Skip navigation
Watchlist Sponsored By :

LATEST POLITICS VIDEOS


Current DateTime: 03:32:01 04 Dec 2008
LinksList Documentid: 25590758
    • Making Their Case 

        A recap of the Big 3 CEOs' testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, with CNBC's Phil LeBeau; Bruce Kogut, Columbia Business School professor; Erich Merkle, Crowe Chizek auto consultant; and CNBC's John Harwood.

    • Corker Weighs In 

        Insight on the Big 3's testimony before the Senate Banking Committee on Thursday, with Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn.

    • Dodd: Inaction Not The Response 

        Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn. and Banking Committee chairman, says bankruptcy is the wrong appraoch.

    • Sen. Dodd Questions Big 3 

        Big Three CEOs Mulally, Wagoner and Nardelli & UAW president Gettelfinger take questions from Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.

    • Sen. Corker Questions Big 3, Pt. 2 

        Big Three CEOs Mulally, Wagoner and Nardelli & UAW president Gettelfinger take questions from Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn.

    • Sen. Corker Questions Big 3 

        Big Three CEOs Mulally, Wagoner and Nardelli & UAW president Gettelfinger take questions from Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn.

    • Sen. Brown Questions Big 3 

        Big Three CEOs Mulally, Wagoner and Nardelli & UAW president Gettelfinger take questions from Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Interview Transcript: Dick Cheney
CNBC.com | 26 Oct 2007 | 03:56 PM ET
Text Size

KUDLOW:  But you have a better track record than most of the economists, that's why I asked.

Mr.  CHENEY:  I'm one for one and I'll stay with a perfect record as long as I don't do it again.

KUDLOW:  You know, one time...(unintelligible)...forecasting record.  But let me ask you more on the economic outlook.  The housing recession is clearly deepens, really not a piece of evidence suggesting otherwise.  The subprime credit virus is inconsistent, has deepened.  I would dare say both the Fed and the Treasury, Mr.  Bernanke and Mr.  Paulson, underestimated the verilence of this housing problem.  How do you see it and inside the White House counsel, how much of a recessionary worry from that is there?

Mr.  CHENEY:  Well, we look at the same forecast everybody else does, basically.  And I had lunch with Hank Wednesday of this week and we've got a group that meets every Wednesday inside the White House that focuses on the economy and economic policy.  I think what we are seeing is a bit of a slowdown here, but the forecast I see for next year indicate continued growth. And I think clearly there have been, you know, there has been a significant adjustment for us in terms of what's happened in the housing market.  But I think we're far short of the point where we've said that a recession is just around the corner.  I don't think it is, but again, I rely upon the professional advice that we get from our economists as well as what we see in the Blue Chip.

KUDLOW:  Are you satisfied with the Federal Reserve's response?  So far they've cut rates once by 50 basis points.  They meet again come Wednesday. Are you satisfied with the Fed?

Mr.  CHENEY:  The Fed makes Fed policy and we generally refrain from editorial comments on what they're doing.  I'm somebody who has great respect for Ben Bernanke.  I think he's a good chairman.  We all worked with him closely before he became chairman of the Federal Reserve and I think the Fed's doing a good job.

KUDLOW:  Are you worried that the dollar has fallen too low?  I mean, you can hardly get through a day in the financial news without reading about the dollar setting a new low.  Does that bother you?  I mean, when I worked for President Reagan many years ago, he used to say a great country needed a strong and reliable currency.  This dollar story bother you?

Mr.  CHENEY:  We think the key--we do believe in a strong dollar, but we think that key is that it be allowed to adjust based on market forces out there and that's exactly what's happening.

KUDLOW:  President Bush is speaking today, this morning, about his unhappiness with the congressional appropriations projects and spending overrun.  He's already vetoed the SCHIP Bill.  He's kind of become the budget warrior this year.  What can you say about that?

Mr.  CHENEY:  Well, he--he's doing it and he's enjoying it.  He did veto the SCHIP bill.  The House yesterday passed another one that is veto-bait as well. Congress hasn't done...

KUDLOW:  You don't think he'll approve it.

Mr.  CHENEY:  It's veto-bait.  The fact is that Congress spends time repassing legislation that he's already vetoed once.  He's sustained that veto, has the votes to sustain an over-ride--to avoid an over-ride, sustain the veto.  And their response is to come right back and do it all over again, wasting more time.  They've got something like 19 legislative days left if they're going to meet their target adjournment date in mid-November.  And they have yet to pass us--to get his signature to get to his desk, a single appropriations bill. This is--you've got to go back 20 years to find a time when the Congress was as inefficient as it is today.  They're not doing their business.  They're postponing action on the supplementals for Iraq.  Their general approach, I think, has been remarkable in terms of not producing any benefits, not moving on the things that we need to be moving on.

KUDLOW:  In your judgment, let's go back to that supplementals, about $50 billion supplemental.  The Democrats have, from time to time, threatened to stop appropriations for the war as part of their anti-war efforts.  Where do you stand on the supplements and negotiations in the backdrop?  Or it's going to be larded with pork, might it be a veto-bait?  Where is this going to come out?

Mr.  CHENEY:  Well, the reason for the supplemental is to pay what's necessary in order to be able to sustain the troops in the field, to be able to continue our operations on the global war on terror and in Afghanistan and Iraq and it's absolutely essential that it get passed.  When Congress says, `Well, gee, we don't have time to deal with it now, we're going to lay it over and take it up next spring,' strikes me that's a classic example of them not stepping up and taking responsibility for a very important piece of business that they are responsible for.  They've got to appropriate that money.  I think it could partly be tied up with their attitude towards the war, but the fact of the
matter is we are succeeding in Iraq.  We are making significant progress.  We do need that money.  It goes to support the troops in their endeavors and it's hypocritical on the part of the Democrats to say they support the troops, but say, `Oh, by the way, we're not going to pass the money or appropriate funds that are needed in order to be able to sustain their activities.' This is money for equipment, to pay for all of those things that go into maintaining a first class fighting force and the Democrats are trying to duck it.


HOME  |  NEWS  |  MARKETS  |  EARNINGS  |  INVESTING  |  VIDEO  |  CNBC TV  |  CNBC PLUS  |  CNBC MOBILE  |  CNBC HD+
About CNBC   |   Site Map   |   Privacy Policy   |   Terms of Service   |   Advertise   |   Help   |   Feedback   |   Video Reprints
  Data is a real-time snapshot   *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes

Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data and Analysis