternoon, that Vice President Brent Vance is going to be in
9:19
Bangor on Thursday. I'm.
9:21
Going to ask you about that. It was perfect timing. 10
9:23
minutes later, I get a press release and one of the Democrat
9:28
candidates basically saying, welcome Mr. Vice President to
9:33
Maine, Tell us why. And just a litany of all these
9:38
issues that at least this candidate determine was all
9:42
Trump's fault. And then concluded with to all
9:47
of the Republicans who were honoring Vice President Trump's
9:51
Vice President Vance's appearance, explain to us why
9:55
blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And I'm thinking, how is this
9:59
advancing your gubernatorial campaign?
10:02
You you think it's a possible that every problem Maine is
10:06
facing is because of Donald Trump, who's been in office
10:10
what, a year and a. Half they don't.
10:11
They don't. They know better.
10:14
They say that because that's what the base wants to hear.
10:18
But that's not a solution. Of course it isn't, but it's
10:20
what the base wants to hear because all they're animated by
10:24
right now is this man is an existential threat to everything
10:27
that I care about. He is the essence of evil, and
10:30
the only thing that I care about is that you fight him or oppose
10:34
him or something like that. So that's all that the
10:36
candidates are going to talk and care about.
10:38
It's one of the reasons I give a lot of bonus points to Angus
10:41
King for not mentioning his name once on this program.
10:44
And I realize he knows where he is, so I'm sure that that has
10:46
something to do with it. But I've listened to the debates
10:48
too, and while he'll do it if asked, obviously he's not
10:52
volunteering it. When I hear him talk about other
10:55
stuff, he's too busy talking about, you know, like this is a
10:57
problem and here's my solution. And I don't love every one of
11:00
his solutions, obviously, but like, at least that's fair
11:03
engagement. I agree.
11:05
Yeah, thank. You.
11:06
What was that again? I agree.
11:07
OK. Sounds sounds good Phil Herman.
11:11
So you had said VP Vance is going to be down here apparently
11:14
going to be talking about fraud, going to be talking about, I
11:19
guess, the political character of the state having been taken
11:22
over by Democrats. And sort of like they're
11:24
responsible for everything that's gone wrong here.
11:26
As a means of boosting, I assume, the gubernatorial
11:29
candidates and LePage and everybody else, while also
11:32
bringing some attention to many of these problems that have
11:35
cropped up in states like Maine. Do you think it's going to be an
11:37
effective trip? I do, actually.
11:40
And I, I was listening to Doctor Oz, who's the head of the Center
11:45
for Medicaid and Medicare Services, who in his interview
11:52
proclaimed that they had shut down hundreds of Hospice centers
11:58
in Los Angeles and they had not received one complaint, not one,
12:03
that they were not in violation of the law.
12:07
He went on to say there are more medical device services for
12:13
Medicare for like wheelchairs and canes and walkers and so
12:17
forth. There's more in Florida than
12:19
there are McDonald's. And the vast majority of them
12:23
are, are owned by people who are Cuban nationals who tend to move
12:29
back and forth across from Florida to to Cuba.
12:32
And then we've been hearing, thanks to the reporting of the
12:36
Main Wire, who seems to be the only one in the media who says,
12:39
look at all of this unaccounted for money that's going on in
12:42
Maine with autism and home health care, etcetera.
12:47
I don't understand why that is a partisan issue.
12:53
Can't we all agree because. It's associated with one leader,
12:57
or. I don't care the problem.
12:58
The point is we're paying the taxes to support people that we
13:02
can all agree should be eligible for a helping hand by their
13:07
their their fellow citizens. And when those dollars have
13:11
reason to be scrutinized because they're not going where they're
13:15
supposed to go or the the data points show that Maine is
13:19
charging exponentially more per service than the national
13:23
average, etcetera, yeah, it's time to call it out, get to the
13:26
bottom of it. And shouldn't be a Democrat,
13:30
Republican issue, which should be a Mainer issue.
13:34
A Mainer issue. A main issue.
13:36
But it isn't because it becomes political, because you want to
13:39
protect your leader who's in charge, who is responsible for
13:42
the things that are not so great.
13:44
You know what I mean? Sorry, but like Janet Mills has
13:46
not been paying attention to. The store.
13:48
OK, So that that's OK, We'll forgive her if she can own up to
13:52
it and fix it, right? I mean, the, the people
13:57
associated with the fraud have got clear linkage to their
14:01
legislative relationships, their gubernatorial relationship,
14:04
their Democrat party relationships.
14:07
So that's a reason to look the other way.
14:10
I don't think so. I don't think even, you know,
14:15
moderate to conservative Democrats would look at this,
14:17
listen to this conversation and say, you know what?
14:19
You're right. I don't think my, my tax dollars
14:22
should be going to enrich people who are potentially violating
14:26
the law. Let's find out.
14:28
And if there's nothing to see here, then the journalists who
14:31
have been covering this story for the last couple of years,
14:33
they can be the ones apologizing.
14:37
Phil Airman joining us as he does every Tuesday or so for a
14:41
cup of coffee and some capital insights.
14:44
Are you following the national redistricting fight?
14:47
I am continuing to go down that room here a little bit.
14:49
What do you think about where we are right now?
14:52
I mean, obviously, I'm sure that you have a very similar opinion
14:56
than I do about how this fight has gone and how foolish it was
14:59
to pick it. But we could acknowledge, could
15:02
we not Phil Herriman, that this sucks.
15:04
Like, I don't like what I'm seeing out of literally anybody
15:06
right now. Like, this is not how it should
15:08
be. Is there anything you can do to
15:10
fix this? I mean, short of like a
15:12
constitutional amendment that says stop it, you idiots, you're
15:16
all awful. Cause can we actually put that
15:18
in the text of the Constitution? You're all awful.
15:20
I, I, I agree with you in the sense that it should be clear
15:24
and concise as to when these lines are re examined.
15:29
And while we're at it, let's include in that amendment the
15:36
census of U.S. citizens, not census of the people here.
15:42
And that's part of why I think this this conversation is move
15:45
forward, is that the Biden administration let in millions
15:48
and millions and millions of people who are perhaps here
15:53
illegally or are waiting to be determined whether they are
15:57
worthy of a silly status. They're going to be counted in
16:01
the census, which is going to influence all of the House
16:06
Congressional District lines. Let's remember that the case
16:11
that the Supreme Court just ruled on has been percolating up
16:15
through the lower courts long before this conversation.
16:17
So this this declaration by the Supreme Court that said, yeah,
16:22
you've drawn this line. You've drawn this congressional
16:26
lines to discriminate in favor of people of African American
16:33
heritage. That's not the the Martin Luther
16:36
King standard that we all aspire to, that you should be judged by
16:40
the content of your character, not by the color of your skin.
16:43
And the and the Supreme Court has essentially said, yeah, you
16:46
cannot overweight the drawing of lines to carve out racially
16:54
preference districts. And you could draw the analogy
16:57
to New England. Matt, Mark my words, who's going
17:01
to have empathy for New England, where arguably 37 to 42% of the
17:11
people in New England, I'm talking Maine, New Hampshire,
17:13
Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island voted for President
17:18
Donald Trump and there's only one Republican elected official
17:23
in all of New England in that Susan Collins.
17:25
Everyone else is a Democrat. Where is where is the where are
17:31
the lines to make the representation for people who
17:34
are of the Republican philosophy?
17:37
Where is their representation? Not, not anywhere.
17:42
Nowhere. Right, right.
17:44
So. But do you give any blame to
17:46
Texas? I mean, having started it this
17:50
time? Yeah, Well.
17:51
I I think there the other thing to remember is that each
17:55
individual state, because we are a Republic, we're not a
18:00
democracy, we are a representative Republic in each
18:03
state of the 50 states that make up the Republic, they have their
18:07
own election laws. And in California, just as an
18:12
example, it's possible that there's a primary out there,
18:15
what is it like 10 candidates and the the top 2 vote getters
18:19
run off in November. They could be of the same party,
18:22
which they have been in the past.
18:23
And it's it's plausible that in California in November, they'll
18:28
have a choice between two Republicans.
18:30
Who and yes, but there is already a move afoot to change
18:33
that system because they don't like that happening.
18:36
Right, right. So back from our friends, the
18:38
democracy defenders. Oh yes, yeah, except when it's
18:42
not democracy. I I'm I'm leaning towards
18:46
believing that Texas had the right to do that because they're
18:50
constitution didn't have such restrictions.
18:52
But you may know more than I, since you have reasons to care
18:55
about Texas. True enough.
18:58
I do. I don't like that they did it,
19:00
and I do blame them to some respect for setting this off.
19:02
But I just think it was a foolish fight for the Democrats
19:04
to pick. And if you want to pretend like
19:06
Texas started it, we need to talk about New York and the
19:08
cycle before that and all the other things that have happened
19:10
preceding it, because that does not happen in a vacuum.
19:13
It just doesn't randomly happen.